A Darker Superman?

An article posted in the reports that Warner is switching up its strategy in regards to the bulk of its next slate of movies. Looks like the success of Batman, and the success Marvel has been having with their own superhero films, has convinced them that they need to make darker films in order to make more money.

So what does this mean for Superman? For one, it looks like we’re going to have to ignore Bryan Singer’s last installment (which picked up so nicely where Superman II left off) because they’re going to reboot the franchise like Marvel did for . It’ll all be like his return to Earth, meeting his son, and stranding Lex Luthor on a desert island never happened.

But it doesn’t stop with tearing down the foundation. What they plan on building in its place will be a darker film dealing with some of the more controversial issues Superman has to deal with… Well, I hate to break it to the higher ups at Warner, but Superman doesn’t have a controversial side, that’s supposed to be his appeal. The reason that Batman works as a darker film is because Batman is a darker character.

This is always going to be the problem with Superman as a movie character. Giving him some depth is what Singer tried to do, and all it did was take time away from him putting out fires and catching airplanes. And that’s not the only problem you encounter when trying to put the big S on the big screen – he has only one weakness which villains always somehow find a way to exploit, no matter how rare Kryptonite is. But beyond any issues of creating dramatic tension with a character like Kal El is that no matter what predicament you put him in, he’s always going to play the boy scout – always. If he doesn’t, we’re not dealing with the same character that everyone’s gotten to know over the last 60 years, and that’s no doubt a problem with the prevalence of the antihero in pop-culture in this cynical modern age. Lastly, if he’s invulnerable and godlike in power, then you’ll have a problem coming up with an opponent that will satisfy everyone’s appetite. Superman II did it well, Superman IV totally made a mess of things (I won’t even mention Superman III).

Based on this major shift from Warner, including the fact that they’ll be holding off on their DC team movies like Batman & Superman and Justice League, it’s hard to believe that people thought it was a risk for Marvel to step out and start financing their own films. To be honest, I didn’t even think they’d get too far with their pilot project being Iron Man (I’m not counting The Punisher, ’cause he sucks) – but I was very happy to be proven wrong after seeing what Favreau was able to do with the material.

I mean, I didn’t like Singer’s Superman that much myself. It dragged and was more of a loving tribute than an actual new breath of life into the character, but that’s what you get when you’re dealing with the ultimate boy scout for a character. The real way to play off his strength is to put that Flanderish-ness up against a darker ally – like everyone’s favourite billionaire, Batman. That way you can laugh a little bit at Superman without feeling guilty – and also marvel at his power when compared to Batman’s bag of tricks.