WB is missing the point. Superman is NOT a DARK CHARACTER. What’s with these idiots? Superman Returns was not a bad movie, but we were simply hoping for more action. A dark villain, better writers, that’s all. Routh was a great Superman. U can’t blame him for such a crappy script. And The Dar Knight did as good as it did because of the publicity. You can’t buy publicity like that. Heath Ledger’s death fueled that movie like nothing we’ve seen before. Its a fact. Batman was awesome, but Ironman was better. Give Superman a worthy villain! Now I have to wait probably another 3 years for Superman.

Superman Returns was by far one of the worst movies ever made in the history of cinema. A stalking deadbeat dad who doesn’t throw one punch in the whole movie. Bye-bye Singer. Good riddance.

I don’t think the “angry god” concept is the right way to go at all.

…unless you’re talking about exploring the concept through a metaphor for our generation’s perception of Superman, the American ubermensch, as an upset, intolerantly high standard the rest of us simply can’t live up to, who is right to hate us for allowing his mere presence to excuse their imperfection.

But that can’t be done with Superman, he’s just not that dark. He’s the ultimate in his genre’s corner of pulp myth fantasy, and as such operates within a certain frequency that, while not necessarily wholesome, doesn’t support such an exploration.

That concept sounds like something better explored by the dozens of Superman knock-offs prevalent in superhero publishers unconstricted by rules like “Superman can’t kill” or “Superman must be seen as a good guy in the end.”

Those inextricable qualities Time Warner (and thus Warner Brothers [and thus DC]) will ultimately be required for the sustained mass appeal of the character and would neuter the angry god concept and thus the film in general.

Besides, why is everyone so afraid to make a movie that’s really in Superman’s head? It’s always ABOUT Superman, but none of the films really went out of their way to get inside Clark Kent’s head and show things from his perspective.

Sure, it’d be expensive as all hell, but Superman’s such an icon that as a franchise he demands such treatment. Either the WB will go balls deep into making a film about the character or they’ll continue retarded attempts at tailoring an unfortunately rigid icon to fit the mold of a character that is by definition Superman’s virtuous opposite.

Batman is the good guy that gets to go as dark as he pleases. Superman gets to be wholesome. Not nauseatingly so, but in a way that reminds us of just how wonderful our history and modern life really is.

He is Helios, Batman is Luna. Apollo sure as hell doesn’t need to be a nice guy, but he brings the light. Luna is the light that shines where there there are only flecks of far-away light in-between chasms of darkness.

Superman begins..

Maybe. I hope dark as the character allows means an adult intelligent film, not let’s change the iconic costume even more; like make it black and moody…

I’d look to Seigal and Shuster for inspiration, back in 1938 Superman beat up bad guys; accepted that sometimes bad things happen to bad people, They increasingly portrayed Lois as smart and independent, and by 1940 planned to introduce K-metal (their version of Kryptonite) in a comic that ended with Lois discovering that Superman was Clark and then agreeing to be partners. Decades ahead of their time. Over ruled by unimaginative exec’s at DC. it didn’t happen.

So something like this ; start with a lower powered Superman, build a relationship with Lois, have him learning about his heritage, details of his origin, as an adult with/because of her, and power him up over the story arc, just as the character did in the comics, as he learns his limits (or lack of them) as he is tested by adversity and adversaries – but not a big rock.

Also no Lex. or at least only as a minor character, the only human that has a chance of really being anything more than annoyance to Superman, is Batman on a bad day with help and lot of planning.

Also no more “every other thing from Krypton” is bad news, be it Rocks, Zod, etc, that’s also old and has been done already. I’m bored of Yay Superman! boo oh no! because we have Superman come to earth some Kyrptonian bad thing is killing us.

It’s a fact that The Dark Knight was good but Ironman was better? Did I actually just read that in the first comment? Moron! Ironman was great but as a movie wasn’t anywhere near as good as The Dark Knight. Ironman was popcorn fluff…good popcorn fluff but popcorn fluff none the less. TDK is much more than hype, that was more than obvious about 5-10 minutes into the movie. You just knew you were watching something so much more than a comic book or superhero movie. Ironman was a comic book/superhero movie, a great one yes but nothing more.

The morons over at Warner Bros did the right thing handing over Batman to Nolan but Superman doesn’t need the dark treatment, it needs someone that doesn’t want to pay respect to Richard Donner but who actually wants to do that reboot. Dark is not the way to go, the villian can of course be dark but Superman is a boy scout and should be written and played that way.

“Superman” should be a Beacon of Light in a Dark World. A Symbol for Hope and Purity. An Icon of all that is good in Humanity from the eyes of ‘child’ Visitor to this Planet… with of course, the tragic realizations that ‘What Mankind strives to be’ is an ideal and the reality of ‘What kind of creature a human being truly is’ a harsh lesson for us all to accept.

I would like to see Superman treated like the ‘Juno’ of the Super Hero world. A happy go lucky child that gets a reality check, but still goes on with life.