My problem with SUPERMAN RETURNS (which had good intentions) was that it might've made the mistake of trying to explore Superman's full pathos. You can do that with Batman because that's part of his gimmick and it's endlessly fascinating, what with his rogues gallery representing slices of his psychology. (Not to mention I didn't think RETURNS had an interesting story quite honestly.)

Superman...I think is much more a symbolic myth, which has attracted most filmmakers who've tackled him. Created by two Jewish cartoonists, his origin was heavily inspired by Moses, and well he was born in 1938 and well in historical context it adds even more fascinating value. (Worth checking out online is a cartoon Siegel/Shuster did for I think Life magazine where Superman swooped in and captured both Hitler and Mussolini and presented them to the League of Naions for trial. This not-so-subtle propaganda got Superman banned in Nazi Germany.)

I like to think that if Batman broods naturally, Superman seems to hold it on his sleeve. If Batman is a night creature who shys away from the public, Superman is all public and daylight, no mask. Superman can get away with fighting the ridiculous giant monsters/aliens while it never seems right Batman doing it. The same with those Superman mythos elements like Supergirl, Krypto the Super Dog, the bottled city of Kandor, all those different types of Kryptonite, etc. Ridiculous sure, but it fits a fairy tale figure like Superman like a glove.

I disagree with the contant complaint that Superman is "boring," it's just you have to present him a good, captivating, entertaining story and context. If you ask me, I really loved what Grant Morrison did with his All-Star Superman comics from recent years. Definately worth reading.

I even liked the cartoon from the 1990s that were made by the same people behind BATMAN: THE ANIMATED SERIES. They actually produced a Superman that was truely highly entertaining and exploited his mythos.