Michael Dougherty talks "Superman Returns" sequel

Back in 2008, Bryan Singer was actively developing a more action-packed sequel to 2006's Superman Returns that he was planning to direct. It had the rumored title of The Man of Steel, and post-Returns, Singer and his writers Dan Harris and Michael Dougherty often dropped hints at what they were planning for the sequel.

Of course, Warner Bros. would later scrap any plans for a sequel to the film, even though according to Dougherty there was never any official or concrete plans or a deal for them to work on the sequel. In 2008, Singer had this to say about his proposed sequel plans:

Recently, Michael Dougherty sat down with Moviehole and revealed some details about what the sequel to Superman Returns would have been had WB given Singer and co. the greenlight.

Dougherty also dropped a hint when asked if any of Superman's villains would appear in the film from the comics that "Brainiac was always interesting" implying that he was at one point or another apart of their sequel plans. Dougherty also speaks candidly about the tepid reaction to Superman Returns, and seemed eager to do the sequel if anything to right some of the wrongs.

This makes sense. I read an earlier version of the screenplay which had some scenes that were shot but then cut- like Superman's trip to the remains of Krypton- which would have been incredible to see. Also, the film had other supervillains that were later exorcised from the story, including plans to feature General Zod (which I'm assuming now after reading Dougherty's comments that he pushed for). I believe when Dougherty says that some of the changes Singer made both during pre-production and production might have hindered the project in some shape or form.

I think Singer is a very talented director, but I think he was possibly the biggest detriment to the project in terms of being unattached to the material. I honestly think he had too much of an emotional attachment to Donner's movie that influenced his judgement when it came to making a thrilling and exciting film. I still love Superman Returns, and I feel it has a fantastic emotional epicenter about unrequited love and feeling like an outsider, but I still feel like it is an imperfect film that would have benefited from a more balanced narrative.

Anyway, what are your thoughts on Dougherty's comments? Would you have liked to have seen a more action-packed sequel to Superman Returns or are you glad we're getting a reboot from Zack Snyder and Christopher Nolan?

 

Id really have liked to see another look into the 06's universe. Routh did a fine job with the material provided. Ida liked to see him take on a more advanced Superman role.

 

Bryan Singer's proposed sequel

I never saw a reason not to move ahead with it and was excited about the prospects. I have my issues with SR...but I have seen the movie at least 20+ times and enjoy it for what it is and not what I wanted it to be.

 

I quite liked Superman Returns and have very little interest in any project that Snyder directs, so I would've loved to have seen a second Singer-helmed Supes film.

 

Don't like the idea of other Kryptonians apart from Zod and his two buddies - dilution of concept. I even think Kara and Clark should live in alternate universes, maybe meeting once but certainly not being regular pals.

Myself, I'd like to see a Superman Begins movie, combining the best elements of the (early) Smallville mythos with an unapologetically contemporary take on Clark as a college student, then college graduate, exploring how a mild-mannered guy got to the point of putting on *that* costume, but not dabbling in any of this non-flying "Blur" placeholder nonsense.

So I guess my answer is, neither, but lean Nolan/Snyder.

Or, Singer's X3.

 

Singer should never have tried to make a direct sequel in the first place. That said, Superman Returns was fine for what it was. I enjoyed the movie and actually like the fact that Superman never threw a punch. I can watch it with my four year old and have him like a Super-hero that doesn't have to beat people up to win the day.

 

If Singer wanted to make a good movie, he should have done so with the movie he was actually given, instead of blowing his opportunity on dull, cornball nostalgia and saving the good stuff for some imagined entitlement to another movie.

Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman

 

Nolan > Singer

No matter what else, it ultimately comes down to this

 

Out of the two given options I choose Singer's sequel. General Zod is mentioned in Marv Wolfman's novelization but more as an afterthought and Clark has trouble remembering his name, I suppose this was a line to conform with Singer's comment early in production that Returns was a "vague" continuation of the Donner verse.

 

Sounds fine to me.

 

Superman Returns was a terrible film and it seems like the writer they're interviewing knows the faults of it pretty well. Singer made a boring film that was a sequal to the boring Donner films (I've never understood why so many people like those films).

 

If Routh is in the Snyder film, I'm fine with that. If not, I would've preferred a sequel to Superman Returns.

 

I'm with you there. Returns is only decent, but while the Donner movies have fantastic elements, the films as films are bloated, dramatically inert, tonally scattershot, did I mention bloated, and vapid.

 

At the time I would have loved to see a sequel, I can't say that I would prefer one over the other, I haven't seen the new one yet. I loved Returns and really wanted to see Singer do a sequel. The thing is, Singer said from the get go that the first movie was going to be slower and more romantic and the second one would be more action packed, it's just nobody payed attention to that. WB new this, but for whatever reason ditched the project anyway. I'm currently happy with what I've heard about the new one so far, so it's all good IMO.

 

I didn't like Superman Returns, so that's my bias. In addition to being a dramatically inert, boring, and pretentious superhero movie, it was clear Bryan Singer was just a fan of the Donner movies and not the comic books. As a result the whole thing felt warmed-over and reductive.

The combination of Christopher Nolan and Zack Snyder though is exciting, since I have no idea what the hell that movie will look like.

 

Singer should have used Routh with as many original donner cast members as possible. This way everyone is as old as they would be in the 25-30 years or so since the Doner films. Then Clark sits there looking 27 years old thinking no one knows he's really Superman. Kinda like the "The Rock" Superman skit on SNL a few years ago where Superman thinks he's fooling everyone but he's not. Now that would have been an interesting movie.

 

Wasn't this movie going to be called The Man of Steel? I wonder if Snyder/Nolan version will use that name.

 

Well gee maybe you should have written that film TO BEGIN WITH.

Just because Star Trek had a mediocre first movie before getting its' Wrath of Khan, doesn't mean every franchise should do the same.

They had their chance. Their movie was mediocre. You don't get another chance. That happens (or should happen) only when you make an awesome movie. See Christopher Nolan and Batman Begins.

 

And now we'll see Superman Starts.

 

Sigh. "Superman: Man of Steel" was a media generated title coming from someones online supposed online review of the script. That was never the confirmed title and yet media and fans have continued to use it, and continue to use it to describe the Nolan/Snyder project now as well. It's been something of a pet peeve for me.

Tired of "Superman Returns" debates but what Singer should have done was his own original take on Superman which he basically attempted to do but mixed parts of it with the Donner universe. He got Dick's blessing through his wife Laura while pitching his concept during production on "X2" on what he would do with a Superman movie if he ever got a chance to make it. Laura liked it so much that she gave him a chance to pitch it to Richard (her husband) and he embraced the idea and Singer was convinced based on that to go ahead with the film once the problems with Fox started.

I don't mind what Singer tried to do with the film at all. I think it would have been more wildly accepted by fans if there was more action sequences in it. I don't buy the argument that Superman is only interesting when he punches something. The plane sequence was breathtaking and my theater clapped and cheered when Superman saved the plane, we were all starved to see Superman again we got caught up in the moment like the people in Metropolis Stadium. The other action piece is when Clark saves Lois and the Whites from the yacht. I think Singer was obviously motivated to show and tell how important Superman's place in our world is and used obvious Jesus allegories to do so, right down to the Death and Return of Superman homage at the end of the movie.

That all being said it's still a beautifully shot movie (I think even the most disgruntled fan can recognize that) with a great cast (with the exception of maybe Kate Bosworth who I never bought as the Margot Kidder Lois who she obviously was supposed to be despite Bryan's claims of vagueness). I think a sequel would have been amazing and given fans exactly what they wanted to see from the first film. I had an idea where Brainiac is actually formed from the mineral deposits combined with the sunstone crystal that Lex wrapped it it and slowly evolves absorbing fragments of the sunstone crystal (which contains fragments of knowledge from the 28 known galaxies) and assimilates New Krypton into his Skull Ship which he embeds himself at the core of the body and launches an invasion of the Earth. The subplot would have dealt with Clark finally moving on with his life while dealing with the knowledge that Jason was his son.