DC could have saved Henry Cavill’s Superman by learning from Marvel

Henry
Cavill as Superman in “Man of Steel” (2013)
Warner Bros.

• Henry Cavill is reportedly out as Superman, and DC will
  instead focus on a Supergirl movie.
• But Cavill’s Superman wasn’t beyond saving, and DC
  could have learned some lessons from the early years of the
  Marvel Cinematic Universe.
• Chris Hemsworth’s Thor was taken in a new direction
  with “Thor: Ragnarok,” and DC could have done something similar
  with Superman.
• Marvel replaced Edward Norton as the Hulk and hasn’t
  made another Hulk solo movie since 2008, but Superman has
  proven to be more appealing to audiences.
• The MCU relies on comic books for inspiration, and
  Superman has 80 years worth of source material to look
  at.

 

DC’s superhero film universe is in need of saving, but DC and
Warner Bros. don’t think that’s a job for Superman.

On Wednesday, The Hollywood Reporter first
reported, which was then followed by other publications like
Variety and TheWrap, that Henry Cavill
would not be playing the Man of Steel in future films after
negotiations fell through for Cavill to cameo in next year’s
“Shazam!” Instead, Warner Bros., the studio that develops all of
DC’s film adaptations, will focus on a Supergirl movie about the
teenage heroine who is Superman’s cousin.

A Warner Bros. spokesperson issued a statement following the
reports: “While no decisions have been made regarding any
upcoming Superman films, we’ve always had great respect for and a
great relationship with Henry Cavill, and that remains
unchanged.”

Warner Bros.’ statement was neither a denial or a
confirmation, but signs indicate that Warner Bros. is
indefinitely putting Superman on the backburner: Cavill was just
cast in Netflix’s “The Witcher” series, and DC has been
rethinking its film strategy after the poor reception to “Justice
League.” Instead of a cinematic universe of connected films
similar to the Marvel Cinematic Universe, it will focus on
standalone stories. 

While the MCU has been a box-office and critical force to
be reckoned with that no other studio has been able to compete
with, it didn’t become that overnight. There are lessons from the
evolution of the MCU that DC could have learned from, rather than
abandoning its flagship character. Henry Cavill’s Superman wasn’t
beyond saving.

READ MORE:   
There are major signs that Ben
Affleck will not return as Batman in the next solo
movie

It may be hard to remember at this point, after both “Black
Panther” and “Avengers: Infinity War” broke box-office records
this year, but the MCU has had similar problems to DC’s that it
managed to offset with consistently entertaining, crowd-pleasing
films every year. The first two “Thor” films are two of the
worst in the MCU, and “The Incredible Hulk,” starring Edward
Norton, was a dud.

Thor, even moreso than Superman, is a hard character to
translate to the big screen in a convincing way. He’s an alien
god that few outside of the comic book community knew or cared
about before Chris Hemsworth took on the role. It wasn’t until
last year’s “Thor: Ragnarok” that the character found a
definitive voice in the MCU, and Hemsworth was allowed to be
himself. He’s funny, and he brought that to the
role.

Cavill was never allowed to embody Superman with much of
his own personality, similarly to how Hemsworth didn’t in the
early “Thor” films. The Superman of 2013’s “Man of Steel” and
especially 2016’s “Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice” was a
brooding figure, closer to Batman in charisma than what comic
book readers, and fans of Christopher Reeve’s “Superman” films,
were accustomed to. But the MCU didn’t give up on Hemsworth’s
Thor, and DC shouldn’t have given up on Cavill’s
Superman. 

One actor the MCU did give up on was Norton, who was
replaced by Mark Ruffalo as Bruce Banner/Hulk in “The Avengers”
and has been in the role since. Norton is known for being a
difficult actor to work with, and reportedly clashed with
Marvel Studios over the direction of “The Incredible Hulk.” That
was an instance where parting ways with an actor, and never
making a “Hulk” movie again, made sense.

The Hulk has proven to work in a group setting, like the
“Avengers” films, but not in solo films. Before the MCU, Ang Lee
directed “Hulk” in 2003, which only made $203 million
domestically (adjusted for inflation) and was panned by critics.
“The Incredible Hulk,” the second movie in the MCU, didn’t fare
much better. It only made $174 million domestically, and is one
of the lowest-grossing and worst-reviewed films in the
franchise. 

Superman is a different story.

“Man of Steel” wasn’t a box-office smash, but it still made
about $670 million worldwide, and raked in $129 million
(adjusted) in its opening weekend, which suggested that audiences
were interested in a modern Superman movie. It quickly fell at
the box office, dropping 65% in its second weekend in theaters,
but with stronger reviews it probably could have maintained a
larger presence at the box office. 

“Batman v Superman” opened to nearly $180 million
(adjusted) at the box office despite horrible reviews, and like
“Man of Steel,” saw a sharp drop in its following weekends in
theaters. But it still made over $870 million worldwide. Apart
from “Justice League,” in which Superman was absent from all
marketing leading up to the movie’s release, Cavill’s time as
Superman was successful enough to give him another shot, and he
clearly didn’t come with the baggage that someone like Norton
did. He’s active on social media about his enthusiasm for the
role, regularly posting Superman-related images on his Instagram.

READ MORE:  ‘Captain Marvel’ could hold the
answers to the future of the Marvel Cinematic Universe after
‘Avengers 4’

By abandoning Cavill’s Superman, DC is abandoning one of
the most recognizable characters in pop culture whose comic book
roots stretch all the way back to 1938, meaning he’s celebrating
his 80th anniversary this year. That’s a lot of years worth of
source material, and something the MCU has done so well is take
inspiration from Marvel comic books. Comic events like “Civil
War,” “Planet Hulk,” and “The Infinity Gauntlet” have been
loosely adapted, and all DC had to do was look at its own rich
library of decades of Superman stories if it wanted to breathe
new life into the character for the big screen.

“Man of Steel” came at a time when Warner Bros. thought the
answer to its Superman problem was in Christopher Nolan’s “The
Dark Knight.” Director Zack Snyder, known for the bloody “300”
and “Watchmen,” resurrected Superman with a darker mood — he
kills the villain at the end after a battle that destroys an
entire city.

Superman needed a makeover, but it’s become clear that
audiences want their superheroes to be fun, which is what a
Superman movie should be. He’s not Batman, and in most ways, he’s
the antithesis of Batman: hopeful, colorful, and
inspiring.

Cavill could have been those things if DC had given him a
chance.