Superman

So it looks like McG can be added to the growing list of directors that have bowed out of Warner Bros. planned revival of Superman. And this isn't a bad thing. McG who has directed the two "Charlies Angels" movies and is an executive producer on the hit television show "The O.C." wasn't qualified to be handed the reigns anyway. Nor was Brett Ratner before him, or dare I say, Tim Burton.

In all fairness to the above mentioned directors though, I don't think anyone is a good fit for the project. I think that Superman's cinematic time has past, and Warner Bros. should just leave the franchise be. Unlike, let's say, Spider-Man, Superman doesn't have as much of a "known" history that can be mined for a feature-length film. And that pretty much leaves his origin story as the only viable option, especially considering that the character will be introduced to an audience that wasn't around for the movies of the late 70s and early 80s.

Perhaps that would make sense if the first movie wasn't any good. But we all know that with the exception of Superman reversing the Earth's orbit in an effort to go back in time, that the first movie is pretty great. It even holds up SFX wise. Superman looks like he is flying when he is supposed to be flying. What more could you ask for?

Lots more SFX I would guess.

I can see it now: a completely CGI Superman during the flying sequences or during any other time where he uses his powers, and the prospect of that isn't very appealing to me.

And I won't even go into a lot of detail here about what a great Superman/Clark Kent Christopher Reeve was and that in an update we would be "treated" to Ashton Kutcher's (or any one of several other "hot" no-talent actors) take on the character.

Let it die Warners. If anything, work with Richard Donner on his cut of "Superman 2" and re-release a mega version of the first two films as originally envisioned instead (a pipe dream I know, but hey, it's my pipe dream).