Boy, time flies!
It was only a month ago that news of a possible Supergirl movie hit the internet.
Of course, there wasn't much there other than news of a screen writer. But the idea that Warner Brothers might want to re-energize the Super-franchise by moving away from the doldrums of the Snyder-verse seemed to make sense. With the success of Wonder Woman and impending success of Captain Marvel, it just seems like a no brainer.
But now some new rumors have come out in the aftermath of the announcement that Henry Cavill will no longer play Superman. It is unclear that the Cavill rumor is true. So these new Supergirl movie rumors are worth discussing here, even if (as the first rumors) this is an exceedingly premature conversation.
First off, this comment from The Playlist. Here is the link and a blurb:
https://theplaylist.net/wb-henry-cavill-still-superman-20180912/
A source today, right after today’s news broke, echoed the same sentiment that Warner Bros would shift focus to "Supergirl" and that movie—likely a period piece set in the 1970s (though this could change) with the young Kryptonian as a teenager—would knock Cavill out of the running for appearing in that particular time period (he’d still be a child then). So, the actor could stick around, but if Supergirl were to go first and with no “Man of Steel 2” film in development, it’s very conceivable that Cavill could not turn up as Superman again for several, several years hence everyone kind of walking away for now, but keeping the door open.
Now I must admit that I don't know if I am keen on Supergirl being set in the 70s, especially if it is part of the DCEU continuity. If Kara did reveal herself back then, wouldn't the S-symbol be known. Wouldn't Superman's reveal be less profound? If she were alive, wouldn't she come to aid Kal when the Phantom Zone folks arrived? Or does that mean she's dead in the present?
Honestly, there is nothing wrong with her arriving after him. Or having arrived earlier but having been in suspended animation or something to explain her youth. Isn't that what the Man of Steel open pod supposed to be all about?
All that said, the idea of a 'Daring New Adventures of Supergirl' style movie is intriguing if only to see Linda Danvers in all those clothes we saw in that comic.
And then the rumor about the villain!
Over on ScreenRant, the rumor is the villain will be Brainiac. Here is the link and a blurb:
https://screenrant.com/supergirl-movie-brainiac-villain/
Now, however, it’s rumored that the Supergirl film has potentially found its villain.
According to Daniel R at SuperBroMovies, the plan for now is for Brainiac to step into the villain role for the Supergirl movie.
Now this is a very good fit.
Since 2008, Brainiac has been a key figure in the Supergirl origin. As seen in the Brainiac arc by Johns and Frank, Kara witnessed the shrinking of Kandor. She lost her friends that way. Brainiac is the boogey man for her generation. So there is a lot of story to chew on if that comes to pass.
I'd love a simple 'Kal is away on a space mission', Brainiac arrives, Supergirl must reveal herself sort of story.
Will this ever come to fruition? Who knows. But it is fun to think about.
So what did you all think?
If the choice was mine, I'd have Kara battle the Fatal Five. A film in which Supergirl somehow brings down Validus, the Emerald Empress, Tharok, Persuader and Mano would be an epic!
ReplyDeleteWell, the continuity of the DCEU is already in shambles, how does wonder woman 84 even fit into continuity if bvs said that she hasn't appeared for decades? Wouldn't she have known Kara by then if the movie is indeed set in the 70s? There are another set of rumours, that DCEU is abandoning the shared universe concept, so it's everyone fending for themselves. So everything will be a standalone film and if a movie is a hit then more movies. DCEU lacks a figure like Kevin feige to drive the franchise forward and so this is the best option (which honestly works better because a bunch of Shazam fans were happy to hear that Superman won't be there to take away any spotlight from Billy)
ReplyDeleteNow, the 70s, I feel like there are already two versions where Kara came after kal so they want to do something different for a movie, shock people that is (and seperate it from Melissa benoist's version) I feel like the aesthetic can work (the retro look is working as seen by Thor ragnarok, IT and surely will for ww84).
If they want a teen superhero (in contrast to the tvshow version) then it is kind of guaranteed to be a small town coming of age storyline. I feel like the setting can work.
But for now, fingers crossed that Supergirl gets her movie because a bunch of Superman fans are already pissed that she is getting her movie before *checks notes* the NINTH Superman film adaptation.
I would love to see WW and SG (personal wish is MM) interact though (or literally anyone apart from Superman)
"Now I must admit that I don't know if I am keen on Supergirl being set in the 70s, especially if it is part of the DCEU continuity."
ReplyDeleteI'm surprised about the movie being a period piece and wondering about the reason.
"If Kara did reveal herself back then, wouldn't the S-symbol be known. Wouldn't Superman's reveal be less profound? If she were alive, wouldn't she come to aid Kal when the Phantom Zone folks arrived? Or does that mean she's dead in the present?"
WW1984 is ignoring the "walking away from humanity for one century" nonsense, so maybe WB is jettisoning the DCEU continuity.
"All that said, the idea of a 'Daring New Adventures of Supergirl' style movie is intriguing if only to see Linda Danvers in all those clothes we saw in that comic."
If only it was based on her Pre-Crisis comics... But it'll be again Kara Danvers, Jeremiah and Eliza's adoptive daughter.
"Now this is a very good fit."
Don't tell some fanboys over CBR, Superman Homepage and Reddit that. They're convinced that WB is trying to replace Superman with Supergirl in spite of zero evidence, and WB is wasting Brainiac on Supergirl.
Of course, Supergirl has a very strong claim on Brainiac. They have fought several times since the 60's and her grudge is so legitimate like Kal-El's.
Anyhow, I'm conflicted about it. On the one hand, it IS a good fit. On the another hand, I'd want Superman to fight Brainiac in a film first, and I want Supergirl to battle her own Rogues.
Now, if the DCEU was a sane place, WB would have made a live-action "The Supergirl from Krypton" movie instead of BvS to introduce Supergirl, Wonder Woman and Darkseid, then MOS2 would have gotten both Superman and Supergirl fighting Brainiac and right now MOS3 and a Supergirl movie would be being filmed.
But it didn't happen like that, and Snyder's supporters can only blame themselves for WB burying the Snyderverse and Cavill leaving.
My personal wish would be a trilogy.
ReplyDeleteFirst one set in the 50s in Midvale where we see her silver age origin. While she ultimately has to defeat a large threat, her cover is never blown courtesy of the Legion who appears towards the end to request her help in the future.
Movie 2 has Kara becoming the hope that unites a torn legion against a big bad.
Movie 3 sends Kara back to the present after a time travelling threat where the full Legion joins up with the full cast of present heroes in the craziest thing ever done on the big screen.
I don't think DCEU can reconcile doing "Supergirl" as a 1970's period piece and the Snyderverse without creating huge continuity contradictions. But then thats what the Snyderverse is good at, that and not making money....
ReplyDeleteSo my gut is, IF the 1970's setting is retained (and it may not be) then its a signal that DCEU "film continuity" is out the window and its "every movie for itself", which given subpar performance to date might be the best option.
I personally LOVE the idea of Brainiac's big screen debut being a slugfest with the winsome Kara Zor El, there is poetic justice in this scenario that'll drive the Supermanhomepage.com ape s**t.
:)
Besides isn't the slightly derisive monicker "Brainiac" something a 1970's teenager would hang on a malevolent extraterrestrial A.I.?
JF
Matrix Supergirl came back after her own space exile - brainwashed by Brainiac! Lots of history to mine.
ReplyDeleteI’m open to any era but in the current DCEU Superman was the first super, while Batman was the first masked vigilante, and the JLA heroes came next. It’s not like there were lots of meta humans running around in the 1970s in this film continuity. So I’d like to see how they rationalize a Supergirl who debuted first.
"But then thats what the Snyderverse is good at, that and not making money...."
ReplyDeleteIt's also good at disrespecting characters and damaging iconic characters' viability.
"I personally LOVE the idea of Brainiac's big screen debut being a slugfest with the winsome Kara Zor El, there is poetic justice in this scenario that'll drive the Supermanhomepage.com ape s**t."
I don't know. Albeit the meltdown of the "Superman must be the only child of Krypton and his kid sister can never get nice things" crowd would be certainly amusing, I don't want anything like resentful fanbases to jeopardize Supergirl's second film.
Supergirl’s. Fanbase will never be found on the supermanhomepage.com, placating that lot is a fools errand IMHO. She has a sizable audience all to her own thanks to ground thoroughly prepared by Ms. Benoist et al, that is what must needs be cultivated. And if “Supergirl, The New Movie” is indeed set in the 1970’s any old explanation can be generated to cover Kal El’s absence, my fave is he is off world with the JLA leaving SG as planetary babysitter.
ReplyDeleteJF
Thanks for all the comments!
ReplyDeleteGreat discussion!
"Of course, there wasn't much there other than news of a screen writer."
ReplyDeleteStill isn't. Still no finished script. All of these follow-up 'rumors' are being floated about by notorious click-bait sites, and not official announcements from WB's film division. Of course, that's not to say that WB might be actually feeding these 'rumors' to the click-bait crowd, in order to survey which of them is a possible way to move forward. However, rumors of Reed Morano being sought to direct a Supergirl movie were shot down by the creator herself, who hasn't been in any contact with the studio.
"But now some new rumors have come out in the aftermath of the announcement that Henry Cavill will no longer play Superman. It is unclear that the Cavill rumor is true."
Cavill's agent says otherwise, and WB followed that up with a pretty wishy-washy statement, basically admitting that no Superman appearances are being planned for Cavill in the current DCEU movie pipeline.
"Now I must admit that I don't know if I am keen on Supergirl being set in the 70s..."
Neither am I, but not because of the rumored reasoning that the studio could omit a Cavill appearance with ease. My reasoning is that it would make for a convenient dodge from addressing current misogyny culture wars against women today....which was the issue I had with Jenkins' first WW film, and appears to be the same mistake the studio is making with the sequel. It's simply ignoring the importance of the female superhero's ongoing struggle for social acceptance, and thus weakens her standing as a game-changer.
KET
"...It would make a convenient dodge from addressing current misogyny culture wars against women today...it's simply ignoring the importance of the female superhero's ongoing struggle for social acceptance, and thus weakens her standing as a game changer."
ReplyDeleteOkay, I will admit, I don't understand this argument. Is there any reason these issues could NOT be addressed in a movie set in the 1970s? If so, tell me why.
But I really wouldn't want a Supergirl movie to deal with those issues in a heavy handed, in your face way. I would hope we get a good solid story, and a Supergirl who can think for herself, is strong and intelligent, can overcome any self doubts, and finds a way to win in the end.
If the Superman situation can be worked out, maybe Superman has been captured by Brainiac, and Supergirl has to come to his rescue.
And "Brainiac" DOES sound like something a teenager would come up with. Well, a teenager and Otto Binder.
"My reasoning is that it would make for a convenient dodge from addressing current misogyny culture wars against women today....which was the issue I had with Jenkins' first WW film, and appears to be the same mistake the studio is making with the sequel. It's simply ignoring the importance of the female superhero's ongoing struggle for social acceptance, and thus weakens her standing as a game-changer."
ReplyDeleteHave to disagree with you, Ket. The further back in time you put a female superhero, the more of a game changer she is. That was what Wonder Woman was all about. Besides, the 70's was the decade of women's lib. Today's questions of equality and misogynistic treatment of women were very much in the air then. It might be fun to have Kara baffled that women on earth have to fight for equal treatment because in Krypton's more advanced society it was simply the way things were.
Great point, William! I'd be OK for the first new Kara film not to bother directly addressing any particular agendas - the TV show has that area well covered. Just having a strong, female character front and centre, more than coping, ultra-competent and confident would be great. There's your positive message right there.
ReplyDeleteI don't want a period piece for the simple reason that it may subliminally paint Kara as a relic. I want her discovered by Superman... boy, imagine the fun if he tried to treat her today as the Silver Age chap did! I'd love to see Clark welcome her, help her find a home and then leave her to it.
And thanks, Anj, for including that Infantino panel, perhaps my favourite Linda Danvers image ever.
Going back to the first comment, 'the retro look is working as seen by Thor ragnarok...' Did I forget something? Wasn't that set in the present day?
I'm cautiously optimistic about this. On one hand, MOAR SUPERGIRL! On the other, as indicated by the comments so far,
ReplyDeleteI'm not too big on a superhero movie pushing an agenda, I'd rather they give me one where they do right by Supergirl
first and foremost, no matter the era they place her in, and entertain me a close second.
As for the "divorce" from the rest of the DCEU and the Henry C, well... considering we've already had Melissa B and
Tyler H Supercousins, I don't think this is such a big deal anymore, but if it could be made to work, it'd be whipped
cream and cherries on top! I do agree though a linkage with Wonder Woman would be epic!
And just to point it out Anj, dunno if you've put in your order for the Bluray version of the Supergirl 1984 movie for
review :)
Regards
"My reasoning is that it would make for a convenient dodge from addressing current misogyny culture wars against women today..."
ReplyDeleteThere's not such a thing, to your everlasting grief.
"It's simply ignoring the importance of the female superhero's ongoing struggle for social acceptance, and thus weakens her standing as a game-changer."
First, you mocked the MeToo movement and defended Kreisberg over Supergirltv.com when his status as a sexual harasser was outed, so don't try and pretend your care for the women's struggles.
"Okay, I will admit, I don't understand this argument. Is there any reason these issues could NOT be addressed in a movie set in the 1970s? If so, tell me why."
There's no reason for it. That argument is ludicrous.
"But I really wouldn't want a Supergirl movie to deal with those issues in a heavy handed, in your face way. I would hope we get a good solid story, and a Supergirl who can think for herself, is strong and intelligent, can overcome any self doubts, and finds a way to win in the end."
That's definitely the most important thing.