Originally posted by Tzigone:
For this movie, I think the origins were a necessity.
I agree that they couldn't do this movie without his origin, since that was the entire movie anyway. What I meant was that they didn't need to set out to tell an origin story. They could have done a movie where Superman is already an established hero and Clark already works for the Daily Planet, and none of the audience would have been lost wondering where this "Superman" guy came from.
Given this movie, the movie I was wanting is going to be the second one. What they've done, though, in retelling the origin is change Superman's relationship with the government and the public from what it's been for decades. I've got mixed feelings about that. On the one hand, it's a very modern take on the character, which doesn't necessarily win points with me. In many ways, it's more realistic and less idealistic. I like Superman because it's escapism, not because I want a realistic portrayal of things. On the other hand, the early Superman comics had the police trying to capture him and the general populace terrified of him, so it's taking Superman back to his roots, which I can respect.
This movie was a good beginning for a series. I just think that they could have jumped into the middle, and it would have worked.
