David Goyer to write new "Superman" movie

[Christopher]

If Superman is to be cast in the same mold--black hair, blue eyes, light skin--then I'd open casting to different ethnicities for the supporting cast. I think the Daily Planet could use a more mutli-ethnic newsroom. Imagine a black actress in the role of Lois Lane. Or maybe an Asian actress. Or a Hispanic Perry White.

Fine with me. Additionally, maybe they could do something with Ron Troupe, the token black Planet reporter in the comics and TAS. Or they could use the TAS character of Angela Chen.

In Superman: Doomsday, Mercy Graves was played by Cree Summer, and I think she was depicted as African-American, though with blonde hair:

http://us.imdb.com/name/nm0582726/bio

And we got an Asian Mercy Graves (Gwendoline Yeo) in The Batman.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

If Superman is to be cast in the same mold--black hair, blue eyes, light skin--then I'd open casting to different ethnicities for the supporting cast. I think the Daily Planet could use a more mutli-ethnic newsroom. Imagine a black actress in the role of Lois Lane. Or maybe an Asian actress. Or a Hispanic Perry White. Hell, I thought casting Dean Cain as Supes/Kent--acting talents aside--was a ballsy move on the part of Deborah Joy LeVine and I applaud her for it.

Works for me.

I don't think they'll go with a Superman older than thirty though - doesn't make sense from the POV of serving the core audience for such movies.

 

[Out Of My Vulcan Mind]

Imagine a black actress in the role of Lois Lane.

It almost happened. McG's first choice for the role was Beyonce Knowles.

 

[Obiwanshinobi]

if they were to make her a blonde like in the animated series off the top of my head, I'd say how about Yvonne Strahovsky. For an asian character, although this would probably typecast them a little but Maggie Q, Zhang Ziyi, or Kelly Hu. Black and/or hispanic. I'm not sure at the moment. if they were to go that route at least. Also depending on her acting chops in Steven Soderbergh's Knockout, maybe somebody who can really fight, MMA fighter turned actress Gina Carano for the character of Mercy Graves.

 

[Bad Bishop]

Imagine a black actress in the role of Lois Lane.

It almost happened. McG's first choice for the role was Beyonce Knowles.

Now there's a bad idea! Superman movies are creatively challenging enough without bringing in a gratuitous racial element.

McG could have been the director of the Superman film that eventually went to Bryan Singer. But filming was set for Australia, and McG was terrified of long flights over the Pacific, according to one account. Tough luck.

Beyonce could still get into a superhero film. She can play Misty Knight if Marvel Studios ever makes Iron Fist.

 

[Stevil2001]

Yeah, everyone knows that non-white people are gratuitous.

 

[Bad Bishop]

Yeah, everyone knows that non-white people are gratuitous.

Now that's not fair. I would have been happy to cast Beyonce as the Daily Planet's gossip columnist.

 

[Obiwanshinobi]

hmm what about Rosario Dawson as Lois? Or Olivia Wilde?

 

[Stone_Cold_Sisko]

Imagine a black actress in the role of Lois Lane.

It almost happened. McG's first choice for the role was Beyonce Knowles.

I think the fact that's BEYONCE is quite a bit worse than she's black. For instance, if they cast say Zoe Saldana as Lois, I'd be right onboard

(not that they should, I don't want Zoe to be taking every genre female role under the sun, but its just an example)

 

[Dusty Ayres]

Well, with Nolan apparently supervising and Goyer writing, looks like WB really believe that lightning can strike twice. Of course, hiring people with a good track record in comic adaptations didn't pan out like they'd planned with Superman Returns (financially anyway) but I think Goyer will give a more populist take as a result.

I know you're (Jackson) lukewarm on him but I think with the Blade movies and the two Batman ones he's been involved in Goyer is an obvious choice - the sole problem being he may be too obvious. He's supposed to be involved in the next Batman movie, a Ghost Rider sequel/ reboot and has been linked to a Magneto prequel, not to mention his Supermax-Green Arrow script. Incidentally,if he gets Superman off the ground (no pun intended), I wonder if the GA movie will get made.

I think and have often said that the starting point of an established Superman with whom who the audience is familar is the way to go. I wish Routh was back but otherwise I'm excited about this project.

As much as I wanted an SR sequel, frankly I'll be happy to see ANY new Superman film at this point. The fact it's spearheaded by Nolan is even better.

I'm also glad to hear it described as "fun", and not dark and gritty like they originally talked about...

In other words (and this has been my greatest fear) we'll all get nothing but a hard-assed asshole version of Superman, with Michael Bay style writing, film-making and editing. All because everybody found Superman too 'gay' due to his caring nature in Superman Returns. With most of the great character moments in the film so beloved by critics and other moviegoers who weren't action all the time obsessed fanboys completely gone. And with Brandon replaced by a crappy actor that's probably not as good as he was. Nice.

I hope that it will be better, but the vibe I get from Goyer tells me that what I've just said will happen, and this movie will be a true failure as opposed to the financial failure that Superman Returns mostly was. All because of whiny brainless fanboys.

EDIT: Here's a review of Superman Returns from 2006 by John Kenneth Muir that encapsulates what I loved about the movie (note that although Muir is a fan, he's not the type of fan who called Brandon Routh's Superman 'gay', but saw something deeper in him):

Of course, even as I harbored high hopes for this new movie, I went into Superman Returns with the iconic portrayals by Christopher Reeve, Margot Kidder and Gene Hackman rolling around my brain. It's a compliment to say that Kevin Spacey thoroughly erased Gene Hackman's Luthor from my mind, playing a far more menacing variation of the scoundrel Lex (yet one who could be interpreted as being the same man...given a few hard years in prison). All the things that I hated about Hackman's interpretation of the role are gone; replaced by Spacey's hard, mean edges. When he threatens to kill Parker Posey's character...I felt he really meant it. I grew up with Hackman in the role, but always felt that he had (wrongly...) assumed he was slumming it; that he was playing in the Batman TV series of the 1960s rather than a major motion picture that took the character of Superman seriously. Even Spacey's humor is nasty in Superman Returns, and I guess we require that level of commitment from our screen villains these days.

As for Brandon Routh...I liked him. This young, mostly unknown talent did one hell of a job of re-casting Superman in his own image. I thought he was very good, very powerful in the role. Routh evidences that sense of innocence that we desire from Superman; that notion of aloneness, of standing-off and being different from those around him.

However, there may be a sex role thingie at play here in regards to the success of this particular Superman variation. I went to see the film with my wife and parents, and both Kathryn and my mother emerged from Superman Returns practically drooling over Routh; raving about his sensitivity, about his penetrating eyes, about his gentle, quiet strength and physical presence. They even (heretically!) said he was probably better than Christopher Reeve in the role. Clearly, the female contingent of our group had been taken with him...up, up and away. That's clever casting indeed.

Now, I won't go so far as Kathryn. For me, Reeve perfectly balanced vulnerability with strength. Routh looks like he was hatched from a Christopher Reeve clone farm (Clonus, perhaps?), and certainly boasts the physical grace and sincerity to be this generation's Superman. However, I did miss Reeve's sense of humor in the role; which was never overpowering, just always percolating under the surface. Reeve was an underrated and accomplished physical comedian (especially in his scenes as Clark Kent), and Routh seemed more mopey and lugubrious in those parts of Superman Returns. Maybe it was the script...or again, merely what we demand of our superheroes today.

A sidenote regarding Routh and Superman. Have you noticed all the buzz recently about "is Superman gay?" This idea really irks me. Not because a superhero couldn't be or shouldn't be gay, but because Superman is being labeled "gay" for all these crazy sociological reasons, and make no mistake, it's meant in a negative, derogatory fashion. Our society has unfortunately come to associate contemporary manhood with swagger and arrogance; with violence and hatred and revenge meted out as "justice." But Superman is not born from such pettiness. He is not born of vengeance or swagger or arrogance. He is a man of decency, objectivity, sensitivity...and true justice. This is how Brandon Routh (accurately) plays the character in Superman Returns, but our society has grown so homophobic that any man who dares to openly express qualities of gentleness or kindness or even brotherhood towards another man is instantly deemed gay. Imagine the headlines when the new Star Trek movie premieres. "Is Mr. Spock gay?" they will shout. Why...he's a...pacifist, after all! He won't fire the phasers and wage war until he's tried to resolve a problem peacefully!!!! What a wimp...must be gay!!!!

It's really sad that our media and politicians are demanding that manliness be judged by the barrel of the gun and by cowboyish military adventures overseas rather than innate qualities of fairness and honesty, dependability and kindness. Must all our heroes be bad boys, I wonder, filled with darkness, angst and the big brood? If so, then that's a shame. Superman has always been my favorite superhero because -- although he carries difficult baggage with him -- he hasn't succumbed to the baser instincts. Truth, justice...well, you know the rest. And, I also admire Superman because throughout the wide pantheon of superheroes, Superman is the one forever in love with a dark-haired beauty of whip-smart intelligence and sharp edges. I'm in love with a woman like that; so I identify with his yearning for Lois Lane.

MOVIE REVIEW: Superman Returns (2006)

And here we go again with the casting of a black actress in the role of a white character (Lois Lane). Basically the whole racial casting controversy that was around the movie version of Avatar: The Last Airbender, except in reverse and with all of the bitching from white people instead of people of color-causing controversy where there needs to be none.

If Superman is to be cast in the same mold--black hair, blue eyes, light skin--then I'd open casting to different ethnicities for the supporting cast. I think the Daily Planet could use a more mutli-ethnic newsroom. Imagine a black actress in the role of Lois Lane. Or maybe an Asian actress. Or a Hispanic Perry White.

Fine with me. Additionally, maybe they could do something with Ron Troupe, the token black Planet reporter in the comics and TAS. Or they could use the TAS character of Angela Chen.

In Superman: Doomsday, Mercy Graves was played by Cree Summer, and I think she was depicted as African-American, though with blonde hair:

http://us.imdb.com/name/nm0582726/bio

And we got an Asian Mercy Graves (Gwendoline Yeo) in The Batman.

Here we go again!

No! No!, A 1,000 times, NO!

There are two black characters in the comics already, Ron Trope and Inspector Bill Henderson-they can be the black characters Superman/Clark Kent meets and deals with, along with maybe also John Henry Irons (Steel) and his niece. (This objection comes from a 42-year old Afro-Canadian male, BTW.)

 

[Captaindemotion]

But that's just it. The problem was that it was trying to be two things at once, a continuation of a '70s franchise and a modern 2000s film. And so it didn't do a good job of being either. It was a film that was unsure of its own identity. That's why a clean break would've been better. If you're going to do it differently, then really do it differently. Don't weigh it down with a pile of homages and recycled music and art design and characterizations.

I must admit, I've never really gotten either the confusion over or the antipathy towards the 'semi-sequel' status of SR. I liked how you could view it as a sequel to the first two Donner/Lester movies, could disregard them or could even, (if you squinted hard enough!) see it as a sequel to Metropolis.

It's not like it's the first time anyone took elements from an earlier incarnation of a franchise. In Batman Forever, Bruce Wayne was entirely unlike that of Batman & Batman Returns, as was Gotham City. Yet Alfred and Comm Gordon were the same and the movie referenced Catwoman. In considering the original Russell T Davies has freely retained what he wanted and ignored what he doesn't like for the revived Dr Who.

The Bond movies are the best example of this. No-one would confuse Roger Moore or Timothy Dalton's 007s for George Lazenby, but Lazenby's marriage to Tracy in OHMSS was referenced in Licence to Kill and For Your Eyes Only. Brosnan's head waiter 007 could not be mistaken for Connery's head bouncer, but in Die Another Day, we saw props and gadgets from the Connery era. I have no problem accepting that Brosnan took on Goldfinger, I just imagine that he made jokes about Take That or Bros instead of the Beatles while doing so.

Similarly, I can merge SR and the Donner movies into a loose continuity, where Kal-El didn't arrive on Earth in the 1950s but the 1980s and where
he debuted as Superman in the late 1990s/ early 2000s rather than late 1970s. I mean, if the movie didn't work for you, then fair enough. I personally thought there was enough similarities and enough updates.

But it doesn't follow that the only alternative is for Clark to be an absurdly overplayed klutz. Reeve was successful in differentiating Clark and Superman just by changing the way he stood, the way he looked at people. It was a marvelously subtle bit of character acting that just got swamped by all the over-the-top clumsiness. You could edit out the klutzy stuff and just hire an actor good enough to make the two men different from each other, even if they both come off as competent and effective in two different ways.

One thing that's always interested me about Tim Daly's performance in S:TAS is that it seems to me that his Clark voice is actually a bit deeper than his Superman voice, in contrast to what you'd expect. And maybe that's because Superman has to be friendlier, more accessible, brighter. Imagine a version where Clark is played as a very serious, driven, tough journalist while Superman is much more affable and warm. There are certainly alternatives to painting Clark as a bumbling caricature.

Yeah, when I think about that, I agree. Have you seen A History of Violence? This might well be considered a spoiler for that movie, so although it's a few years old, I'll code it.


Edit - bugger, as usual, I've screwed up the spoilder code, so if anyone wants to avoid spoilers for AHOV, please just scroll past the following really quickly. Sorry!

Viggo Mortensen's character appears to be a quiet, mild-mannered cafe owner, who becomes a media sensation when he stops a robbery in his premises. He is then visited by two mafia types, who claim to recognise him as one of their own. He denies it - but they're right. There is one scene where Mortensen defends himself against an attack by them. In that scene, he simply transforms from the cafe owner to the gangster. Mortensen is standing still, he doesn't say anything, he hardly moves, his facial expression hardly changes. You just know he's reverted. 
 
It's an astonishing piece of acting, that's hard to describe, it needs to be seen. Since seeing it, I've thought that his Oscar nod for Eastern Promises is to compensate for not being nominated here - a bit like how Jeremy Irons won for Reversal of Fortune, but really deserved his nod for Dead Ringers (another Cronenberg film dealing with duality and another example of one actor playing two people differently).
 
Which is a long-winded way of noting how one actor can brilliantly and subtly play two the same man in two different ways!

Well, with Nolan apparently supervising and Goyer writing, looks like WB really believe that lightning can strike twice. Of course, hiring people with a good track record in comic adaptations didn't pan out like they'd planned with Superman Returns (financially anyway) but I think Goyer will give a more populist take as a result.

I know you're (Jackson) lukewarm on him but I think with the Blade movies and the two Batman ones he's been involved in Goyer is an obvious choice - the sole problem being he may be too obvious. He's supposed to be involved in the next Batman movie, a Ghost Rider sequel/ reboot and has been linked to a Magneto prequel, not to mention his Supermax-Green Arrow script. Incidentally,if he gets Superman off the ground (no pun intended), I wonder if the GA movie will get made.

I think and have often said that the starting point of an established Superman with whom who the audience is familar is the way to go. I wish Routh was back but otherwise I'm excited about this project.

As much as I wanted an SR sequel, frankly I'll be happy to see ANY new Superman film at this point. The fact it's spearheaded by Nolan is even better.

I'm also glad to hear it described as "fun", and not dark and gritty like they originally talked about...

In other words (and this has been my greatest fear) we'll all get nothing but a hard-assed asshole version of Superman, with Michael Bay style writing, film-making and editing. All because everybody found Superman too 'gay' due to his caring nature in Superman Returns. With most of the great character moments in the film so beloved by critics and other moviegoers who weren't action all the time obsessed fanboys completely gone. And with Brandon replaced by a crappy actor that's probably not as good as he was. Nice.

Can you show me in my quote where exactly you're getting all of this? I don't get any of it in dave james quote either.

This isn't the first time I've noticed you quoting myself or other posters, then drawing a totally irrelevant and unconnected conclusion from what we've said.

 

[Out Of My Vulcan Mind]

In other words (and this has been my greatest fear) we'll all get nothing but a hard-assed asshole version of Superman, with Michael Bay style writing, film-making and editing.

The filmmaking aesthetic favored by Chris and Jonah Nolan is miles away from Michael Bay.

 

[Christopher]

Now there's a bad idea! Superman movies are creatively challenging enough without bringing in a gratuitous racial element.

Uhhh... Superman's Kryptonian and Lois is human. There's already a much bigger "racial element" to the story than any trivial difference in skin complexion. And unless the movie were set in the past, there's no way that Lois being dark-skinned would be an "element" in the story at all. When was the last time you saw a TV show or movie that presented a mixed-ethnicity romance and made an issue out of the fact that it was mixed?

 

[Shazam!]

And unless the movie were set in the past

THE DREAM

 

[Ryan Thomas Riddle]

If Superman is to be cast in the same mold--black hair, blue eyes, light skin--then I'd open casting to different ethnicities for the supporting cast. I think the Daily Planet could use a more mutli-ethnic newsroom. Imagine a black actress in the role of Lois Lane. Or maybe an Asian actress. Or a Hispanic Perry White.

Fine with me. Additionally, maybe they could do something with Ron Troupe, the token black Planet reporter in the comics and TAS. Or they could use the TAS character of Angela Chen.

In Superman: Doomsday, Mercy Graves was played by Cree Summer, and I think she was depicted as African-American, though with blonde hair:

http://us.imdb.com/name/nm0582726/bio

And we got an Asian Mercy Graves (Gwendoline Yeo) in The Batman.

Here we go again!

No! No!, A 1,000 times, NO!

There are two black characters in the comics already, Ron Trope and Inspector Bill Henderson-they can be the black characters Superman/Clark Kent meets and deals with, along with maybe also John Henry Irons (Steel) and his niece. (This objection comes from a 42-year old Afro-Canadian male, BTW.)

For a post that has some wonderful insight on Superman's character, it ends with a knee-jerk reaction--rolleyes noted--over the suggestion that someone of a different skin complexion play Lois Lane.

No one stated out right that it should be a black actress and only a black actress. Or an asian actress. The suggestion was that casting not limit itself to a white, dark-haired actress. There are a great deal of talented actresses in the Hollywood pool of different ethnicities. So why not open up the field? Same with the other characters.

Why should the Daily Planet be limited to Ron Trope as the only ethnic representation? In fact, when was the last time he really contributed anything to the Superman comics. Usually, he gets no more than a panel or two and some witty remark aimed at Steve Lombard.

Now there's a bad idea! Superman movies are creatively challenging enough without bringing in a gratuitous racial element.

Uhhh... Superman's Kryptonian and Lois is human. There's already a much bigger "racial element" to the story than any trivial difference in skin complexion. And unless the movie were set in the past, there's no way that Lois being dark-skinned would be an "element" in the story at all. When was the last time you saw a TV show or movie that presented a mixed-ethnicity romance and made an issue out of the fact that it was mixed?

This reminds me of the penultimate scene in the 1970s issue of Superman's Girlfriend Lois Lane, "I Am Curious (Black)!"

Sure we can laugh at the simplicity with how the issue deals with race and racial tensions, even the stereotypes it contains and the sledgehammer ending that makes "Let That Be Your Last Battlefield" look more subtle.

In the issue, Superman uses a device to transfigure Lois from white to black. The penultimate scene has the black Lois asking Superman if he'd still love her and marry her if she remained black. I find his response brilliant:

You ask me that of me...Superman? An alien from the Krypton? A universal outsider? I don't even have human skin! It's tougher than steel!

Of course, Lois's cringeworthy come back ("But your skin is the right color") ruins it.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Of course, Lois's cringeworthy come back ("But your skin is the right color") ruins it.

Cringeworthy, yeah, but the writer inadvertantly makes a point: Supes may be from another planet, but as long as he looks like a white guy no one cares where he's from. If he were black they might start a movement to see his birth certificate and immigration papers.

Will Smith as Superman guarantees box office...but then, Will Smith as Mortimer Snerd would, too.

Hey, what about Angelina Jolie as Lois? She's not overexposed or anything.

 

[Ryan Thomas Riddle]

Of course, Lois's cringeworthy come back ("But your skin is the right color") ruins it.

Cringeworthy, yeah, but the writer inadvertantly makes a point: Supes may be from another planet, but as long as he looks like a white guy no one cares where he's from. If he were black they might start a movement to see his birth certificate and immigration papers.

Ya know, come to think about it, that's something worthy of exploring in a Superman movie. I can see a scene where Lex Luthor overstates his point that Superman is alien by saying something along those lines, like the sadistic scene in Superman: Birthright where he shows Lois and Clark the holographic representation of Superman being dissected.

 

[Out Of My Vulcan Mind]

Cringeworthy, yeah, but the writer inadvertantly makes a point: Supes may be from another planet, but as long as he looks like a white guy no one cares where he's from. If he were black they might start a movement to see his birth certificate and immigration papers.

Maybe that was the point the writer intended to make with that line, rather than it being inadvertent.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

That's always a possibility, and intent is the essential gulf that writers and readers have to bridge - sometimes more successfully than others.

 

[davejames]

I must admit, I've never really gotten either the confusion over or the antipathy towards the 'semi-sequel' status of SR. I liked how you could view it as a sequel to the first two Donner/Lester movies, could disregard them or could even, (if you squinted hard enough!) see it as a sequel to Metropolis.

Same here. But somehow I have a feeling most fans are putting the blame on that stuff when the truth is they just didn't care for the movie's somber tone.

I bet if SR was much more of a fun, vibrant movie with tons of kickass action (ala' the Spidey movies), there would be a LOT fewer complaints about the homages and the quasi-sequel thing....