There has been a great deal of discussion recently about how Superman was represented in Zack Snyder's recent Man Of Steel reboot, particularly in a final third which saw most of Metropolis destroyed, presumably with considerable loss of life. The movie industry's tendency when it comes to creating a sequel to a successful movie which nevertheless drew the ire of the core fanbase is to pretend the events of the original never happened. In the case of Man Of Steel, it's a pretty solid bet that when the second entry comes around, Metropolis will be fully rebuilt and no-one will think twice about trusting a superhero who was at least partially responsible for its initial destruction.
The problem with this approach is that it ends up satisfying no-one, diminishing the integrity of the movie's universe by pretending an event of enormous consequence never occurred and leaving the first movie's problems as an open wound. You only need to look at the Bond series, which rebooted following the dreadful Die Another Day and discarded the promising idea of a new evil organisation for Bond to go up against after mixed reviews for Quantum Of Solace. Yet with careful writing, it's entirely possible to create a sequel which is not only a strong story in its own right, but resolves the original film's mistakes at the same time. What follows is my attempt to outline how this could be done for Man Of Steel.