Yes

by James Thornton

Created on: June 26, 2009

I would gladly pay to see a dark reboot if certain qualities of the Superman mythos is adhered to. Foremost among these is the hero and his qualities. Superman is a Messianic figure sent by a wise and benevolent father, Jor-El, to save mankind. Both Superman and Clark Kent should hold this worldview. The dark twist to this part of the mythos could be his childhood and upbringing by the Kent's in Smallville. Superman is practically immortal. He should land on Earth during the 30's or 40's during the Great Depression and World War Two and be brought up to be very conservative and/or religious. Imagine a Superman who is OCD about truth telling and obeying the law. He ages much slower than his parents who can't send him to school for obvious reasons. They pass away while he appears to be in his twenties yet actually closer to fifty or sixty years old when he emerges as Superman and shocks the world. Few people think he is a hero at first, and many people worry about alien invasions. It takes a while of fighting crime, pulling cats out of trees, and providing disaster relief before he is fully accepted. Through it all he plugs away, but is increasingly bitter towards people. He doesn't care for the cynicism or the hero worship. The Kent farm is his Fortress of Solitude. He has been living on the Kent farm for 75 years in almost complete isolation and really knows nothing about his adopted world. His worldview is Manichean; he only sees shades of black and white. To be dark the film should put Superman in a moral dilemma where he has to decide between the truth and law and good and falsehood.

This moral dilemma should result as a conflict with the antagonist. If Lex Luthor is the main villain then he should operate inside of the law; better yet with legitimate power being used for evil purposes. Some of the more interesting storylines in the comics have Luthor becoming President of the United States and using his authority to gain dictatorial powers and forcing Superman to choose between the law and righteousness. Pulling cats out of trees, fighting crime, and serving as disaster relief leads to him taking an oath (Truth, Justice and the American Way) and becoming an agent of the US Government. He needs to feel compelled to break the law and his oath in order to save mankind; even if mankind doesn't want to be saving (they elected Luthor after all). Perhaps Luthor orders the invasion and destruction of a country on manufactured intelligence. Superman obeys orders and kills a lot of people thinking he is doing good and later finds he was a tool of evil. He then resolves to remove Luthor from office by force.

Another thing about the villain; there should be more than one. While Luthor poses a mental challenge to Superman he also needs a physical threat and someone he can unleash his full power against. Doomsday would serve nicely here. Lex Luthor could use Doomsday as a fail safe in case Superman tries overthrowing him. This would pit him against the US military and Doomsday who Luthor cannot control once unleashed, and is nearly indestructible because it is created from Superman's DNA. Elite forces could be armed with Kryptonite, which should be used very sparingly to level the playing field a little bit, but it would be really cool to see Superman ripping the turrets off of tanks and shooting down fighter jets with his heat vision. An epic battle that almost completely destroys a mostly evacuated Metropolis with Doomsday would then ensue. Not only does he battle the military and Doomsday, but he also has to save civilians caught in the middle. The battle between Superman and Zod and his minions in "Superman 2" was by far the best part in that film.

The third part of the mythos to be addressed is Clark's relationships with Lois, Jimmy, and Perry White. The character arc should occur here with the three supporting characters providing life lessons and teaching Clark how to be human. The duality of Clark and Superman should be ditched. They are the one and the same. Superman should come before Clark, with Clark being a necessity to live in Metropolis. Superman invents Clark to be closer to Lois. His career as an investigative reporter could be the catalyst that brings him into conflict with President Luthor. Initially, his love for Lois is unrequited. Superman is the story of the lifetime and her attraction to him should be unchanged. As their relationship develops she can take on the role of bringing him out of naivety and introducing some shades of gray into his worldview. She convinces him that he must destroy Luthor even if it means breaking an oath committing treason. Superman should also reveal his identity as Clark to her by the middle of the movie, thus bringing in the Lois and Clark love story and making a play for the female demographic. Furthermore, the tragedy of knowing that he will outlive her for millennia as well as their inability to have children would be make the love story all the more compelling. This strategy proved pretty successful in the Spiderman franchise with evolving relationship between Peter and Mary Jane, but doomed love would likely be irresistible making this a love story and the ultimate superhero flick. Perry could play a father role, and Jimmy would remain Clark's best friend. Jimmy would be the comedic relief as he brings Clark up to date in the modern world.

This concept for a dark reboot redefines the mythos without trashing it. Clark's rural Kansas upbringing is interpreted in a new light and forces Superman to be a perceived villain threatening democracy in order to be mankind's savior. Earlier "rules" are broken. Superman invents the Clark persona, and reveals himself to Lois. The love story is retained but with a tragic twist. This is because Superman is an alien and has a much longer lifespan than humans. He also is faced with a grave physical threat in the form of Doomsday and elite soldiers armed with Kryptonite. Most importantly, Superman kills innocent people in the name of good and this will be a traumatizing event that leads to Luthor's death and Superman ruling the country from the White House (this is a clever play on the question of a benevolent God and free will). Superman loves us so much he won't allow us to destroy ourselves and won't be a tool again. How dark is that?

This takes us to a sequel; if I were a movie mogul I pit Superman against the most dangerous man on the planet-Bruce Wayne. The cliffhanger ending of the first film would probably take place in Wayne Manor, and would be reminiscent of the ending in "Batman Begins" where Gordon hands the Dark Knight the Joker playing card. The audience knows what is coming next and will be camping out on the sidewalk months before theatrical release to see that flick. The classic all time battle in comic lore in my opinion was Superman and Batman's fight in Frank Miller's "The Dark Knight Returns". Batman is going to kill Superman to restore democracy! He rejects Superman's utopian vision for mankind and prefers the warts that come with freedom. Fanboys and geeks like me have been dreaming about the Superman vs. Batman movie that has been rumored to be in development for years and was a prank in "I am Legend" (see that billboard with the two hero's logos?).

A promising "threequel" would be an alien invasion of Earth (Supes can't be the only ET in the universe) headed by Darkseid, that forces Batman and Superman to call a truce and unite forces.

There you have it. My opinion on why and how the Superman franchise should be rebooted.

Learn more about this author, James Thornton.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.