Superman 2000

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Superman 2000

Post  thecolorsblend on Sat Nov 26, 2011 12:30 am

I don't know if any of you have ever seen this before or if we've ever talked about but here goes...

URL- http://superman.nu/theages/History/2000/SUPERMAN2000.php

Basically Mark Waid, Mark Millar, Grant Morrison and Tom Peyer approached DC and pitched them on a sort of warm reboot of Superman. And "reboot" is maybe not the right term but you get the idea. Basically it would've kept at least 99% of the then current continuity but it would've redirected it. For example...

The key to the initial concept lies in a radical but organic reversal of the currently accepted logic of the Superman/Clark dynamic.

In our interpretation, Clark Kent isn’t what Superman really IS, Clark is what Superman WAS--until he reached his teenage years and began to realize what all those years of soaking up the Kansas sun had done to his alien cells. Superman’s story here is seen as the tale of a Midwest farmer’s son who BECAME AN ALIEN shortly after puberty. Suddenly young Clark doesn’t just know his Ma and Pa through sight, touch, sound--he knows the exact timbre of their pulse rates, he can look at their DNA and recognize their distinctive electrical fields and hear the neural crackle and release of chemicals which tell him they’ve changed their minds about something.

And he can do all this, he can scan the entire environment in an INSTANT, with levels of perception we can only imagine.

That’s gonna turn anyone’s head around a little.

This is someone who by any stretch of the imagination is no longer just human--except for the part of him, the ethical, humanitarian base nurtured by the Kents, which forms the unshakable foundation for everything Superman is BUT WHO IS WHAT SUPERMAN CAN NO LONGER BE. Or, in other words not our own, "...who, DISGUISED as Clark Kent, fights a never-ending battle..."

As originally conceived by Siegel and Shuster, Clark becomes a cherished, poignant masquerade: mild-mannered, thoughtful, humane Clark. When Superman is being human, Clark is his template but this is a being no longer confined by gravity or pain or mortality and his experiences as Superman are experiences on a level of existence we can only hope to imagine.

So, in order to accomplish the transition to this new take on Superman more easily, our rationale is this: it’s been established that Superman’s powers are a result of solar energy saturating his cellular batteries. It’s even been suggested that his powers will increase through time as he absorbs more of our sun’s radiation.

And that’s just what happens.

As part of his alien maturation process, Superman crosses a second, critical threshold of solar radiation absorption and suddenly wakes up three times more powerful and three times smarter.

This changes everything.

Some other stuff too.

We see Luthor playing chess with twenty grandmasters simultaneously while reading untranslated Il Principe and teaching himself Urdu via a Walkman he made for himself in five minutes back in 1962. Luthor is so smart we don't even have a WORD for what he is yet; calling him a genius is as insulting as calling him an imbecile.

Here’s a secret about Luthor no one yet knows. Despite his born ruthlessness, he was once salvageable, once redeemable--until Superman arrived. Though even he doesn’t consciously realize it, every iota of Luthor’s self-esteem was pinned to achieving that most lofty goal: to be considered the greatest man who ever lived. And he was on his way--until Superman appeared and outclassed him, triggering the scattershot sociopathic tantrum that is his criminal career.

Here’s another secret. Luthor's Lexcorp empire? All the corporate-baron stuff we see him doing routinely? Six minutes of his day, maybe less. He’s not the Kingpin. He only pretends to be. Luthor the businessman is the tip of the iceberg, a smokescreen generated to give the public and his enemies a false, easily digested persona which masks his true depths. In other words, Luthor conquered the financial world largely in order to project a "secret identity" designed to make people underestimate him. Lexcorp is but one of a thousand projects Luthor attends to every day.

In time, once Superman learns of Luthor’s depth, he will come to understand Lex as a tragedy of wasted potential. Though he realizes he could not have handled his earlier, formative encounters with Luthor any differently, Superman carries a new weight around in his heart. He knows now that Luthor, but for the path he chose, could have been his equal, his only true peer on this earth. And though Superman’s greatest priority will always be to stop Luthor’s schemes, his greatest frustration will be his continuing inability to rehabilitate Lex for the good of all mankind.

On and on and on. The basic idea here was to restore a lot of Pre-Crisis ideas and concepts into the modern continuity. Odd as it may seem now, there was a time when such a thing was a revolutionary (borderline heretical) idea.

Mike Carlin eventually caught wind of these things being done behind his back, fired and then blacklisted Waid, Morrison, Peyer and Millar (which is why there was little or no Superman stuff from them for years). And so the relaunch was put on ice. Even so, you can find elements of the proposal in Red Son, All-Star and Birthright.

All in all, it's hard not to think of this as a huge missed opportunity, esp considering the crapitude that followed in the early to mid 2000's (Steven T. Seagle, step forward).

thecolorsblend
Moderator
Moderator

Posts : 4257
Points : 5802
User Reputation : 287
Join date : 2010-12-02

Back to top Go down

Re: Superman 2000

Post  webhead2006 on Sat Nov 26, 2011 1:55 am

Well that is a crazy article man.

webhead2006
Missing In Action
Missing In Action

Posts : 4344
Points : 4854
User Reputation : 2
Join date : 2010-10-16
Age : 31

Back to top Go down

Re: Superman 2000

Post  Apologist Puncher on Sat Nov 26, 2011 9:04 pm

I seem to remember something about that. Didn't THEY also want to "drop trunk" in their pitch?

_________________
BJ Routh and Bryan Singer WERE the worst thing to happen to Superman since Bepo the Super Monkey.

Apologist Puncher
Admin
Admin

Posts : 4864
Points : 7476
User Reputation : 548
Join date : 2010-10-11
Age : 40
Location : West Coast, USA

http://supermanfilmwatchdog.forumcanadien.org

Back to top Go down

Re: Superman 2000

Post  non_amos on Sat Nov 26, 2011 9:20 pm

Apologist Puncher wrote:I seem to remember something about that. Didn't THEY also want to "drop trunk" in their pitch?

Heh heh! You sorta made a 'funny' there & maybe unintentionally? "OK, Superman, this is duh Apologist Gestapo. Drop those trunks! NOW!" Laughing

non_amos
Christopher Reeve
Christopher Reeve

Posts : 2305
Points : 2717
User Reputation : 250
Join date : 2010-10-16

Back to top Go down

Re: Superman 2000

Post  Apologist Puncher on Sun Nov 27, 2011 8:15 pm

It was quite intentional, thankyouverymuch.

_________________
BJ Routh and Bryan Singer WERE the worst thing to happen to Superman since Bepo the Super Monkey.

Apologist Puncher
Admin
Admin

Posts : 4864
Points : 7476
User Reputation : 548
Join date : 2010-10-11
Age : 40
Location : West Coast, USA

http://supermanfilmwatchdog.forumcanadien.org

Back to top Go down

Re: Superman 2000

Post  thecolorsblend on Tue Nov 29, 2011 11:21 pm

Apologist Puncher wrote:I seem to remember something about that. Didn't THEY also want to "drop trunk" in their pitch?
Yeah, actually. And for whatever it's worth, that's one thing I seriously doubt DC would've permitted them to do at the time. They were investing a lot of merchandising and licensing efforts behind Superman, esp at the time, and I can't imagine they'd let even those guys ruin that.

thecolorsblend
Moderator
Moderator

Posts : 4257
Points : 5802
User Reputation : 287
Join date : 2010-12-02

Back to top Go down

Re: Superman 2000

Post  Apologist Puncher on Tue Nov 29, 2011 11:43 pm

thecolorsblend wrote:Yeah, actually. And for whatever it's worth, that's one thing I seriously doubt DC would've permitted them to do at the time. They were investing a lot of merchandising and licensing efforts behind Superman, esp at the time, and I can't imagine they'd let even those guys ruin that.

Still, with Morrison attached to that abomination of a "costume" in BOTH books makes much more sense now.

He didn't get his chance before, and is making-up for it NOW.

_________________
BJ Routh and Bryan Singer WERE the worst thing to happen to Superman since Bepo the Super Monkey.

Apologist Puncher
Admin
Admin

Posts : 4864
Points : 7476
User Reputation : 548
Join date : 2010-10-11
Age : 40
Location : West Coast, USA

http://supermanfilmwatchdog.forumcanadien.org

Back to top Go down

Re: Superman 2000

Post  thecolorsblend on Tue Nov 29, 2011 11:47 pm

Apologist Puncher wrote:
thecolorsblend wrote:Yeah, actually. And for whatever it's worth, that's one thing I seriously doubt DC would've permitted them to do at the time. They were investing a lot of merchandising and licensing efforts behind Superman, esp at the time, and I can't imagine they'd let even those guys ruin that.

Still, with Morrison attached to that abomination of a "costume" in BOTH books makes much more sense now.

He didn't get his chance before, and is making-up for it NOW.
I don't know about that. He had a golden opportunity to do the same thing in All-Star and didn't go for it.

thecolorsblend
Moderator
Moderator

Posts : 4257
Points : 5802
User Reputation : 287
Join date : 2010-12-02

Back to top Go down

Re: Superman 2000

Post  Apologist Puncher on Tue Nov 29, 2011 11:52 pm

thecolorsblend wrote:I don't know about that. He had a golden opportunity to do the same thing in All-Star and didn't go for it.

I doubt they gave him the freedom to remove the trunks at that time.

And, technically, he DID:


_________________
BJ Routh and Bryan Singer WERE the worst thing to happen to Superman since Bepo the Super Monkey.

Apologist Puncher
Admin
Admin

Posts : 4864
Points : 7476
User Reputation : 548
Join date : 2010-10-11
Age : 40
Location : West Coast, USA

http://supermanfilmwatchdog.forumcanadien.org

Back to top Go down

Re: Superman 2000

Post  Apologist Puncher on Wed Nov 30, 2011 1:57 am

From your link, colors:

THE COSTUME

We’d like to tweak the costume by finally getting rid of the red underpants. This gives us a new look which somehow recovers the more classic, Golden Age, "primal" Superman look and feels like an update. This move also has instant media appeal: Finally, Superman’s smart enough to wear his shorts UNDER his pants.



Goes to show the amount of respect Superman has had at DC Comics, doesn't it?

_________________
BJ Routh and Bryan Singer WERE the worst thing to happen to Superman since Bepo the Super Monkey.

Apologist Puncher
Admin
Admin

Posts : 4864
Points : 7476
User Reputation : 548
Join date : 2010-10-11
Age : 40
Location : West Coast, USA

http://supermanfilmwatchdog.forumcanadien.org

Back to top Go down

Re: Superman 2000

Post  thecolorsblend on Wed Nov 30, 2011 2:40 am

I disagree. In the pre-9/11 world (and maybe even now), removing the trunks from The Suit (and I mean this as a standalone event, not in the context of The New 52, where it's a snowflake in a blizzard) would be newsworthy.

thecolorsblend
Moderator
Moderator

Posts : 4257
Points : 5802
User Reputation : 287
Join date : 2010-12-02

Back to top Go down

Re: Superman 2000

Post  Apologist Puncher on Wed Nov 30, 2011 10:33 pm

thecolorsblend wrote:I disagree. In the pre-9/11 world (and maybe even now), removing the trunks from The Suit (and I mean this as a standalone event, not in the context of The New 52, where it's a snowflake in a blizzard) would be newsworthy.

So, you have ZERO problem with them:

A. Calling them UNDERPANTS

And:

B. Implying Superman is not only an IDIOT, but mocking the look he is famous for creating?

Good to know.

_________________
BJ Routh and Bryan Singer WERE the worst thing to happen to Superman since Bepo the Super Monkey.

Apologist Puncher
Admin
Admin

Posts : 4864
Points : 7476
User Reputation : 548
Join date : 2010-10-11
Age : 40
Location : West Coast, USA

http://supermanfilmwatchdog.forumcanadien.org

Back to top Go down

Re: Superman 2000

Post  thecolorsblend on Wed Nov 30, 2011 11:16 pm

Apologist Puncher wrote:
thecolorsblend wrote:I disagree. In the pre-9/11 world (and maybe even now), removing the trunks from The Suit (and I mean this as a standalone event, not in the context of The New 52, where it's a snowflake in a blizzard) would be newsworthy.

So, you have ZERO problem with them:

A. Calling them UNDERPANTS
I don't think calling them "trunks" had caught on by that point. Even so, yeah, it does bother me. I never said otherwise. My bit there was meant to say that they're right in that removing them would've generated media attention at the time since (as far as I know) it'd never been done in a serious attempt before.

And:

B. Implying Superman is not only an IDIOT, but mocking the look he is famous for creating?
I never said that either and this entire element is the single part of the pitch that really bothered me. In spite of the great work these writers have done on Superman, that part of the pitch had all the feeling of looking down their nose at the character. To hear Mark Waid go on and on about Superman, it's clear that it's completely the opposite of how he feels. Grant Morrison has made some pretty complimentary remarks about Superman as well. But that part of the pitch rubbed me the wrong way. A lot.

And I never said otherwise.

My sole point was that they were right that removing the TRUNKS would've scared up some publicity for the project. Hell, that's probably the sole thing the media would have focused on.

thecolorsblend
Moderator
Moderator

Posts : 4257
Points : 5802
User Reputation : 287
Join date : 2010-12-02

Back to top Go down

Re: Superman 2000

Post  Apologist Puncher on Fri Dec 02, 2011 11:18 pm

Since my post was in reference to the bold parts, and how full of disrespect they were, saying "I disagree" would make someone think you, disagreed, with their disagreement?

_________________
BJ Routh and Bryan Singer WERE the worst thing to happen to Superman since Bepo the Super Monkey.

Apologist Puncher
Admin
Admin

Posts : 4864
Points : 7476
User Reputation : 548
Join date : 2010-10-11
Age : 40
Location : West Coast, USA

http://supermanfilmwatchdog.forumcanadien.org

Back to top Go down

Re: Superman 2000

Post  Sponsored content Today at 1:03 am


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum