Here there be spoilers.
Confronted by aliens who manifest physical projections of his darkest
fears, Superman is killed in battle. Transcending
his body, he is reborn as Lois Lane’s son and raised in the sewers by a rag-tag
band of mutants and freaks. As
Metropolis is torn apart by fear and chaos, the reborn and rapidly maturing Boy of Steel
must find a way to emerge from hiding and preserve his father’s legacy.
Who wrote it?
Jonathan
Lemkin, credited writer on Lethal Weapon 4, The Devil’s Advocate, Shooter and
Red Planet.
When was it written?
This draft is dated 24.3.95.
How long is it?
58 pages (scanned from hard-copy).
What's the broad structure?
Act 1: pages 1-25
Act 2a: pages 26-58
What's the context?
With Superman back in Warners’ hands after buying out the
Salkinds, the studio put Jon Peters to work on the franchise, confident his
experience herding Tim Burton’s Batman to the screen would pay off for them
again. Peters hired Jonathan Lemkin to
write the first draft.
Lemkin goes on
the record in David Hughes’s The
Greatest Sci-Fi Movies Never Made
“I think, based on the action of Lethal
Weapon 4, some of the more supernatural elements of Devil’s Advocate and the
fantasy elements of Demolition Man, everyone felt comfortable with going
forward with me as the writer of Superman Reborn”.
There’s a curious cyclicity to the whole business. Movies take a long time to make. Scripts can be in development for years before even pre-production starts. Curiously, Lethal Weapon 4, which Lemkin cites as one of the reasons he got the Superman job, wasn’t released until more than 3 years after this was written. It was also, famously, rushed into production with no finalised script, allegedly because Warner Bros. had a Krypton-sized hole in their 1998 release schedule caused by the implosion of… Superman Lives, which Superman Reborn had evolved into.
Why didn't it happen?
Lemkin cites the
similarities in theme and tone to Batman Forever as the reason Warners decided
not to press ahead with his script.
Peters hired Gregory Poirier for a page one rewrite.
The Script
To call this script bat-shit crazy does
bat-shit crazy a disservice.
Let's not kid ourselves; similarities between this and Batman
Forever are not the reason it didn’t get made. Yes, they touch on some of the some themes, but the
underlying reasons it never went further are much, much more obvious. Lemkin says that his only briefs were to
write a great film, and to reinvent Superman for the MTV generation.
Lord knows what Jon Peters thought of the MTV generation.
Lemkin was also, allegedly, bound by the commercial realities of Hollywood film-making. In this case, the deals which can be made with toy companies to off-set the huge production and marketing costs inherent in blockbuster film-making.
“This is a huge corporate asset, and if you look at the marketing that can come from this, it’s phenomenal. So they’re being very careful with what we do.”
Apparently there’s a word for the suitability of a film to be
turned into toys. Toyetic.
Superman Reborn is not toyetic.
It is not a script for a family movie. In fact it opens with the legend: “No one is
here to save you anymore”. Can you see
that plastered all over little Johnny’s Christmas morning prezzies? The notion of toy companies merchandising a film which involves
the death of the entire principle cast in the first 20 minutes,
murder, rape, orgies and general chaos as society collapses in on itself is… a
stretch, to say the least. It’s not
impossible that it was those companies who nixed this, having first look
rights under their merchandising deal.
So who's our protagonist?
Once again, it’s not Superman, but two transient
alien energy beings able to assume human form: Morpheus and Delia. Their origin is never explained. I haven’t been able to find a trace of them in
the Superman mythos so it seems they were Lemkin’s original creations. Without their arrival, smashing to earth
inside a meteorite, the story doesn’t happen.
*For updated thoughts on protagonism, see my new post*
*For updated thoughts on protagonism, see my new post*
What does our protagonist want at the start of the story?
They’re tricksters; their aim is not just to conquer but to toy
with worlds, to destroy champions, wreck the planet, feed on the fear and chaos
they generate, and move on.
What does Superman want at the start of the story?
Once again, he’s doing fine.
But much like the previous script, Lois is unhappy, unable to see them
ever settling down and having a normal life.
In short, she wants out.
What happens next?
Interrupted mid break-up, Superman goes into battle with a being formed from his darkest fears, the final iteration of which is a giant
Kryptonite being. With the Man of Steel
six feet under, Morpheus and Delia set about creating chaos. But Superman’s spirit has undergone some kind
of transference, impregnating Lois with his child, which comes to
term in a single week. She and Jimmy Olsen
are killed protecting the baby, who is taken in by Harry Cadamus, a 120 year old geneticist living underground in a hidden community of mutants he
helped engineer. The boy, whom he names
Miles McGee, continues ageing rapidly, growing to the age of 11 in a week. But the older he gets, the quicker his powers
develop, and the more curious he becomes about who he is and where he came
from…
Does he resolve his conflict, and if so, how?
If we ascribe Kal-El’s conflicts to his son, given that he is
essentially Superman resurrected… It’s
still tough to say, as there's only half a script. What we do know is that it's about hope versus fear. The internal
goal is represented externally by Morpheus’ visual readouts, which document the
city’s levels of hope versus fear like some kind of emotional stat bar. Every
night, fear wins. But every morning,
people wake with the hope of a new day and better day. Morpheus is infuriated by this; what does it
take to break these people? It’s a
little on the nose, but not ineffective.
So let’s extrapolate, given
what we know and where the arcs start.
Given that the film is about hope versus fear, and Superman’s fear is
what ultimately destroyed him, I don’t think it’s outrageous to postulate that
it’s Miles’ faith in himself that allows him to triumph. Are we sure he wins? No.
But given that this script was designed to breathe life into the
character on screen and resurrect the franchise, it’s a fairly safe bet. It’ll be Miles' ability to push through his
fear in a way his father couldn’t which will ultimately be Metropolis’
salvation. It's hinted that he's also able to manifest his own thoughts physically, so this would probably have had a part to play in the final confrontation.
In a similar vein, humanity’s arc, from a society molly-coddled by
the presence of a living God upon whom it relies for salvation, could end in a new-found heroism amongst the civilian populace. It’s hinted at earlier, but I’d expect to see
it ratcheted up in the final act as both Superman and Metropolis face their
fears, bring down Morpheus and restore hope for the future.
What works?
- It’s a good story, essentially Batman with Superpowers. Miles’ parents are murdered, and he grows up in a world racked by fear and chaos, a metaphorical darkness, only to emerge from that to avenge them. The themes are timeless; fear versus hope. The absence of a father and the appearance of a new father figure are very much in keeping with previous iterations of the character.
- Kryptonite. Instead of an inert rock, it’s used sparingly, given form and purpose; the Kryptonite monster which manifests itself from Superman’s darkest fears is a proactive use of the classic Superman storytelling crutch.
- As much as certain aspects of the original Superman’s portrayal jar (see “what doesn’t work”, there’s an interesting concept underlying them. Superman here is, as Morpheus points out, “a hero with a logical appreciation of his own shortcomings.” We’re starting to move towards a more sophisticated, nuanced psychology of the superhero. A man with doubts like any other. In this case “what if something else is stronger?”
- In keeping with this, Superman’s strength makes the monster stronger. This idea was also explored a little at the end of the 1992 script. When someone is as strong as Superman, how do you develop drama? By turning that strength against him. He can’t outmuscle it, so what does he do?
- The infamous life-force transference. I never had a problem with it. If we’re going to suspend our disbelief enough to believe that a baby can travel billions of miles from an alien world, and then do all the stuff he can do… who’s to say how he procreates? “The son becomes the father, and the father the son.”
- As much as the script dwells on hopelessness, there is a message of hope in there. “It’s good to be tough, it’s not good to be hard”.
- 20 years before Batman Begins, Lemkin asks; what if the presence of your hero created your villains? He also asks whether Superman’s presence has actually retarded humanity’s growth. Doesn’t the presence of a god encourage us not to rely on ourselves, to expect to be saved? It’s hard to know if he more deeply explored the implications of this in the second half.
- Morpheus is pretty funny, and not altogether detestable because of it. It’s easy to imagine Jim Carrey pulling the role off in his sleep, but The Riddler was also a manic trickster, and that’s one of the things here that isn’t all that far removed from Batman Forever.
What doesn't work?
- Superman’s strength makes the monster stronger. I know, we’ve been here in “things that worked”, right? But having set up this interesting action dynamic, Lemkin squanders it by having him… outmuscle it anyway, pulling its head off and hurling it down the street. (Man Of Steel haters take note; it could have been much worse.) Having established an obstacle, Lemkin conveniently does away with it as soon as the monster has done its job, which is to usher out the established cinematic Superman on a gurney.
- That death is a little perfunctory. It takes only five pages to detail a battle that kills a being as powerful as Superman. Go big or go home.
- Morpheus wants to rule. He states that he needs 80,000-100,000 minds enslaved to match Superman’s power… But he and Delia just killed Superman, the most powerful being on the planet by some stretch. So what’s the end game? The villains’ motivations aren’t outlined very well. “To rule” seems a pretty amorphous goal.
- Superman is not the Superman we’re familiar with. Morpheus describes him as cold-hearted, hopeless and faithless. It plays up the alien aspect. This is partially the tack that Goyer and Nolan have hung Man Of Steel on, but that’s a reboot. Here, Superman is essentially mid-continuity; established in the world, working at The Daily Planet, in a relationship with Lois. To paint this Superman as lacking faith, hope, and warmth would have been utterly jarring, because Reeve’s Superman is anything but. Conversely, Morpheus also refers to those dregs of humanity who power him in the same terms. They can’t both be true.
- The whole “MTV generation” vibe. It's 1995, and Superman isn't cool anymore. That means no cheesiness. Only dark, grungy heroes need apply. Our new Superman grows up in a sewer. This emotional aesthetic seems to translate not only into a rumination on despair and hopelessness, but incredible amounts of sex, swearing and violence. We’ve got more decapitations than Sleepy Hollow, skeletons being pulled out, head-shots, rape, hand-jobs, child-porn palaces, smashing a 9 year old with a pipe… and worst of all, Techno. It’s almost Dickensian in its grimness, like Lemkin was daring Warners to fire him by writing something so outrageous it would never get past this draft. Yes, it sets the scene and establishes the stakes, but this is a Superman movie. It's too much.
- Meta-references. My biggest issue with the whole thing. Superman comic books exist in the Superman universe. That’s useful as a device to inculcate Miles into the lore surrounding his father, but also show how humanity has abandoned its adoration of Superman. Trouble is, it’s nothing some discarded newspapers and memorabilia couldn’t have done. Similarly, Cadamus refers to “Ma and Pa Kent” like it’s common knowledge the couple raised him. It doesn’t work. It’s confusing and bizarre, the story-telling equivalent of the ’92 script’s wink to camera.
Conclusion
It’s strange that only half of Lemkin's script has ever shown
up. Was there every any more? If there is a second half, why has it never
surfaced? It stops right in the
middle of page 58 with a CUT TO, so it doesn’t look like someone just lopped it
off at the end of an arbitrary page. The
script came to light as part of the deposition in a multi-billion dollar lawsuit,
wherein several unmade Superman scripts were produced to show the
company’s continual investment in kick-starting the franchise.
Given this context it’s hard to believe the second half
wouldn’t have been part of the deposition.
Did Lemkin never finish? If not,
why not? Did the toy companies nix
it? Did the notoriously mercurial Peters
change his mind?
As much as it pisses on the movie continuity, there’s no doubt that
the first 58 pages of Superman Reborn
work as a story; just not necessarily a Superman story. If you thought the Bates/Jones/Salkind draft
read a little Elseworlds, this’ll
blow your hair off. The only thing I can
think of to compare it to in that context is Frank Miller’s draft for the
aborted Batman: Year One. The one where
Alfred is a black guy called “Little Al” and the Batmobile is a Lincoln
Continental. Superman Reborn looks over that script’s remolding of the basic
story and sneers at it for not going far enough. It’s so different I couldn’t imagine it ever
getting made, but perhaps it’s very value lies in its reimagining of the
basics.
Like the previous draft, Superman Reborn pre-supposes the existence of galactic cultures
outside of Krypton and Earth, not to mention the existence of earthly mutants
and the underground world they live in. In that, it too feels more like the
comics than the previous movies. But it too has the
same issue of jarring with those movies. Regardless of age and accidents, the original cast could conceivably have started this story (the script mentions that
Jimmy has now aged and has a family), but it’s hard to imagine them intending to
invite Christopher Reeve back for what amounts to a 15 minute cameo before
offing him. By the same token, which
actor would settle for being the new Superman all of 15 minutes before handing
the mantle over to a series of kids and someone who passes as 21? It’s not a hard
reboot, so it’s tough to imagine anyone else in these roles. It’s a hand-off movie, but it's so tonally
inconsistent with the previous films that the only continuity would be the
actors. Once again, it falls between
stools.
Man of Steel
preventable death and destruction rating (where Man of Steel is a 10):
3 – A fair amount of property damage which Superman does nothing
to try and prevent by removing the dream creature from Metropolis. Having said that, he’s a little busy getting
his arse kicked. Property damage isn't the first thing on his mind, frankly. It's hard to say where it
all goes from there...
(All sources have been linked to except the script: if you happen
to be the creator or originator of any materials you feel have been
misappropriated, please let me know and I'll do my best to correct the
problem.)
