What Is Your Vision for Superman?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm gonna go cry in a corner now. My script writer friend, who is not actually a script writer yet, thought it was good. Though he doesn't like Superhero films so I don't know how valuable his opinions are. Why did you hate that part in particular? Superman is weak as a child and learns the true meaning of what it means to be strong as he gains superpowers.

It's been done about a million times by virtually every superhero ever.
 
For starters, I think it is more important to talk about I wouldn't do. I'd leave kryptonite out as well as situations where the only way the villain can get the upper hand on Superman is to force Superman into choosing to save innocent people rather than pursuing the villain. When it comes to Superman on film, there are very few times where he has faced something that could go toe to toe with him and I can't ever think of a time when he has been so outmatched that he had to outsmart an enemy.

I like Bruce Timm's Superman a great deal. There are some stories that rely on kryptonite or on cliched 'stop an out of control train' type moments, but the best moments are when he is up against Darkseid, Metallo, Doomsday or Braniac. Lex Luthor can be interesting, but so far the film versions of him haven't been. I want to see a physical challenge for Superman. I want to see buildings getting leveled when he fights.
 
CPrWN.jpg
 
I'm gonna go cry in a corner now. My script writer friend, who is not actually a script writer yet, thought it was good. Though he doesn't like Superhero films so I don't know how valuable his opinions are. Why did you hate that part in particular? Superman is weak as a child and learns the true meaning of what it means to be strong as he gains superpowers.

Well, the problem is that Superman gets his powers from the sun. And I'd also suggest there's absolutely no need to tell Superman's origin ever again.
 
I'd make it so it was not advertised as a Superman film, but rather just a strange modern-day sci-fi/action movie.

Even watching the film, it wouldn't be until the very end when you realize it's a Superman Origin Story.
 
shaowebb's idea seems pretty good.

Otherwise, I think the crucial thing is to reinvent the character into having well defined limits.. both to the audience and to himself. He should be shown struggling to lift some things, and outright failing to be able to lift other things. He should fly as fast as he can to reach something, and arrive too late. He should get hit by a plane and break his leg.. whatever. There needs to be some reasonable threat that both he and the audience are worried about in whatever's going on.

Or just have him tormented by the fact that every time he eats a sandwich, there are 10,000 people in the world that he could have saved from horrible deaths, but didn't.
 
shaowebb's idea seems pretty good.

Otherwise, I think the crucial thing is to reinvent the character into having well defined limits.. both to the audience and to himself. He should be shown struggling to lift some things, and outright failing to be able to lift other things. He should fly as fast as he can to reach something, and arrive too late. He should get hit by a plane and break his leg.. whatever. There needs to be some reasonable threat that both he and the audience are worried about in whatever's going on.

Or just have him tormented by the fact that every time he eats a sandwich, there are 10,000 people in the world that he could have saved from horrible deaths, but didn't.

Thank you. It leaves room for action scenes if needed. Rescue attempts, military attempts to incarcerate, disasters and all the action high cinema CG you could want and even culminates with the fight thing, but by God it puts the focus on the man and not the power. The drama is what is needed here. I think every screen writer so far has missed this and its why Superman movies are turning out poorly.

I dont think he needs to be weakened at all though. Rather than make him struggle to be strong enough he should just struggle to do the right thing. Tries to hold up a falling building in an earthquake. Doesn't work and a chunk is torn off and people barely survive it falling below. Takes a flying run at the builing to try again in desperation...too much force over too small an area. He punches clean through the building and crashes from over shooting unprepared for the building not resisting his momentum. Watches the building fall. Theres a million scenarios like this. He should become more than a little afraid of his own power potentially causing danger for people. Heck I'd have him sonic boom and blowout glass in skyscrapers during this crash causing glass debris to injure those in areas that were previously safe from his failed rescue.

No the only time he should struggle is against Doomsday in my idea. He shouldn't be winning. He should be nearly dead. He can get injured then and actually know fear. He sees blood...his blood. My God he could die. What does he do? He could die...are they worth dying for? Some are running from him blaming him for this monster too. Why fight? But he sees someone in trouble...no more being afraid of whether or not his powers could harm others if he didn't hold back. He has to fight because if he doesn't no one else will. Full tilt no more doubts slug fest. Both fall. Both are meant to be seen as dead by the audience. Relieve them by Star labs saying after checking Doomsday for a pulse and finding none that they got one in Superman. Haul them off and do the ending I stated before. Superman is carried off to Star to be treated and left alone, and Doomsday's is abducted ominously by the government to develop a countermeasure. Heck Star should keep all the samples they can of Superman too. Pure sequel loophole left open here to allow the audience's imagination to roar for a sequel.

Its just how you right a script like this. You have to make him afraid of something and until the end the most frightening thing is his own power hurting people. Thats drama and drama (not ACTION) is what defines whether a film is good or not.
 
Are you troll posting now? Film is a different beast than comic books and this just wouldn't fly. You're not focusing a bit on the man. You're just focusing on fights and convoluted setups for them. You can't do a film without creating a likeable hero and that requires more than just saving the day. He has to be human with wants, doubts, desires, and all the rest.

Just because you can lift a fallen building from an earthquake doesn't mean your trained how NOT to lift areas so as not to collapse large portions onto survivors trapped beneath. X-ray vision be damned son all you are is a big indestructible brute with good intentions. Compelling characters struggle to do the right thing and the line needs blurred to keep it intense. Make him screw up things like the building rescue, or saving miners or having him make someone go hypoxic from a fast speedy save via flight, or even have him whiplash someone in a super speed rescue and let the tragedy fly in the face of the man who only wants to help.

This is how you create drama. You're just creating action and for film you need both to be good. There is a difference between rising action and well written drama...you lack it.


There is a HUGE difference in learning what it means to be "Strong" and learning what it means to be "a hero." Its obvious from your emphasis on action that you are just focusing on his powers and not what it must be like to actually try to be a hero that powerful who deals with how people would perceive him. Strength won't make them trust you. If anything it may make them uneasy. And Strength doesn't mean you know what to do when people need help. You can more easily cause as much harm as good in those situations with that kind of power if you aren't a trained member of rescue team with the right kind of experience for the task at hand.

Look guy its obvious you like Superman, but this isn't good. I mean I'm an Animation student about to graduate from a top school and believe me when the guy whose action CG tells you even his work can't make this interesting that its bad. You don't have a script. You have a long winded action film and your other script with the scrawny Superman and such doesn't even use the character of Superman...it uses what seems like the template of "little boy you are the chosen one now go be awesome and prove you are special to the world simply because" and thats really cliche and hard to sell to audiences...especially when its how you are rewriting a famous character. That would offend a LOT of his fanbase to pander his name like that behind a character that is so completely unlike him. Look up some books on writing literature and how to develop stories. I'm not gonna tell anyone to stop dreaming, but I will tell someone when an idea is flawed enough to scrap. Its time to scrap this and think more about what makes a good dramatic film instead of what kind of fanfiction you'd read.

Well I was mostly just trying to create an interesting scenario for some cool images I had in my head. If I was actually writing a movie I would put all the emotional conflict stuff into the plot I have outlined, but yeah I don't know the first thing about actually making a script or a film. If you look at Batman Begins it is actuallly a fairly conventional plot in a lot of ways, it's how Nolan pulls it off and who he casts that makes it brilliant. If you had to summarize that story in one short paragraph it could also seem sort of bland.
 
You are part of the problem. The only way to make Superman interesting is to change him.

that makes him interesting to you, not everybody. the fact is it's more fun to see Supes struggle against a Zod or Darkseid or Brainiac. I can't understand why movie audiences think that a struggling hero is somehow more relatable. you want to see imagination flying on screen, not no more down to earth "realistic" bullshit, go watch Batman for that. that fits that character fine.
 
Into Batman ;)

superbat1.png


that makes him interesting to you, not everybody. the fact is it's more fun to see Supes struggle against a Zod or Darkseid or Brainiac. I can't understand why movie audiences think that a struggling hero is somehow more relatable. you want to see imagination flying on screen, not no more down to earth "realistic" bullshit, go watch Batman for that. that fits that character fine.
It's not a question of realism, it is a question of interest. Zod was cool, but do you really think mainstream audiences will enjoy Brainiac?

Most people, maybe not you, but most people, enjoy a protagonist they can relate to in some way. Superduperman has gotten so overpowered over the years that is not really possible any more.
 
that makes him interesting to you, not everybody. the fact is it's more fun to see Supes struggle against a Zod or Darkseid or Brainiac. I can't understand why movie audiences think that a struggling hero is somehow more relatable. you want to see imagination flying on screen, not no more down to earth "realistic" bullshit, go watch Batman for that. that fits that character fine.

You can't understand? Are you serious?


Oh internet, you never disappoint me.
 
The Chillin' Superman on a cloud is how I envision Superman. Oddly enough, I was always quite impartial to Superman in the past until another thread put that image of Superman into my head. Just the man of steel, invincible to everything in the universe besides a little dose of kryptonite, defying gravity carefree sitting atop of a cloud. There is nothing intense about this Superman. His facial expression, posture and body language are mellow. In a world where normal humans worry about Iran and terrorism among other things Superman can choose not to. He can choose to save the day or if he doesn't he is hardly affected. Unless of course a threat is potentially harmful to Lois, Superman shouldn't really have a care for much anything else. He can walk down the darkest alleys in the projects without a care. Shit he can tear down a reinforced door to a crackhouse without worrying about the bullet wounds. He could literally breakdown the door, throw some crack down the drain, throw in some puns and jokes, laugh and leave without any repercussions. Just because he is fucking Superman and he can do what the fuck he wants. He has nothing to fear, and a man without anything to fear has nothing to lose. In my opinion, Lois should be used a literary device to inject Superman with a sense of humanism later on in the Superman saga. Every Superman story is the same. Superman decides all of the sudden wants to act human, so he gets a job and disguises himself as Clark Kent? Get the fuck out of here. That's such a bullshit cliche it honestly has no part in a modern day Superman movie. Part of the reason why I always disliked Superman is because there was no possible way I could relate to him, whereas characters like Batman I found a connection even as a child. Superman was always this cliche superhero that I found incredibly boring. An interesting Superman in my opinion is one that takes an invincible baby alien with distinctively human like features, raised by humans into adulthood amongst human peers. Think of Superman in this sense as a human, not an alien, but a human who came out of the womb invincible. Then ask yourself, how would the average human behave if given these amazing powers? Build a character around that idea first for the origin story. Don't turn Superman into a cocky bro douche, that is far from my suggestion. Rather invent a character free from all boundaries of society. He should be witty with his own abilities because there is no other superhuman or villain to compare him to. The picture with him lounging atop the clouds seriously epitomizes my vision for Superman. It is the perfect portrayal of how one with these amazing abilities would act and is captured in that single picture. Check it out after you read and refer back to this post with what you think. Put a Superman like that on the screen, and you can take my money please.
 
I'd make it so it was not advertised as a Superman film, but rather just a strange modern-day sci-fi/action movie.

Even watching the film, it wouldn't be until the very end when you realize it's a Superman Origin Story.

Yes this is a good idea, but it wouldn't be easy to pull off. That's kind of what I was trying to do in my plot but I guess it didn't come out right.
 
The Chillin' Superman on a cloud is how I envision Superman. Oddly enough, I was always quite impartial to Superman in the past until another thread put that image of Superman into my head. Just the man of steel, invincible to everything in the universe besides a little dose of kryptonite, defying gravity carefree sitting atop of a cloud. There is nothing intense about this Superman. His facial expression, posture and body language are mellow. In a world where normal humans worry about Iran and terrorism among other things Superman can choose not to. He can choose to save the day or he doesn't and he is hardly affected. Unless of course a threat is potentially harmful to Lois, Superman shouldn't really have a care for much anything else. He can walk down the darkest alleys in the projects, shit he can tear down a reinforced door to a crackhouse without worrying about the bullet wounds. He could literally breakdown the door, throw some crack down the drain, throw in some puns and racist jokes, laugh and leave. Just because he is fucking Superman and he can do what the fuck he wants without severe consequences. He has nothing to fear, and a man without anything to fear has nothing to lose. Lois should be used a literary device to inject Superman with a sense of humanism. Every Superman story is the same. Superman decides he all of the sudden wants to act human, so he gets a job and disguises himself as Clark Kent? Get the fuck out of here. That's such bullshit cliche I want it out. Part of the reason why I always disliked Superman is because there was no possible way I could relate to him, whereas characters like Batman I found a connection even as a child. Superman was always this cliche superhero that I found incredibly boring. An interesting Superman in my opinion is one that takes an invincible baby alien with distinctively human like features, raised by humans into adulthood amongst human peers. Think of Superman in this sense as a human, not an alien, but a human who came out of the womb invincible. Then ask yourself, how would the average human behave if given these amazing powers. Build a character around that idea first for the origin story. Don't turn Superman into a cocky bro douche, that is far from my suggestion. Rather invent a character free from all boundaries of society. He should be witty with his own abilities because there is no other superhuman or villain to compare him to. The picture with him lounging atop the clouds seriously epitomizes my vision for Superman. It is the perfect portrayal of how one with these amazing abilities would act and is captured in that single picture. Check it out after you read and refer back to this post with what you think.

I am sure Superman could break through this wall of text.
 
Someone who isn't all powerful, could get his ass handed to him if not careful. By more powerful beings of course.

Kryptonite would be a whole lot more rare. Not everyone and their grandma can have a piece of it.

He would need to keep his moral compass. He might seem like a goody-goody but I dunno you guys, I like it when my superheroes are heroic and people I would strive to be more like.
 
Well I was mostly just trying to create an interesting scenario for some cool images I had in my head. If I was actually writing a movie I would put all the emotional conflict stuff into the plot I have outlined, but yeah I don't know the first thing about actually making a script or a film. If you look at Batman Begins it is actuallly a fairly conventional plot in a lot of ways, it's how Nolan pulls it off and who he casts that makes it brilliant. If you had to summarize that story in one short paragraph it could also seem sort of bland.

Your idea may be able to do a comic, but even then its a coin toss. Emotional "Stuff" as you put it is what is required for cinema to work. And there is no guarantee your actors can pull off that stuff when your focus is mainly on getting that "stuff" out of the way for the action. Plus your script really weakens the character as a whole and requires a new sensei character to train him just like in DBZ or something.

There can be a trainer to Batman because in the comics HE WAS TRAINED. However, Superman wasn't taught anything. Its part of his character that he is so alone. He's the last of his kind, and is the ultimate immigrant who found a dream. He is literally described that way by DC in documentaries. Your awkward boy angle may try to make him isolated, but it does so in such a way that he wouldn't have a dream and in a way that slaps his character in the face. He's smallville slice of americana farmboy. You make him kind of Emo "chosen one" by training and all that. It literally sounds like DBZ season 1. Im not joking here.

You really need to look at this harder in a way thats more encompassing. You have to stay true enough to the character so as not to insult the fanbase, you have to write a movie that has enough emotional drama to actually please theater goers, you have to have a plot that is NOT so complex that it just seems like an over the top comicbook or you'll have them rolling their eyes, and you have to make the action have meaning and you do that by focusing on Earth, its people, the costs, the danger, the fear, and the man and all the paranoia and hurt rolled into this. If you focus on all the angles and subplots and back story and history rewrites and other characters and enemies for your film you won't have time to fully develop anything unless it was done as a TV series over a much LONGER period of time. You have to remember that films have to have the time to develop each piece in a meaningful manner. Folks have to get to know every character at an almost constant pace. Folks have to build each threat up over time or they stop caring after seeing too many explosions. You just don't leave enough time to do anything you want and its just not suited for fans of the comic or of film.

Please, just look into some books on formatting literature, building plot, rising action, drama, foreshadowing, staging, timing and all the rest. Its not as simple as what villains and what action with what back story when it comes to film. You have to know how to make audiences feel things and how to pace things to give them the meaning you desire. Researching how its done may help you tweak this into something someday, but as it is now its completely unusable for a multitude of reasons. I'm really trying to help you see why here because this means something to you and for that alone you're owed some help on how to turn into something good someday. You just need to know more about how first.
 
After reading a lot of Superman/Batman comics, I don't think they should be allowed to be in anything solo anymore.


The contrast between the two, and the things writers have to come up with to challenge Batman and Superman almost always result in some amazing stories. It will also help with what I think is lacking in a lot of modern Batman storytelling like the Nolan movies and the Arkham city games in which they completely ignore Batmans mind and focus more on his fighting. With Superman there, he can handle all the heavy lifting.

Batman is brains, Superman is brawn.



It was an episode in Justice League. Where Mongul gives Superman a brain controlling parasite thing right?


It was adapted into an episode of Justice League Unlimited.

Holy crap, thanks for the heads up!
 
Here's a question I want to raise and I would if I were to do anything with the post on page 1 about how to handle Superman for film.

If a man appears and is this powerful the world will react. This is a fact. Some will panic, others will praise, but the world will be nervous and their will be a response required to calm the public. Whether its by governments, religions, or by masses of people a reaction will be felt.
The only way to try to quell public opinion and put them at ease is how? By CONTROLLING THE MEDIA. Superman is Clark Kent and Clark Kent is a reporter. Now if you are a man who is all powerful you have free reign to write your own moral compass. Is it moral to usurp freedom of speech in this way and try to force the Daily Plant to print not what the public feels, but praise for Superman?

How would it even work? You think the media would run anything but the drama on a story like this? Fat chance. They'd run every angle possible on how the world sees Superman that they could because the public would want to have the media tell them answers to their questions.

How do you handle that if you're Superman? Take action as a reporter trying to control freedom of speech and public opinion or by grand standing as Superman? Either one makes you a slave and defensive and that is bad.

Just think about it.
 
Thank you. It leaves room for action scenes if needed. Rescue attempts, military attempts to incarcerate, disasters and all the action high cinema CG you could want and even culminates with the fight thing, but by God it puts the focus on the man and not the power. The drama is what is needed here. I think every screen writer so far has missed this and its why Superman movies are turning out poorly.

I dont think he needs to be weakened at all though. Rather than make him struggle to be strong enough he should just struggle to do the right thing. Tries to hold up a falling building in an earthquake. Doesn't work and a chunk is torn off and people barely survive it falling below. Takes a flying run at the builing to try again in desperation...too much force over too small an area. He punches clean through the building and crashes from over shooting unprepared for the building not resisting his momentum. Watches the building fall. Theres a million scenarios like this. He should become more than a little afraid of his own power potentially causing danger for people. Heck I'd have him sonic boom and blowout glass in skyscrapers during this crash causing glass debris to injure those in areas that were previously safe from his failed rescue.

No the only time he should struggle is against Doomsday in my idea. He shouldn't be winning. He should be nearly dead. He can get injured then and actually know fear. He sees blood...his blood. My God he could die. What does he do? He could die...are they worth dying for? Some are running from him blaming him for this monster too. Why fight? But he sees someone in trouble...no more being afraid of whether or not his powers could harm others if he didn't hold back. He has to fight because if he doesn't no one else will. Full tilt no more doubts slug fest. Both fall. Both are meant to be seen as dead by the audience. Relieve them by Star labs saying after checking Doomsday for a pulse and finding none that they got one in Superman. Haul them off and do the ending I stated before. Superman is carried off to Star to be treated and left alone, and Doomsday's is abducted ominously by the government to develop a countermeasure. Heck Star should keep all the samples they can of Superman too. Pure sequel loophole left open here to allow the audience's imagination to roar for a sequel.

Its just how you right a script like this. You have to make him afraid of something and until the end the most frightening thing is his own power hurting people. Thats drama and drama (not ACTION) is what defines whether a film is good or not.

Well at this point everyone has figured out that Superman needs to be able to die, bleed, fail and all that. That is something that every Superman plot will have in the modern day. Though I do like your idea about how the world responds to Superman and how he is a bit afraid of what his own power could do to others.


Your idea may be able to do a comic, but even then its a coin toss. Emotional "Stuff" as you put it is what is required for cinema to work. And there is no guarantee your actors can pull off that stuff when your focus is mainly on getting that "stuff" out of the way for the action. Plus your script really weakens the character as a whole and requires a new sensei character to train him just like in DBZ or something.

This may sound goofy but maybe there is something about Goku in DBZ that could give us some insights about a Superman movie. Goku is basically a jolly Superman type figure right? In fact anime in general has a long history of dealing with very overpowered characters and managing to build good stories around them.

There can be a trainer to Batman because in the comics HE WAS TRAINED. However, Superman wasn't taught anything. Its part of his character that he is so alone. He's the last of his kind, and is the ultimate immigrant who found a dream. He is literally described that way by DC in documentaries. Your awkward boy angle may try to make him isolated, but it does so in such a way that he wouldn't have a dream and in a way that slaps his character in the face. He's smallville slice of americana farmboy. You make him kind of Emo "chosen one" by training and all that. It literally sounds like DBZ season 1. Im not joking here.

True I had not thought about all this. Superman is fundamentally different and applying general superhero formulas may not work.

You really need to look at this harder in a way thats more encompassing. You have to stay true enough to the character so as not to insult the fanbase, you have to write a movie that has enough emotional drama to actually please theater goers, you have to have a plot that is NOT so complex that it just seems like an over the top comicbook or you'll have them rolling their eyes, and you have to make the action have meaning and you do that by focusing on Earth, its people, the costs, the danger, the fear, and the man and all the paranoia and hurt rolled into this. If you focus on all the angles and subplots and back story and history rewrites and other characters and enemies for your film you won't have time to fully develop anything unless it was done as a TV series over a much LONGER period of time. You have to remember that films have to have the time to develop each piece in a meaningful manner. Folks have to get to know every character at an almost constant pace. Folks have to build each threat up over time or they stop caring after seeing too many explosions. You just don't leave enough time to do anything you want and its just not suited for fans of the comic or of film.

Please, just look into some books on formatting literature, building plot, rising action, drama, foreshadowing, staging, timing and all the rest. Its not as simple as what villains and what action with what back story when it comes to film. You have to know how to make audiences feel things and how to pace things to give them the meaning you desire. Researching how its done may help you tweak this into something someday, but as it is now its completely unusable for a multitude of reasons. I'm really trying to help you see why here because this means something to you and for that alone you're owed some help on how to turn into something good someday. You just need to know more about how first.

Well I don't ever intend to write a Superman story, just some fun stuff to think about. Besides I'm sure Goyer and Nolan have come up with something that if done right will properly reboot Superman. Only question is this Snyder guy who I'm not too familiar with.

Here's a question I want to raise and I would if I were to do anything with the post on page 1 about how to handle Superman for film.

If a man appears and is this powerful the world will react. This is a fact. Some will panic, others will praise, but the world will be nervous and their will be a response required to calm the public. Whether its by governments, religions, or by masses of people a reaction will be felt.
The only way to try to quell public opinion and put them at ease is how? By CONTROLLING THE MEDIA. Superman is Clark Kent and Clark Kent is a reporter. Now if you are a man who is all powerful you have free reign to write your own moral compass. Is it moral to usurp freedom of speech in this way and try to force the Daily Plant to print not what the public feels, but praise for Superman?

How would it even work? You think the media would run anything but the drama on a story like this? Fat chance. They'd run every angle possible on how the world sees Superman that they could because the public would want to have the media tell them answers to their questions.

How do you handle that if you're Superman? Take action as a reporter trying to control freedom of speech and public opinion or by grand standing as Superman? Either one makes you a slave and defensive and that is bad.

Just think about it.

Have you ever seen that Superman TAS episode called "The Late Mr. Kent"?
 
This may sound goofy but maybe there is something about Goku in DBZ that could give us some insights about a Superman movie. Goku is basically a jolly Superman type figure right? In fact anime in general has a long history of dealing with very overpowered characters and managing to build good stories around them.

DBZ can't give us any insights because nobody deals with Goku as an overpowered character. In fact no anime deals with an overpowered character other than to show them train and fight stronger opponents. The only people reacting are those closest to them and their enemies and that has no sense of scope.

The only animes I know of that actually forced the populous to deal with the overpowered guy was "Akira" or "Deathnote" (in its own way)and it brings up the kind of stuff that I mentioned would be basic human nature. Fear, worship, paranoia, and violence. Lets avoid anime history here though. There is no other way to see it and there is no dealing with something written so powerful. Thats why the thing they must face the most is the fear of their own power and consequences from showing poor judgement with it nearly every time they've meant good. Their power is the only thing built enough to draw on for conflict so use it against them and the world that he wishes to save.
 
I'm still not sure where this "superman a flawed character" comes from. We've had one recent so so movie and 2 cheesy 80s cash ins with two solid movies 30 years ago. Suddenly he's boring?
 
I don't think I care anymore.

but if I did, I'd want a Superman like the one from Batman Brave and the Bold or all star superman
 
DBZ can't give us any insights because nobody deals with Goku as an overpowered character. In fact no anime deals with an overpowered character other than to show them train and fight stronger opponents. The only people reacting are those closest to them and their enemies and that has no sense of scope.

The only animes I know of that actually forced the populous to deal with the overpowered guy was "Akira" or "Deathnote" (in its own way)and it brings up the kind of stuff that I mentioned would be basic human nature. Fear, worship, paranoia, and violence. Lets avoid anime history here though. There is no other way to see it and there is no dealing with something written so powerful. Thats why the thing they must face the most is the fear of their own power and consequences from showing poor judgement with it nearly every time they've meant good. Their power is the only thing built enough to draw on for conflict so use it against them and the world that he wishes to save.

Interestingly enough this is actually kind of similar to an idea I had about Braniac. How Braniac takes over planets and installs himself as a sort of god who will develop the creatures but then ultimately destroys them when they grow too threatening. They trust and worship him so they assume he won't do anything wrong. Maybe it is possible to create an interesting parallel between Braniac and Superman as god like figures.
 
Interestingly enough this is actually kind of similar to an idea I had about Braniac. How Braniac takes over planets and installs himself as a sort of god who will develop the creatures but then ultimately destroys them when they grow too threatening. They trust and worship him so they assume he won't do anything wrong. Maybe it is possible to create an interesting parallel between Braniac and Superman as god like figures.

Possible. You're getting into the useful tool of having heroes that parallel their villain. However, the main problem with Brainiac is selling him to an audience with a name like Brainiac. His name is literally a grade school insult. It just doesn't sell easily. You could make it the biggest robotic contraption around and scary as hell and do all kinds of great plot with him quite easily, but it still doesn't change the fact that his name makes him too hard of a sell. Its silly even to children. Most you could do is refer to him as "The Machine" or something of the sort and at maximum show an anagram etched into his main CPU that says Brainiac...though you may not even want to show the anagram and just show the full name listed on the machine so that fans would get the reference and feel pleased he wasn't renamed, and so theatre go-ers wouldn't be put off by a silly name.

However, a Brainiac film needs a lot of subplot and maneuverings. He's a hard write because to write a genius you have to showcase genius level strategies to the audience and impress them and that is often difficult. Still he's usable if you can remember to dance around that name properly. Marketing 101 is often unfriendly like that to comic book classics. You wouldn't believe how tricky it is to use any of The Flash's enemies. You'd have to write it up like a murder mystery and focus on forensics and MO to even do him. Thank God the character is a forensics scientist...too bad his Rogues Gallery is the campiest ever conceived and so over the top in powers that its rough to write for.
 
Possible. You're getting into the useful tool of having heroes that parallel their villain. However, the main problem with Brainiac is selling him to an audience with a name like Brainiac. His name is literally a grade school insult. It just doesn't sell easily. You could make it the biggest robotic contraption around and scary as hell and do all kinds of great plot with him quite easily, but it still doesn't change the fact that his name makes him too hard of a sell. Its silly even to children. Most you could do is refer to him as "The Machine" or something of the sort and at maximum show an anagram etched into his main CPU that says Brainiac...though you may not even want to show the anagram and just show the full name listed on the machine so that fans would get the reference and feel pleased he wasn't renamed, and so theatre go-ers wouldn't be put off by a silly name.

However, a Brainiac film needs a lot of subplot and maneuverings. He's a hard write because to write a genius you have to showcase genius level strategies to the audience and impress them and that is often difficult. Still he's usable if you can remember to dance around that name properly. Marketing 101 is often unfriendly like that to comic book classics. You wouldn't believe how tricky it is to use any of The Flash's enemies. You'd have to write it up like a murder mystery and focus on forensics and MO to even do him. Thank God the character is a forensics scientist...too bad his Rogues Gallery is the campiest ever conceived and so over the top in powers that its rough to write for.

I imagined Braniac as being a creature with many names and ultimately nameless. Braniac would be the nickname that the people on Earth gave to him. The God Machine is another cool name.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom