It's kind of cute to see DC Comics and Warner Bros. getting all excited about making superhero movies again now that The Dark Knight has been established as the greatest, most important film in the history of mankind. This comes after a decade of almost every DC-based movie being a failure while most of what has come from rival camp Marvel Comics has been successful. Now the tables have turned -- or they have for one movie, anyway -- and DC is emboldened. The next step? Find a way to ruin Superman again!

Word came last week that DC and Warners will reboot the Superman franchise, similar to the way Marvel rebooted the Incredible Hulk. (And gee, look how great that turned out! This summer's The Incredible Hulk did just as well at the box office as 2003's supposedly disastrous Hulk did.) Warner honcho Jeff Robinov said they plan to "reintroduce" the character -- but reboot, reintroduce, whatever you call it, are they forgetting that that's what 2006's Superman Returns was? How many times do they think they can redo this character before audiences just give up altogether?

Plenty of questions remain. A reboot probably means an entirely new cast, and possibly a new director. Word on the street before last week's announcement was that Bryan Singer could stay on board if he was willing to go in the new direction, but that's not very helpful right now, since no one knows what the new direction is yet.

As our Erik Davis reported over the weekend, Warner Bros and DC Comics are in the midst of rehashing their strategy, opting for the slow and steady route. But there's one franchise that has his "reinvention" movie, as it were: Superman. Word is, Warner Bros is utterly torn as to what to do with him.

Variety's Anne Thompson reports that the studio is really taking their time in deciding what to do, and how Bryan Singer will play into it. At this point, despite all the rumors and excited quotes from Singer, no one is working on a Superman script.

Surprisingly, they're with the majority of fans on this one, and feel that the movie didn't revive the character the way they wanted, or the way they know it can be done. (You really have changed things, Christopher Nolan.) Thompson was told that the studio is making the Man of Steel a top priority -- and if Singer is willing "to go in the right direction," they'll keep him, if not, he's off the property. One executive freely admitted that "it might be better to start from scratch."

Remember, Mark Millar and a "big name action director" who had connections at Warner Bros were readying themselves to make a Superman pitch. Millar claimed the world would know by December. Given that such sharks are circling, I won't be surprised if Warners does start from scratch. I'm as perplexed as anyone as to where Singer can go from Superman Returns. For a healthy franchise, they're going to have to reboot, and leave Returns in that misty category of a Donner long delayed sequel.

What do you think? Reboot or continue Singer's storyline?

UPDATE: Cinematical has been given this brand new still from the film, which shows Cruise without the eye patch.

MGM seems to be trying to reverse the effects of the doomsaying that circulated about Tom Cruise and Bryan Singer's Hitler-assassination-attempt thriller Valkyrie in the spring, culminating in the announcement that the movie was moving from December 2008 to President's Day 2009. That was received as a surrender, a sure sign that the studio had no confidence in the film and was doing damage control by moving it out of harm's way. Now, following some successful test screenings, MGM has reversed itself and is moving Valkyrie back into the heart of Oscar season: December 26, 2008. Apparently, though, the studio still doesn't think it has awards potential, and is making the move because it thinks Valkyrie will do well in the Christmastime marketplace.

I'm sure positive test screenings did have a lot to do with MGM's decision, but I think it's a smart move because it's great spin control. The press loves to read the tea leaves of studio behavior, and will see this as a major vote of confidence. I suspect the buzz on Valkyrie will seriously improve now that it is no longer the subject of what was perceived as a February dump.

For my part, I don't care about Tom Cruise or his silly eyepatch, but I have a lot of trust in Bryan Singer. The man can make a good mainstream thriller, and I don't see why Valkyrie should be any exception. I think a lot of the "bad buzz" (such as Roger Friedman randomly attacking the film) is just Cruise-bashing, which may be justified but probably shouldn't extend to his movies.

With The Dark Knight and Watchmen on everyone's mind, we are going to get a lot of dark and edgy "superhero" movies, centered on stories that tear down the myth of the caped crusader and show them to be the flawed individuals they truly are.

Capeshooters is the latest to tear off the Spandex. According to Variety, it's based on an upcoming comic book by Rob Liefield, cofounder of Image Comics, and will be produced by none other than Bryan Singer. After filming so many good superheroes Singer is apparently interested in exploring the "darker side of the subject." The timing, coming so soon after Tony Stark graced the screen, is probably coincidental.

So, what is particularly dark about this deconstruction? The TMZ angle! Capeshooters revolves around two slackers turned paparazzi, who specialize in shooting covert videos of superheroes. (And speaking of Stark, he probably would have loads of those videos. Wolverine, too.) They find themselves on the run after they stumble onto evidence that one particularly beloved hero is, in fact, a villain. (Harvey Dent, say it ain't so!)

It all depends on the upcoming comic book, of course, but it sounds like Watchmen already did this. And better. Still, you can't blame writers for trying to walk a mile in Alan Moore's shoes, can you? Perhaps the book will be more unique than it looks from this angle.

Mark Millar is becoming a real Hollywood insider these days, a Frank Miller in training. He dropped quite an intriguing bombshell to Scotland's Daily Record -- claiming that there's a Superman movie revamp on the way. While some of his claims could be dismissed as wishful thinking by a man who merely wants to fulfill his Kryptonian dreams, he's certainly talking it out with someone. Says Millar, "I've been planning this my entire life. I've got my director and producer set up, and it'll be 2011. This is how far ahead you have to think. The Superman brand is toxic after that last movie lost 200 million, but in 2011 we're hoping to restart it. Sadly I can't say who the director is, but we may make it official by Christmas. But fingers crossed it could work out, that would be my lifetime's dream."

Now, this flies directly in the face of Bryan Singer confirming he was attached to the sequel. But there's been a peculiar lack of progress with it. He's obviously busy with Valkyrie, but when you look at how quickly the Iron Man and Spider-Man franchises are moving, well, someone's not moving faster than a speeding bullet anymore. Could Warner Bros really be open to rebooting the franchise? The parallels between Ang Lee's Hulk and Bryan Singer's Superman Returns are striking, and I can honestly see the studio choosing a similarly clean slate. But they would be ditching a pretty expensive investment in Returns, and creating quite a controversy in the process.
Far more people loved Superman Returns than Hulk, and Singer commands a lot of geek cred.

When two movies with similar plots hit theaters around the same time, it usually just reveals the vapidity of Hollywood formula (as was the case when Deep Impact and Armageddon came out a few months apart). The situation changes, however, when the subject matter has far more thematic weight. Defamer's S.T. VanAirsdale points out the potential conflict brewing now that The Weinstein Company has picked up U.S. theatrical, DVD and television rights to the 2004 German film Operation Valykrie, a dramatization of the failed attempt to assassinate Adolf Hilter during World War II. Sound familiar? That's because Bryan Singer's upcoming 2009 release, Valkyrie, tells precisely the same story, with Tom Cruise in the role of would-be assassin Col. Claus Von Stauffenberg. In the German movie, the character is played by Sebastian Koch, the debonair star of The Lives of Others and Paul Verhoeven's Black Book.

In addition to the overlapping content, VanAirsdale points out another potential conflict: Koch's female co-star in Black Book, the alluring Carice van Houten, stars opposite Cruise in Valkyrie, creating the sort of meaty overlap that money can buy. Harvey Weinstein's no slouch when it comes to instigating controversy, but his company hasn't exactly had the best of luck with its recent daring titles (few turned out for Where in the World is Osama bin Laden?). Personal drama has impacted Cruise's films before, but this might be the rare case where he would have nothing to do with it.

What in the world is going on now? Valkyrie (recently criticized by Fox's Roger Friedman, who said the film "is set up for not only failure, but ridicule") has just shifted release dates yet again (according to The Hollywood Reporter); this time moving from October 2008 to President's Day Weekend 2009. You might remember that the flick was originally supposed to hit theaters this June, before the first release date shift was made. Some claimed MGM and United Artists were moving the film to the fall in order to line up for possible Oscar consideration. Could all of this early negative talk have convinced them to, instead, target one of the first big holiday weekends of 2009?

Seems like a pretty good decision to me. With everyone trashing Tom Cruise for his non-existent German accent and silly eye patch, there was pretty much no way this film was going to be taken seriously come Oscar time. The cast definitely rocks -- no doubt there -- but if Lions for Lambs proved anything, it's that you should not release a Tom Cruise film in the middle of Oscar season unless it's Thanksgiving Weekend and we're talking Mission Impossible 4. Valkyrie will now go up against a new Friday the 13th film and Confessions of a Shopaholic. Clark Woods, president of domestic distribution, had this to say: "When an opening became available for President's Day Weekend, we seized the opportunity. Moving into a big holiday weekend is the right move."

Let's hope there's still a right move to be made...

So we all know that Tom Cruise jokes are getting a little old, but you can't deny it's been fascinating to watch one of the most powerful guys in movies have a "freak out" and be forced to watch all his star-worship fade away. According to Fox News' Roger Friedman, it's not looking good for Bryan Singer's historical drama, Valkyrie. According to Friedman, "Valkyrie is a set up for not only failure, but ridicule." Friedman goes on to take shots at Cruise's attempts at a German accent and even Singer and Christopher McQuarrie's dialog gets a few (dis) honorable mentions. Although, to be fair, I wouldn't count on a gossip reporter from Fox to be the final word on film criticism.

Friedman joins the chorus of critics who think that Valkyrie will not only fail to improve Cruise's current Hollywood standing, but that it will further add another nail to his box office coffin. Cruise still has a few more chances to pull himself out of this mess: First up will be a cameo in Tropic Thunder, then it's on to a full-on attempt at comedy with director Todd Phillips (Old School) in Men, and finally Cruise is expected to star alongside Ben Stiller in the buddy comedy, The Hardy Men (which I personally think has some potential). Who knows? Maybe he will finally be making people laugh at him on purpose. Valkyrie arrives in theaters on October 3rd.

[via Film Drunk]

Holy "Where the hell did this one come from" Batman! In a last ditch effort to win back fans, Warner Bros. has apparently convinced both Christian Bale and Brandon Routh to reprise the roles of Batman and Superman for their upcoming live-action Justice League of America film (currently titled Justice League Mortal). A press release just sent to Cinematical comes with this hilarious quote from a studio rep: "Brandon wasn't too hard to convince; he half-jokingly told us he's dreamt about this opportunity every night for the past several months."

Both men have signed a three-picture deal, which means Warners has plans to extend Justice League beyond the initial film, due out in 2009. Currently, there's no word on whether Armie Hammer (the actor supposed to play Batman) will still appear in some capacity, be it as a younger version of Batman or as a random extra in a background shot. On why he ultimately decided to take the role when there's a good chance it could confuse fans and screw up Nolan's franchise, Bale said, "I don't see me taking on this role getting in the way of anything, aside from someone else's paycheck. The script is awesome. Batman is awesome. Brendon and I look forward to taking this one to the next level."

Sounds like the studio is finally getting serious about this film, bringing on two actors with established fanbases -- guys they know will bolster the flick's box office. There are still a lot of unanswered questions, like what happens to Bryan Singer's The Man of Steel now and will Chris Nolan even go ahead with a third Batman film with Bale doing JLA? Well, one thing is for sure: This whole project just got a lot more interesting ...

For more, check out the entire press release over here.

So for starters, the newest photos from Valkyrie manage to make Tom Cruise look a lot more dashing. Good thing, too, because the only other photo release prompted a flurry of cheap shots aimed at everybody's favorite tabloid whipping boy. Empire now has three new studio stills from Bryan Singer's historical drama about the infamous July 20th plot to assassinate Hitler. Joining Cruise are Bill Nighy, Kenneth Branagh, Eddie Izzard and Terrence Stamp. There are also some extra shots in the newsstand edition of Empire this month, along with an interview with Singer.

Cruise stars as German Colonel Claus von Stauffenberg. In 1944, Stauffenberg along with other high-ranking officers in the Nazi party attempted to assassinate Adolph Hitler. Stauffenberg and his crew attempted to kill Hitler with a bomb planted in a briefcase. Obviously they failed, and the key players were rounded up almost immediately. By 1945, most of the men involved had committed suicide or had been executed in a variety of nasty ways.

Last Wednesday, a federal judge ruled that the estate of Jerome Siegel was entitled to claim a share of the United States copyright to all things Superman. Siegel created the character with his partner Joseph Shuster in the 1930's before selling the copyright to Detective Comics (which later became DC Comics, now owned by Time Warner) for a whopping $130. Siegel has been fighting to reclaim a portion of the copyright basically ever since, though all he ever won was a $30,000 annuity that stopped in 1999. Now, 11 years after his death, it looks like he's been vindicated, pending an appeal by Time Warner. You can find more details in this New York Times article.

No one seems sure about what specific implications this will have, and I'm no expert on copyright law, but everyone seems to agree on two things: 1) Time Warner may owe the Siegel estate a lot of money from use of the character since 1999, and 2) this may have thrown at least a temporary wrench into Warner's plans for a follow-up to Bryan Singer's Superman Returns. Ordinarily, news that legal squabbling is holding up production on a favorite franchise would lead to a lot of cursing from fans who are shocked -- shocked! -- that money and greed would stand in the way of filmmaking. But this time it's a "little guy" who's causing all the trouble, not a faceless corporation, and it seems churlish to complain.

My prediction: Time Warner will pay the Siegels off. There's too much money in Superman for something like this to halt the assembly line for very long.

Rumors have been flying today that Bryan Singer is indeed working on the sequel to Superman Returns. Well, it is not just rumor -- Singer himself confirmed it to Empire. "Yes, 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." He lashes out at claims that first film was a flop, pointing out that it made $400 million.

If you're thinking "It wasn't a flop financially, Singer, it was a flop because no one liked it," well, he addresses that too. He promises the next one will up the stakes. "The first one was a romantic film and a nostalgic film. I'll be the first person to own up to that without making any apologies for it. I knew it was going to be that from the outset. And now that the characters are established, there's really an opportunity to up the threat levels . . .Clearly there'll be a body count. From frame one, it will be unrelenting terror! All those teenage girls who found the movie and mooned over James Marsden or Brandon [Routh]? Well, I'm going to wake them up!"

My problem is that I didn't find it nostalgic or romantic, I just found it rather dull. I stopped believing a man could fly, and wondered instead why James Marsden was always losing his girls to men of steel and adamantium. All the pieces were there for a fantastic reboot, a film that could reintroduce Superman to a new audience, but it simply fell flat. I do believe Singer has it in him -- and he does tend to be better with superhero sequels than his originals. So I will forgive and forget, and happily await the next installment.

Slashfilm now has the first on-set photos from Gus Van Sant's Harvey Milk biopic, Milk. As we all know, Bryan Singer's competing Milk film, The Mayor of Castor Street, has been parked in development hell. Now it looks like Van Sant's film will be the first Hollywood life-story of the legendary mayor of San Francisco, so get ready for a little stroll down memory lane since most of these photos are of the local spots in the area being given a 1970's makeover.

For those of you not familiar with Milk's legacy, he was, "an American politician and gay rights activist, was the first openly gay city supervisor of San Francisco, California, and therefore, according to Time magazine, 'the first openly gay man elected to any substantial political office in the history of the planet.'" The perpetually dour Sean Penn will play Milk, and most gossip had Matt Damon in the role of Milk's murderer and co-worker, Dan White. Now it's looking like Josh Brolin will step in. Other cast members include Emile Hirsch, James Franco, and Diego Luna

While most of the focus had been on whether Penn could pull off the congenial and upbeat Milk, I have to admit I'm a little nervous on the directing end of things as well. As much as I respect Van Sant, I wonder whether he is willing to make a more 'conventional' biopic. It might be the only way to introduce as many people as possible to this invaluable figure in gay rights, rather than alienating them with something a little more along the lines of Last Days. Milk is set to open in theaters later this year.

Can such a large project as the Superman sequel unravel in a single day? Certainly seems that way, doesn't it? First there was the Anne Thompson blog post which made the rounds earlier in the day (see our post on it here), in which she speculated -- and it seems a given that she wouldn't make such a speculation unless she had some info to back it up -- that Bryan Singer was likely to throw off the long-in-doubt sequel to the mediocre-performing Superman Returns in favor of concentrating on his other upcoming projects. I personally don't see the logic in this, since Valkyrie is already in the can and the Harvey Milk film will be a small thing that need not trample on a huge payday like the Supes sequel. However, Thompson also made a sideways reference to what may be the real issue -- Warner Bros.' increasingly obvious intention of using the upcoming Justice League of America as a way of rebooting said underperfoming Superman film by tossing Brandon Routh.

Now comes Latino Review, exploding a story that they claim to have been sitting on "for weeks and weeks" out of deference to sources at DC Comics. "Kelvin knew about Brandon not being the new Superman for weeks and weeks now, but made a promise to the DC people that he wouldn't break the story. Variety has now confirmed what we've secretly known for a while and Brandon Routh will be replaced in the stand-alone sequel by whomever is cast as Superman in the upcoming Justice League of America movie." Funny, since Variety doesn't say that at all -- this is clearly LR's attempt at a 'whoops, I thought it was safe to leak that info since Variety reported.' Anyway, if LR's source is legit the move on Warner and DC's part does make sense -- Routh didn't connect with audiences, for whatever reason, and in the age of instant reboots there are no second chances.

From the "Things We Already Figured Out, But It's Nice to See Other People Saying the Same Thing" pile ...

Instead of the usual three little tidbits, today we're bringing you one large mish-mosh of information about the future of Superman, Batman and the Justice League flick. Over on her blog, Variety's Anne Thompson talks a bit about all three of these properties, saying it's "highly unlikely" that Bryan Singer will return to the Superman franchise now that he's decided to scale down and shell out a few passion projects (namely this summer's Valkyrie and The Mayor of Castro Street). Thompson says our next big-screen meeting with the Man of Steel will probably come in the form of a much younger actor in the role as part of that planned Justice League film.

Oh, and about that planned Justice League film -- Thompson doesn't think it will be shot until after the WGA strike is resolved, which could potentially push production back to summer versus the original plan to begin shooting early in 2008. Warner Bros. still hasn't officially announced the cast for Justice League, and last we heard director George Miller was forging ahead, claiming everything was still on schedule. For Christmas, I asked Santa for this whole film to just go away. Let's see if he stands up to his end of the bargain.

Finally, as far as future solo Batman installments go, Thompson says Warner Bros. is so happy with the way The Dark Knight turned out that they seriously hope director Christopher Nolan will return to helm a third film. I always thought a third film was part of his initial contract, but I gather it wasn't. You have to imagine there will be a bunch of loose ends to tie up following Dark Knight, and so here's hoping Nolan returns to finish the job rather than hand the franchise off to someone less worthy.