Story here, indicating that Singer may delay or abandon Logan's Run in favor of his chapter two for Supes.

In an article published by Variety, the trade magazine mentions that Superman Returns director Bryan Singer might not want to take on both the sequel and a remake of "Logan's Run."

Bryan Singer may not direct the remake of "Logan's Run" after all.

Warner Bros. and producer Joel Silver want to start lensing the sci-fi pic this fall, which would mean Singer might end up shooting two tentpoles -- "Logan's" and a "Superman Returns" sequel -- back-to-back.

Now THIS doesn't look good:

Super ($200 Million) Man or Else? (TMZ)
Will Hollywood blockbuster budgets continue to fly "up, up and away?" Not necessarily.

At least, not at Warner Bros. Pictures. After a $225 million "Pirates of the Caribbean" sailed into port, taking the wind out of "Superman Returns'" $205 million Spandex, Warner Bros. executives are said to be circumspect as to whether the Man of Steel will fly again.

Talent agency insiders with ties to the film tell TMZ that Warner Bros. Pictures president and COO Alan Horn has informed agents that a sequel hinges on whether grosses of "Superman Returns" can crest the $200 million mark domestically. What's more, the studio plans to shave millions - many millions - off any "Superman" sequel's budget. (Amusingly, in the current "Superman Returns," Lois Lane pleads with Lex Luthor, "But millions will die! " It turns out she was right on the money.)

...

The next movie should be "Superman & Lois", given the Warners will mine again from the Batman franchise.

Wouldn't it have to be Superman Forever, first?

I guess that would be better than The Neverending Superman Story II

Peace.

Ken

Looks like the sequel will have more action in it...

: Talent agency insiders with ties to the film tell TMZ that Warner Bros. Pictures president and COO
: Alan Horn has informed agents that a sequel hinges on whether grosses of "Superman Returns"
: can crest the $200 million mark domestically.

And last weekend, it did.

Link to the thread for the previous film.

Singer's zinger: another 'Superman'
Bryan Singer has inked a deal with Warner Bros. Pictures to direct and produce a sequel to "Superman Returns," with Legendary Pictures expected to co-finance. Pic is tentatively intended for release in summer 2009, although the studio stressed that there's not even a script or budget yet.
Variety, October 30

200...nine?!? Good grief.

Well, there were three-year gaps between the X-Men movies (2000, 2003, 2006), and between the Star Wars (1977, 1980, 1983; 1999, 2002, 2005) movies too, come to that. Even the original Superman films (1978, 1980, 1983, 1987) had gaps of three or four years between them, the only exception being between the first two films, which were shot partly simultaneously. And the Batman films (1989, 1992, 1995, 1997) were also released at a pace of every three years, mostly -- except for that last one with Arnold Schwarzenegger and George Clooney, which was rushed into production after only two years, and basically killed the franchise. (Batman Begins is such a different beast that it's not really the same franchise any more.) So for a big-budgeted superhero movie that hasn't even been written yet, a three-year gap seems reasonable.

United Artists grabs Singer thriller
United Artists toppers Tom Cruise and Paula Wagner have greenlit their second film, an original thriller that Bryan Singer will direct as his next feature. The untitled film re-teams Singer with "The Usual Suspects" screenwriter Chris McQuarrie. . . . The film will delay Warner Bros.' hope of mounting a sequel to "Superman Returns" in the near future.
Variety, March 13

Exclusive : Superman WON'T go it alone
After the slightly . . . disappointing returns on "Superman Returns", Warner were in two minds about whether to continue the series or not -- right away, anyway. One idea that came up was to make their long-planned "Justice League" movie, and possibly just incorporate 'Superman' into that. Cut to a month or so ago, and the trades announce that the studio is in the early stages of developing a "Justice League" movie. Interestingly enough, a couple of weeks later, those some publications announce that the next "Superman" sequel could be delayed -- because director Bryan Singer has gone and got himself involved in another film; a thriller for United Artists. Interesting hey? Well, the plot thickens, I heard from a pretty reliable source this weekend -- who, has some top contacts himself -- who essentially confirmed that the WB are thinking of putting the next "Superman" movie into turnaround, and instead will just use the character in the new "Justice League" movie. (Funnily enough, Batman would not be involved in the new film -- he's too big to waste on a film like this, apparently).
Moviehole.net, March 19

Spacey set for 'Superman' sequel
Kevin Spacey will return as Lex Luthor in "Superman: Man of Steel" and appear in "Telstar," Nick Moran's film version of Moran and James Hicks' 2005 darkly comic West End play about flamboyant '60s record mogul Joe Meek. "Superman" director Bryan Singer met with Spacey in New York while the latter was appearing on Broadway in Eugene O'Neill's recently wrapped "Moon for the Misbegotten." Singer was about to pitch his "Man of Steel" sequel to Warner Bros.; "Superman Returns" scripter Michael Dougherty is now writing the screenplay. After Singer completes "Valkyrie" and "The Mayor of Castro Street," he plans to start production on "Man of Steel" next year for a 2009 release. . . .
Variety, July 10

So the Superman franchise is going with naming schemes similar to the new Batman franchise? Interesting.

I thought Kevin Spacey had retired from film acting....

Clint M wrote:
: So the Superman franchise is going with naming schemes similar to the new Batman franchise? Interesting.

Yeah, I figured that was the scheme back when Begins and Returns came out. Can't say I like the way they're perpetuating that, myself. The two franchises are very different (not least because Begins was a full-fledged re-boot, whereas Returns is essentially an alternate sequel to earlier sequels in the existing franchise), and deserve to be kept so.

Phill Lytle wrote:
: I thought Kevin Spacey had retired from film acting....

He addresses -- or, rather, rebutts -- those rumours in the linked article.

The bigger concern for me is that the first semi-definite word about the Superman sequel is about Spacey at ALL -- partly because it's somewhat worrying that the villain should still matter more than the hero (has anyone talked to Brandon Routh re: whether HE will be in the sequel?), and partly because I don't see why Lex Luthor has to be in every single cotton-pickin' Superman film (the only one he WASN'T in was Superman III, where the lead villain was basically a movie-only imitation of Luthor; why can't these films use any of the OTHER supervillains from the comic books, the way the Batman films have always done!?).

I want Brainiac! or Bizarro!

To be fair, Luther isn't just an enemy or "bad guy"--he's an arch-nemesis. Does any superhero have as significant an arch-nemesis? Only the Joker & Batman come to mind, and I think Supes & Luthor are even more intertwined.

I'm still rooting for Brainiac, though. (Unless they bring back Zod or use Mxyzptlk or Bizarro). Oh, cool! Wikipedia has an entry devoted to Superman villains!

How about the return of Zod?

Played by...

oh...

would you be okay with...

TERRENCE STAMP??

Might happen.

I think it's a bad idea. The homages of "Superman Returns" veered to close to ripoff. Having Stamp as Zod would make the next film more of that lineage.

Could be for a cameo...

'Superman' writers won't return
Superman needs some ideas for what his next adventure might be. "Superman Returns" scribes Michael Dougherty and Dan Harris have opted not to come back and pen a sequel to the 2006 summer pic that would have reunited them with helmer Bryan Singer. The three also worked together on "X2: X-Men United."
Variety, October 21

Cape fear: Superman still grounded
Could the WGA strike prove Kryptonite to the Man of Steel?
With the work stoppage playing havoc with studio slates, Warner's planned sequel to Bryan Singer's "Superman Returns" could be locked up in the Fortress of Solitude for some time. . . .
Before Singer started production on UA's "Valkyrie," WB and co-financier Legendary Pictures closed a deal for him to produce and direct "Superman: Man of Steel."
According to a spokesman for the director's reps at William Morris, "'Superman' is moving forward with Bryan Singer attached." But inside the studio, "Superman" is not on any fast track, and word is that Singer may wind up not directing it. . . .
Variety, January 11

All I can say is, this does nothing to move me - and I'm a Superman fan from waaaaaay back. Singer's Superman Returns hardened me, jaded me. It tried so hard and fell short of greatness, and I no longer have faith that Singer can pull it off. I'd rather Singer have another go than Ratner, McG, or Burton get their crack at it, but I'd MUCH rather see another director, a fresh director, take the reins. I want to believe that a man can not only fly - but can be truly good and noble and self-sacrificing that he inspires ME to be a hero. I don't think Singer has that in him.

Singer Talks Superman Returns Sequel
Earlier today, IESB reported that rumours were flying that Bryan Singer was working on a sequel to Superman Returns. Well, we've spoken to Singer and he's confirmed that work's under way on the film that some said would never happen because the first was perceived as a flop. . . . " . . . I'm just getting back with writers after the strike. We're just in the development phase. I'm starting to develop a sequel...with the intention of directing it."
Empire Online, March 11

Burton, Denes?!? BURTON?

I'm more than happy to see Singer try again. I was unmoved and disappointed with his first attempt, but he's still 2-1 when it comes to superhero films.

Yes, I'd rather Singer than Burton. That surprises you?

Ruling Gives Heirs a Share of Superman Copyright
Time Warner is no longer the sole proprietor of Superman.
A federal judge here on Wednesday ruled that the heirs of Jerome Siegel — who 70 years ago sold the rights to the action hero he created with Joseph Shuster to Detective Comics for $130 — were entitled to claim a share of the United States copyright to the character. The ruling left intact Time Warner’s international rights to the character, which it has long owned through its DC Comics unit.
And it reserved for trial questions over how much the company may owe the Siegel heirs for use of the character since 1999, when their ownership is deemed to have been restored. Also to be resolved is whether the heirs are entitled to payments directly from Time Warner’s film unit, Warner Brothers, which took in $200 million at the domestic box office with “Superman Returns” in 2006, or only from the DC unit’s Superman profits.
Still, the ruling threatened to complicate Warner’s plans to make more films featuring Superman, including another sequel and a planned movie based on the DC Comics’ “Justice League of America,” in which he joins Batman, Wonder Woman and other superheroes to battle evildoers. . . .
New York Times, March 29

Warner vexed by legal Man of Steel
He's a superhero to rights holders -- but Kryptonite to studios.
Last week, attorney Marc Toberoff won a potentially costly "Superman" victory against Warner Bros. for co-creator Jerome Siegel's heirs. The federal ruling, which gives the heirs a stake in rights sold 71 years ago, could put a serious crimp on future plans for one of the studio's most enduring -- and lucrative -- franchises, especially if co-creator Joe Shuster's heirs follow suit in five years, when they are eligible to do so.
As it is, the studio has at least two Superman projects in development -- a follow-up to Bryan Singer's "Superman Returns" and "Justice League" -- and it may end up paying tens of millions from the domestic haul of "Superman Returns" to Siegel's heirs under the ruling, which applies to domestic monies for Superman projects since 1999.
The case is Toberoff's latest -- and potentially most damaging -- claim against the studio. The dedicated copyright crusader has pursued claims involving "Wild Wild West," "Dukes of Hazzard," "Smallville" and the upcoming "Get Smart."
He has gone after other studios, including Sony, but his most high-profile cases -- and victories -- have involved Warners. The studio paid "Moonrunners" producer Robert B. Clark a $17.5 million settlement in a case about similarities between that 1974 movie and the bigscreen "The Dukes of Hazzard." And a federal judge ruled earlier in the Siegels' favor over "Smallville," although that was challenged and the case still being resolved. . . .
Variety, March 30

Thomas Tull '92 Discusses His Journey From Hamilton to Hollywood
Legendary's roster of upcoming films includes a wide variety of properties, including Watchmen (from the renowned graphic novel), Akira (a remake of the popular Japanese anime film), a Superman sequel (in Which Tull hopes to invoke more of the image of "an angry god"), Clash of the Titans, Where the Wild Things Are and a film of Paradise Lost (Tull is particularly interested in the "[story] arc of Lucifer").
Hamilton College, April 21

Routh Returns for Lie to Me & Talks Superman
CS: What sides of Superman and Clark Kent are you excited about exploring in the sequel?
Routh: Well, I think that something that audiences are looking for – and I certainly am, too – is for Superman to actually be able to lay a punch on someone or something. I was filming and I thought, "I haven't really hit anything. I feel like I'm going to need to let some of this anger out." So I'm happy that I think that's going to be a central part of the sequel, getting a good villain that we can actually have physical altercations with. Certainly also, I'd like more humor from Clark or just more of Clark and Jimmy. A little bit more of Lois and Clark, how we used to see them, a bit more of buddies. Perhaps things will be smoothed over with Superman and Lois and she can afford to be a little bit nicer to Clark. I think that's something that people want to see and those are some of the great moments from previous "Superman" films. Also, Superman and Lois getting together, that's always my end goal. I want that to happen. The romantic in me wants that to happen eventually whether they're finally together in this movie or in whatever future films there might be. I kind of want to see that happen.
ComingSoon.net, April 29

Anne Thompson: "Today I was told that it is a priority at the studio to find the right direction and if Bryan Singer is willing to do that, fine, but if he gets in the way, he may not stay on the project."

Warner Brothers Confirms Superman re-boot




Here's the original article.

for reboot; for "darker." I'm not sure how that would play out....

Arg. "dark" worked for Batman because he is a dark and brooding character. A dark and brooding Superman or Flash would be terrible. You can tackle moral questions without a dark tone. I am not opposed to a dark tone, there are characters for home it benefits them. But to presume that going Dark Knight on other DC Properties ignores the success of Iron Man. Iron Man was fun and loved by movie goers and critics alike. Superman's evil side should be tough to find, not out on display.

I think Superman Returns was dark and brooding enough.

I agree. This is one of those times when the film industry's copycat ways are especially unfortunate.

I think Cinematical has a good take on this, here.

What? The only thing dark about SR were the insides of my eyelids after I fell asleep 20 minutes in.

So... it's a happy movie about Superman stalking Lois and her fiance who are raising his love child while he adjusts to being an absentee dad? (And I say this as one who really appreciates the movie.)

Nezpop wrote:
: Superman's evil side should be tough to find, not out on display.

Yeah, and besides, whenever I hear "Superman's evil side", I think of that Superman-goes-bad subplot in Superman III, quite probably the worst of the Superman movies to date.

Hasn't it been said that Gotham City is Metropolis at night? If that carries over to their protagonists, then it should be pretty hard to portray Supes' dark side as anything resembling what Nolan has done with Batman.

I never made it that far. I literally fell asleep.

FWIW, I disagree. Superman III is truly terrible, but Superman IV: The Quest for Peace is just flat-out unwatchably incompetent. Superman III is a movie desperately running on bad ideas in lieu of inspiration, but Superman IV is like a non-movie that doesn't even know it should be desperate, made by people who have never even heard of inspiration.


Well, then, silly, you should take it from me that it was dark and brooding enough.

Perhaps an adaptation of Red Son: the alternative tale where Superman landed in the Ukraine and was raised by Joseph Stalin?

Hard to believe that it has come down to Singer's single misfire with RETURNS and now the Warners want a clean slate to tell more Superman stories. Who would have guessed that about Singer's sure footed directing? Afterall, his treatment of the X-Men (a most convoluted universe of heroes and villains) was spot on.

If one thing about Superman Returns was enlightening, it was Lex's personal hatred for Superman's single wielded power and superior technological knowledge (which the Gene Hackman Luthor didn't fully realize the potential of). Unfortunately, Luthor didn't do much to neutralize Superman's abilities (resulting in a really bland action film), but he did seize control of the Kryptonian's technology for his own conceited designs (though unimpressively imagined).

SDG wrote:
: FWIW, I disagree. Superman III is truly terrible, but Superman IV: The Quest for Peace is just flat-out unwatchably incompetent. Superman III is a movie desperately running on bad ideas in lieu of inspiration, but Superman IV is like a non-movie that doesn't even know it should be desperate, made by people who have never even heard of inspiration.

You may be right. Re-reading the blog post that I wrote when I watched the films back-to-back two years ago, I see that I didn't express a preference at the time. Though my reference to Superman III being "so nakedly TRIVIAL that it feels like a serious mis-step" might be taken as a stronger criticism than my reference to the way Superman IV merely "recycles entire gags and sequences" from the first two films. Then again, I also call IV "annoyingly sanctimonious". Then again again, III makes a hash of the first two films by having Superman sleep with someone without any consequences whatsoever, and so soon after II made a big, big deal of how Kal-El could only have sex with a woman if he were human rather than Kryptonian. (The problem here may be one of narrative emphasis or thematic concern more than one of abiding by the rules of the narrative universe, but a problem, it is.)

Mark Millar Working On Superman Trilogy?
In an interview with Fresh Ink’s Blair Butler, comic book author Mark Millar said he’d like to make a trilogy of films for a re-booted Superman series, and it might happen. Millar's vision for a new Superman:
"I've had this plan for like 10 years for a big three-picture Superman thing, like a Lord of the Rings epic, starting over from scratch again with a seven-hour Superman story. One to be released each year." Millar said.
G4, August 28