Is singer messing with us?

[ohmshalone]

In a few days, we have had an old script and a possibly different cut shown to us. I doubt both these popular websites would want to embarrass themselves or intentially lie, so is singer handing out fakes to test or tease us?

[Excel]

no.

[Masut]

All sorts of weird crap is going on at the moment. I'm hella confused

[The Kid]

you took my words, Masut.

same here

[Masut]

Why did 2 threads about the UGO review get deleted? What do the Hype know that we don't?

[The Kid]

I think its a conspiracy. They even closed my "Safe haven for those who demand less" thread on misc comics films section because they don't want people demanding less I guess.

[Excel]

the reviews a fake.

[Masut]

I was going to start a thread politely asking why they were deleted but I'm afraid the mods will see it as an act of rebellion or some kind of attack and try and ban me.

[Desk]

the reviews a fake.
Where has that been established, other than on a site sympathetic to the production?

It looks plenty genuine to me, with oodles of information that hasn't been seen before such as details about the finale and purported dialogue.

How many other negative reviews will be branded fake? Will they all be suppressed for the next seven weeks until the film comes out? Don't people have a right to be warned if this thing's a turkey, and not waste their money? Isn't preventing people from being warned tantamount to participating in fraud?

[boywonder13]

Has it been confirmed as a Fake? By Who?

[GarudA]

Has it been confirmed as a Fake? By Who?

Thats what I would like to know as well and as to why they deleted the threads

[VGPOP]

I refuse to believe that bull.sh.it.

I cannot believe the lenght a person would go to boycott a movie. IT'S A FREAKING MOVIE!!!

[rene_artois]

In a few days, we have had an old script and a possibly different cut shown to us. I doubt both these popular websites would want to embarrass themselves or intentially lie, so is singer handing out fakes to test or tease us?

That's what I keep thinking. In the reviews that have been popping up, there has been no mention of the scenes at Metropolis General Hospital, even though stills of those scene were released months ago. There were also photos of people holding signs with messages like "Superman Don't Die" and "We Love Superman"

We also have a shot of Kryptonite dagger and the picture of the statue of Luthor standing over Superman's body.

Call me crazy but Superman being mortally wounded is not the kind of plot point that should be left out of a review.

[Mentok]

Why did 2 threads about the UGO review get deleted? What do the Hype know that we don't?

Bluetights confirmed its a fake review.

I believe it was made from quotes from Moriarty's script review.

[Desk]

Bluetights confirmed its a fake review.

I believe it was made from quotes from Moriarty's script review.
Quite frankly, I don't believe Bluetights...

First they try to discredit Moriarty's script review. Next we have an independent review of the film itself by a widely-recognised fan-site which corroborates what Mori said and adds loads of other details he didn't mention, and Bluetights tries to discredit that, too?

Shame on them.

Perhaps a class action lawsuit by disgruntled movie-goers who were misled into disregarding all the warnings might be appropriate?

[ohmshalone]

The ugo review did bring up one ebert-ish plot hole - what will be the point of a whole new continent if the world goes through so much destruction ? Will there even be a financial system still in place or does luthor just want to rule ?

[boywonder13]

Bluetights confirmed its a fake review.

I believe it was made from quotes from Moriarty's script review.

Where has bluetights confirmed it? Can u send me Moriarty's script review please via PM?

[millennium movies]

I dont believe it either (BT and SHH)

[Nivek]

If it's gone, it is probobly either fake, or a sourse on the West Coast is passing around the same script and WB is closing in on them. They dont mess around anymore, and UGO very well might be violating a diclosure agreement, or just be a patsy in a bust to find holes in the production.

One things for sure, WB isn't going to be handing out press or screening passes to some websites after this. Of course those sites will do the usual "they dont want us to see it so we cant tell you how bad it is", when it's more "You burned your bridges" type situation. This is all just very frustrating, sad, and seems like theres an agenda.

You figure all the lessons learned from AICN's advertising of "Negative" Hulk reviews a month before the movies release (and also letting people know in the process it's out there on the net to be downloaded), and unwillingness to publish these reviews and being called Hypocrites for it. Or the Abrams superman script mess.

I would think it's great if this script is an early draft that was leaked by warner Brothers Security and Legal, just to see where it would pop up. And all these "Spoiler Sites" get burned in their rush to publish early damning reviews.

[VGPOP]

I hope WB sue the hell out of this guy and shut down the website

[The Kid]

The ugo review did bring up one ebert-ish plot hole - what will be the point of a whole new continent if the world goes through so much destruction ? Will there even be a financial system still in place or does luthor just want to rule ?

maybe he'll make up a new system and have people do whatever he wants. Or maybe he'll be a slave owner, that sort of thing.

[Ita-KalEl]

Ugo review is a fake.
Moriarty has wrote only his opinion (of a non-fan) based on a so-called leaked script. I respect his opinion. If he thinks that the JJ Abrams script was great, it's not my problem. :)

[The Batman]

Why cant people simply accept the fact that this movie might not be what they're expecting?

[Masut]

I can accept that it might not be as good as we expect, but THIS bad? I mean what should we compare it to? Hulk? Fantastic Four? Daredevil? All these movies were at least somewhat enjoyable to the fans. If Superman Returns is indeed as bad as this 'review' says then I will be quite shocked.

[VGPOP]

Why cant people simply accept the fact that this movie might not be what they're expecting?

I'll believe when I see it with my own eyes. If it turns out to be fake. We should ALL write to this as***** and let him have it.

He will lose ALL credibility towards ALL future movies. And I think he will.

[Nivek]

Why cant people simply accept the fact that this movie might not be what they're expecting?

I've been exspecting the kid since last year when it was brought up. I thought it was a strange new element to add, but I dont think it's going to destroy the film by any means. I just want to see the film, and this possible kid in the context of the story, before I damn it.

[Masut]

Come to think of it, there is a lot I know happens in this movie that the trailer did not even show in the slightest. I think Singer may be be holding back to keep some things interesting for us.

[Desk]

Discussion in this forum is appearing increasingly pointless.

Even if this review had been written by Roger Ebert or appeared in Variety it seems half the people in this forum would be finding some way to dismiss it, claiming it was fake or misinformation released by Singer and the studio.

Some people won't believe it till they see it with their own eyes... and many not even then. :)

[Nivek]

I can accept that it might not be as good as we expect, but THIS bad? I mean what should we compare it to? Hulk? Fantastic Four? Daredevil? All these movies were at least somewhat enjoyable to the fans. If Superman Returns is indeed as bad as this 'review' says then I will be quite shocked.


As a Hulk fan, when all that crap went down with the Work-cut Leak, I was more furious that Drew/Moriarty only mentioned "Negative" reviews were coming in. Then everyone (or at least the fanboys exspecting it to be bad) assumed it was indeed bad, and the stain never went away.

I actually was very negative toward ang Lee's take on Hulk, and after seeing it, really appreciated alot of Hulk elements he brought to the film. It isn't as bad, as a Hulk fan, as people made it out to be.

[ohmshalone]

Why cant people simply accept the fact that this movie might not be what they're expecting?
its not that, seriously. The problem is that these "reviews" seem so suspicious. One earthquake after a whole new continent ? SPOILER!!! - what about the wet finale ?

[millennium movies]

^ Thats pure fanboy behavior. I mean WTF? What do you people get out of giving it to him? Personal gratification as a fanboy, is that it? Let the guy have his opinion. From what i read in it he brings some very smart comments about it (NK system and credit card comment) and seems to know his material. I mean how many more websites do need to put up a bad review until people actualy start accepting this movie will not be the best thing to ever come?

[boywonder13]

I can accept that it might not be as good as we expect, but THIS bad? I mean what should we compare it to? Hulk? Fantastic Four? Daredevil? All these movies were at least somewhat enjoyable to the fans. If Superman Returns is indeed as bad as this 'review' says then I will be quite shocked.

That;s true, there is no way this movie could be that "bad"!!!:supes: :up:

[Nivek]

Discussion in this forum is appearing increasingly pointless.

Even if this review had been written by Roger Ebert or appeared in Variety it seems half the people in this forum would be finding some way to dismiss it, claiming it was fake or misinformation released by Singer and the studio.

Some people won't believe it till they see it with their own eyes... and many not even then. :)

Unless someone seen a finished cut of the film, I am not believing jack. Scripts are always in a state of change in production. The writers were on set for that very reason.

[Masut]

As a Hulk fan, when all that crap went down with the Work-cut Leak, I was more furious that Drew/Moriarty only mentioned "Negative" reviews were coming in. Then everyone (or at least the fanboys exspecting it to be bad) assumed it was indeed bad, and the stain never went away.

I actually was very negative toward ang Lee's take on Hulk, and after seeing it, really appreciated alot of Hulk elements he brought to the film. It isn't as bad, as a Hulk fan, as people made it out to be.

Please don't think I'm saying the movies I mentioned are bad. They are just ones off the top of my head that I've seen others speak badly of.

[Ita-KalEl]

Why cant people simply accept the fact that this movie might not be what they're expecting?

LOL, who?
Oldguy&company?

:D

Or Moriarty? Because he likes the Ratner version of the movie. I remember very well this board after the AICN review of JJ Abrams script.
Or people are totally insane and hate everything, or there is something wrong.

[The Kid]

no it's ok to say fantastic four and daredevil are bad. I'd agree with yu on that.

[millennium movies]

Unless someone seen a finished cut of the film...

Well thats what happened with the UGO review...

[Ita-KalEl]

Well thats what happened with the UGO review...

LOL!

[millennium movies]

LOL indeed, i just re-read his comment. My mistake!

[Nivek]

Well thats what happened with the UGO review...


Ever think that they know it's a fake because there isn't a cut thats been seen outside of studio heads, production staff, or the MPAA screeners?

[millennium movies]

Oh an unfinished viewing is possible at this point.

[Mentok]

Quite frankly, I don't believe Bluetights...

Thats fine.

First they try to discredit Moriarty's script review.

No they didnt, they said that its not the final script (which it turns out is correct) and that its not what is in the final filmed script.

Next we have an independent review of the film itself by a widely-recognised fan-site which corroborates what Mori said and adds loads of other details he didn't mention, and Bluetights tries to discredit that, too?


'The review' of a rough cut of the film was not even a review. I have never ever seen a review like that. Its a collection of thoughts, Thoughts that seem to come from the quotes from Moris script review.

Its a huge red flag that the 'review' was so negative and it came out after Moris script review.

The new 'review' does not give any more details other than what Mori has already posted over on the forums.

Frther proof that its a fake review? The failure to review key scenes that we know are in the film. These scenes are far too big to have been left out of a rough draft of the film.


Perhaps a class action lawsuit by disgruntled movie-goers who were misled into disregarding all the warnings might be appropriate?

Dont overact or anything. I am glad that two internet reviews of a film that is not yet finished are good enough for you to pay attention to.

Personally I need someone a hell of alot more stable and someone who knows exactly what it is they are reviewing.

[Mentok]

Discussion in this forum is appearing increasingly pointless.

Even if this review had been written by Roger Ebert or appeared in Variety it seems half the people in this forum would be finding some way to dismiss it, claiming it was fake or misinformation released by Singer and the studio.

Some people won't believe it till they see it with their own eyes... and many not even then. :)

No, we would believe a credible source, no matter what they said about it.

The point is, this latest 'review' is not.

[Super Adw]

Justin from bluetights also wrote....

"the "review" mentions things that were never even filmed."

[Mentok]

^^ exactly, things that were in the early draft that Moriarty reviewed.

[ohmshalone]

Thats fine.



No they didnt, they said that its not the final script (which it turns out is correct) and that its not what is in the final filmed script.




'The review' of a rough cut of the film was not even a review. I have never ever seen a review like that. Its a collection of thoughts, Thoughts that seem to come from the quotes from Moris script review.

Its a huge red flag that the 'review' was so negative and it came out after Moris script review.

The new 'review' does not give any more details other than what Mori has already posted over on the forums.

Frther proof that its a fake review? The failure to review key scenes that we know are in the film. These scenes are far too big to have been left out of a rough draft of the film.




Dont overact or anything. I am glad that two internet reviews of a film that is not yet finished are good enough for you to pay attention to.

Personally I need someone a hell of alot more stable and someone who knows exactly what it is they are reviewing.
not to mention someone who's seen the final cut

[VGPOP]

Why is there so much hatred towards this character?

Again I say, I cannot believe the lenght a person would go to boycott a movie.

It's not like we're electing a new president.

IT'S A MOVIE!!!

[Mentok]

not to mention someone who's seen the final cut

Well, yeah. That too :p

[Desk]

Why is there so much hatred towards this character?There's not a hatred for this character - there's a deep, abiding love, which is why people are so heated over the approach being taken with Singer's film.

[Desk]

Well, yeah. That too :p
Suuure, because from what the UGO.com reviewer said it really sounded like he was going to be turned completely around by a few edits and some completed effects.

Yeah, he was really sitting on the fence. :)

[Showtime]

Personally, I never listen to "so-called reviewers" when going to see a movie. How can any one reviewer judge if I am going to like a certain movie or not.

It doesn't matter if they bring Siskel from the dead to tell me if a movie is good or bad, I could care less what they are saying. I want to create my own opinion with my own two eyes and my semi-functioning brain.

You think that reviewers and people who run these websites don't have agendas? You must be freakin kidding yourselves.

If people are saying that Moriarty or UGO has an agenda then doesn't this mean Bluetights does as well? Both parties have agendas for very different reasons. This is the same for peoples opinions on these boards, we are all clouded with our own agendas whether we refuse to believe it or not.

I have spent enough time worrying about what Moriarty or UGO is saying about this film when they haven't even seen a final cut. Who cares what they say? We don't know what draft Moriarty read and we don't even know where UGO got their information. When all the smoke clears we will know if there is a piano wielding half-blood Kryptonian kid and Bluetights is just playing Super-Shield or if Moriarty threw his itegrity down the drain bringing UGO along for the ride over an early draft of the script.

[Kane]

So the UGO review was a fake?

[VGPOP]

So the UGO review was a fake?

Well, you can notice that in his first paragraph.

He claims he's seen the movie already.

I thought they were still working on it.

[VGPOP]

Interesting enough that this so call "review" was publish AFTER theatrical trailer

[Kane]

I think its done. But I trust Bluetights.net if they confirm its fake, they havent given me a reason to doubt their credibility in the past.

[Morg]

I think its a conspiracy. They even closed my "Safe haven for those who demand less" thread on misc comics films section because they don't want people demanding less I guess.


tell the truth sonny, I closed it because you had a attitude in there

[Kane]

Ya Wesyeed, you need to chill out seriously.

[wobbly]

This far out I wouldn't take too much of these early reviews to heart, especially one's whose legitamacy may be in doubt.

Moriarty's comments though do give me cause for concern, mainly as his complaints do mirror my own dislikes of what I've read here about the story, but even so I can reserve my judgement until I see the thing. If I find I agree with any bad reviews seen beforehand at least I was forewarned. If I love the thing then it's a pleasant surprise.

[The Kid]

tell the truth sonny, I closed it because you had a attitude in there

:down I disagree. I meant four stars for you all, nothing wrong wth four stars ****. I love to **** you all. I think it was misinterpreted. I don't know why you closed it unless it was because you thought I was cursing the people who want good films made, morg...:confused:


I thought it would be a good topic.
as for this one...
Singer can be trusted with superman but even if it's not too hot, I'll love it.

[The Kid]

Ya Wesyeed, you need to chill out seriously.

I'm chilled. Do you have some problem with me?:confused:

[Kane]

Ya. You dont act chilled. In some posts you were spazzing out as much as Muscles4supes. Its kinda annoying.


Just relax.

[Morg]

:down I disagree. I meant four stars for you all, nothing wrong wth four stars ****. I love to **** you all. I think it was misinterpreted. I don't know why you closed it unless it was because you thought I was cursing the people who want good films made, morg...:confused:


I thought it would be a good topic.
as for this one...
Singer can be trusted with superman but even if it's not too hot, I'll love it.


Still fibbing

No one?

**** you all then.

That what you posted after no one joined in.

[The Kid]

Do I ask what spazzing out is or not... and hey, who's muscles4supes?

I don't remember any posts I spazzed out in. wanna point those out to me?

[boywonder13]

Well, you can notice that in his first paragraph.

He claims he's seen the movie already.

I thought they were still working on it.

Im not syaing this guy saw it but, early screenings happen all the time months before the movie even thoigh effects and other things arent done yet....:supes:

[Masut]

Solve this with PM's please lol

[Morg]

Look him up, he's usally pop up here in supes/smallville and community forum

[The Kid]

Still fibbing



That what you posted after no one joined in.

ok, I'll admit it. I was a little dissapointed that no one wants bad movies, but you all have to admit that high expectations kill these movies for you. Just lower them completely and everything will be fine.

Are we cool, morg. I just wanted people to demand less... you know... to end all this whining... to help make everybody happy...:O:up: I wont give anybody four stars again.

[ervann]

Why is there so much hatred towards this character?

Again I say, I cannot believe the lenght a person would go to boycott a movie.

It's not like we're electing a new president.

IT'S A MOVIE!!!

Most people will not believe the kind of fandom and discussion that goes on here over A MOVIE

[Eteric]

Most people will not believe the kind of fandom and discussion that goes on here over A MOVIE

To true. I showed a friend of mine this place a bit after the first pic of Brandon as Superman showed up.

He couldn't believe it. Haha.

[Mentok]

Suuure, because from what the UGO.com reviewer said it really sounded like he was going to be turned completely around by a few edits and some completed effects.

Yeah, he was really sitting on the fence. :)


You just made a good point.

He was highly biased, not only towards the film, but Singer as well.

Any real reviewer would would know that heavily biased reviews destroy any credability.

[Mentok]

Most people will not believe the kind of fandom and discussion that goes on here over A MOVIE

If it get me away from work a few times during the day I am happy.

[Mentok]

Im not syaing this guy saw it but, early screenings happen all the time months before the movie even thoigh effects and other things arent done yet....:supes:

Yeah, they do all the time. A few things to remember though...

The crew and WB have worked very hard to keep this whole film under wraps. Doing public test screenings now would result in alot of internet chatter, not just a single review.

I also believe Singer has final cut with this film. So its pointless for WB to public test screenings. If anything test screenings would be limites to WB department heads and other important people.

In the end, its just not credible. Too much points to it being a fake made up from Moriarty's screipt review.

So I will wait for real reviews of the finished film.

[ervann]

If it get me away from work a few times during the day I am happy.

To be honest I've been trying to stay away from the boards and not post or even read anymore, because I so want to enjoy the movie and be surprised and entertained. If it sucks, then ok. But if it's bad it'll definitely suck a lot more after all these build-up, negativity, conspiracy theories etc.

I remembered how much I enjoyed Batman Begins, having barely been to the boards to discuss and read about it.

[Cinemaman]

Mori said Abrams script was better than it, so i dont believe him, why?

Because Abrams script was horrible!

[Desk]

You just made a good point.

He was highly biased, not only towards the film, but Singer as well.

Any real reviewer would would know that heavily biased reviews destroy any credability.
Let me get this straight..... you're saying that anyone who watches a film and doesn't like it is biased against it?

Guess what - despite all your better efforts you're absolutely correct!! It's what's called forming a subjective opinion.

[Desk]

Mori said Abrams script was better than it, so i dont believe him, why?

Because Abrams script was horrible!
What prevents Singer's script from being even more horrible?

[sf2]

In a few days, we have had an old script and a possibly different cut shown to us. I doubt both these popular websites would want to embarrass themselves or intentially lie, so is singer handing out fakes to test or tease us?
are we his buddy??? messing with us??? fool!

[ultimatefan]

Leaking of fake scripts or unrevised early drafts is a common studio practice. It wouldn´t be the first time with Singer, either. Fans were tricked into thinking it was Wolverine that Magneto wanted to catch in the train in the first X-Men, than people went to the theaters and found out it was Rogue. And it wasn´t a plot point that you could erase in just one scene either.

[Showtime]

What prevents Singer's script from being even more horrible?

Singer's story, he doesn't get credit for the script, if you want to get technical.

[Desk]

Singer's story, he doesn't get credit for the script, if you want to get technical.
"Singer's script," as in the script director Bryan Singer is using.

[The Game]

Mori said Abrams script was better than it, so i dont believe him, why?

Because Abrams script was horrible!

That script can still be saved, take out the stupidity such as the suit-in-a-can and the Lex alien thing and we could have a solid movie.

[Showtime]

"Singer's script," as in the script director Bryan Singer is using.

The one written by Harris and Dougherty which was more than "influenced" by Singer. I am with you. :up:

[Desk]

That script can still be saved, take out the stupidity such as the suit-in-a-can and the Lex alien thing and we could have a solid movie.They would still have had to blow up Krypton, but they could have easily reworked the villains into aliens from a rival sister planet with similar powers to Supes'.

[Octoberist]

I can accept that it might not be as good as we expect, but THIS bad? I mean what should we compare it to? Hulk? Fantastic Four? Daredevil? All these movies were at least somewhat enjoyable to the fans. If Superman Returns is indeed as bad as this 'review' says then I will be quite shocked.

The review on UGO as if this is the next Batman & Robin. If it doesn't live up to expectations, I think don't think it'll go down that route.

[boywonder13]

THere is no way Superman Returns could end up as Batman and Robin...

Thats Impossible!

[The Kid]

Even if it did, I'd love it because I love batman and robin. Some minds know good art and others don't, I guess.

[boywonder13]

I dont hate Batman and Robin. I like it to some degree also, i was just talking about how the public responded to it!

:)

[Octoberist]

I can see how some people would enjoy batman and robin as a novality: It's so bad that it's funny. At the sametime, it did ruin the franchise..

[Oldguy]

Where has that been established, other than on a site sympathetic to the production?

It looks plenty genuine to me, with oodles of information that hasn't been seen before such as details about the finale and purported dialogue.

How many other negative reviews will be branded fake? Will they all be suppressed for the next seven weeks until the film comes out? Don't people have a right to be warned if this thing's a turkey, and not waste their money? Isn't preventing people from being warned tantamount to participating in fraud?

The last post that saw the light of day on the UGO thread was me quoting BT's "dismissal" of the UGO review, and asking him point blank if he's on the SR payroll. Ask Don Corleone, we were mid conversation in the thread when it got deleted.

You hit the nail on the head, Desk. All of these test screening reviews will be deleted and surpressed to preserve the opening weekend. Now I'm just a friendly neighbor to the north, but I can't for the life of me, see american evangelical red staters being happy with this interpretation of the man of steel.

[Showtime]

The last post that saw the light of day on the UGO thread was me quoting BT's "dismissal" of the UGO review, and asking him point blank if he's on the SR payroll. Ask Don Corleone, we were mid conversation in the thread when it got deleted.


Really? That is more than interesting.

[Matt]

SMOKE AND MIRROS! TOM WELLING IS STILL SUPERMAN!...comeon...grow up. Warner Bros would not risk the well being of a 180 million plus dollar project to "mess" with fans.

[Michael Corleone]

The last post that saw the light of day on the UGO thread was me quoting BT's "dismissal" of the UGO review, and asking him point blank if he's on the SR payroll. Ask Don Corleone, we were mid conversation in the thread when it got deleted.

You hit the nail on the head, Desk. All of these test screening reviews will be deleted and surpressed to preserve the opening weekend. Now I'm just a friendly neighbor to the north, but I can't for the life of me, see american evangelical red staters being happy with this interpretation of the man of steel.

Yep..I hate to say it but it was a nice little conversation untill Oldguy mentioned BT being on the SR payroll and trying to conduct damage control.... then the thread went POOF! I'm not much for speculation but it doesnt look good for their reputation when stuff like that happens.

[Cinemaman]

So Dougherty confirmed that UGO's review was fake and Moriarty read only very old script draft.

So fnal script have no scenes, which were written in Moriarty's review.

And we will get 6 action sequences.

Awesome day!

[Kane]

lol @ Desk and Oldguy believing this is all some kind of conspiricy.

They probably wont even believe the writers :rolleyes:

[dark_b]

so is cinememan right? is this what happened?

[Showtime]

Yep..I hate to say it but it was a nice little conversation untill Oldguy mentioned BT being on the SR payroll and trying to conduct damage control.... then the thread went POOF! I'm not much for speculation but it doesnt look good for their reputation when stuff like that happens.

As I said before we don't know who is blowing smoke and who isn't. Everyone has their own agenda. It doesn't look good at all that the thread closed in such a manner and that all the threads on such subjects are disappearing like wild fire on these boards.

I emailed Mike Dougherty and he said it was an January 2005 draft and that the UGO review was based on this draft and there was no "rough cut" of the movie. Believe what you will.

Superman Returns June 30th

"Who will you stand with?"

[Michael Corleone]

lol @ Desk and Oldguy believing this is all some kind of conspiricy.

They probably wont even believe the writers :rolleyes:


You dont have to believe it's soome kind of conspiraicy. It's about the fact that whenever something negative about the film comes up it gets deleted. I'm as positive as the next guy but if someone wants to dislike the film they have every right to do so on here. The UGO thread last night can be accepted. It was debunked by reputable people and its gone. But now Moriarty's thread is gone? You have to take the bad with the good. Can't be any other way.

[Cinemaman]

so is cinememan right? is this what happened?

Yes, I am right. He answered me, I can give you his letter, if you don't believe me.

[Michael Corleone]

As I said before we don't know who is blowing smoke and who isn't. Everyone has their own agenda. It doesn't look good at all that the thread closed in such a manner and that all the threads on such subjects are disappearing like wild fire on these boards.

I emailed Mike Dougherty and he said it was an January 2005 draft and that the UGO review was based on this draft and there was no "rough cut" of the movie. Believe what you will.

Superman Returns June 30th

"Who will you stand with?"

I mean at this point I have to go with what they say. But if this sort of damage control continues? Well my opinion may change. I'm not going to lean either way but I will be skeptical. Honestly if they are just trying to control the information well then after we see the film we will know the truth one way or another. That means all of the reputations will be on the line. I'll make my final choice when I see the film. Untill then....people are being shady.

[Oldguy]

As I said before we don't know who is blowing smoke and who isn't. Everyone has their own agenda. It doesn't look good at all that the thread closed in such a manner and that all the threads on such subjects are disappearing like wild fire on these boards.

I emailed Mike Dougherty and he said it was an January 2005 draft and that the UGO review was based on this draft and there was no "rough cut" of the movie. Believe what you will.

Superman Returns June 30th

"Who will you stand with?"

No rough cut? That's horse****. The editor has to work from something, something has to be put together for studio approval. Test screenings are standard operating procedure for a super-hero franchise movie.

Negative reviews are being deleted faster than a speeding bullet to preserve the almighty opening weekend, because we're not going to have to wait another year for Hulk 2.

Sorry Showtimes, the bile isn't meant to be directed at you. Apologies if it seems that way.

[Showtime]

I mean at this point I have to go with what they say. But if this sort of damage control continues? Well my opinion may change. I'm not going to lean either way but I will be skeptical. Honestly if they are just trying to control the information well then after we see the film we will know the truth one way or another. That means all of the reputations will be on the line. I'll make my final choice when I see the film. Untill then....people are being shady.

It's a very tough call. There is agendas involved on both sides of the fence. Do you question the timing of Moriarty's and UGO's "reviews"? Or are they right on time with reviews per any other movie? Is Bluetights and WB trying to protect a fallout of their product or are they merely telling us the truth because they are in the know?

[Kane]

Whats the point of leaving threads about innacurate reviews up. It will just spread confusion and make them seem official...despite them being debunked by the actual writers.

[Showtime]

No rough cut? That's horse****. The editor has to work from something, something has to be put together for studio approval. Test screenings are standard operating procedure for a super-hero franchise movie.

Negative reviews are being deleted faster than a speeding bullet to preserve the almighty opening weekend, because we're not going to have to wait another year for Hulk 2.

Sorry Showtimes, the bile isn't meant to be directed at you. Apologies if it seems that way.

Something strange is going on and it's happening from all directions. Why are a large amount of threads getting deleted from the Hype without explanation, never mind Bluetights.

We're always cool man. I don't take it personally. I know you are passionate about your views and about the character of Superman.

Just passing along information. Thanks for not shooting the messenger. :up:

[TheVileOne]

Ugo review is a fake.
Moriarty has wrote only his opinion (of a non-fan) based on a so-called leaked script. I respect his opinion. If he thinks that the JJ Abrams script was great, it's not my problem. :)

Was Moriarty NOT the one that trashed the Abrams script?

Because he did. He trashed it a lot. It was a big deal.

[wobbly]

Whats the point of leaving threads about innacurate reviews up. It will just spread confusion and make them seem official...despite them being debunked by the actual writers.

True, but I hope the mods at least give an explanation for the deletions (a sticky thread would do the trick). As it is though Oldguy, Desk & Micheal Corleone have every right to voice their suspicions.

[Cinemaman]

But they also said BB will be bad movie, but it became the BEST Batman movie.

So I think SR will be also great. Moriarty read very old draft, Dougherty confirmed it in his e-mail letter to me.

[Hunter Rider]

It's all getting confizzling:confused:

[Bad Superman]

Whoa. . . a few threads have been deleted.

[Oldguy]

It's all getting confizzling:confused:

Bottem line, bad reviews are coming forth, and damage control is on high alert to preserve opening weekend. If SR isn't guilty of being a bad movie, then it shouldn't be afraid of some bad reviews.

Yet SR employees assure us that all bad reviews are unfounded, without offering any proof to substantiate their claims other than, they said so,(please pay no attention to the conflict of interest behind the curtain.)
Dougherty, would even have us believe there is no rough draft of this movie, appearantly everyone at WB has so much faith in Ottoman to edit it right, they don't need a rough draft. They're even forgoing the test screenings that summer blockbusters are famous for.:rolleyes:

Internet Buzz isn't as insignificant as we were lead to believe after all.

[Matt]

Bottem line, bad reviews are coming forth, and damage control is on high alert to preserve opening weekend. If SR isn't guilty of being a bad movie, then it shouldn't be afraid of some bad reviews.

Yet SR employees assure us that all bad reviews are unfounded, without offering any proof to substantiate their claims other than, they said so,(please pay no attention to the conflict of interest behind the curtain.)
Dougherty, would even have us believe there is no rough draft of this movie, appearantly everyone at WB has so much faith in Ottoman to edit it right, they don't need a rough draft. They're even forgoing the test screenings that summer blockbusters are famous for.:rolleyes:

Internet Buzz isn't as insignificant as we were lead to believe after all.

...sigh :(

[Fatboy Roberts]

double post, sorry.

[Hunter Rider]

Bottem line, bad reviews are coming forth, and damage control is on high alert to preserve opening weekend. If SR isn't guilty of being a bad movie, then it shouldn't be afraid of some bad reviews.

Yet SR employees assure us that all bad reviews are unfounded, without offering any proof to substantiate their claims other than, they said so,(please pay no attention to the conflict of interest behind the curtain.)
Dougherty, would even have us believe there is no rough draft of this movie, appearantly everyone at WB has so much faith in Ottoman to edit it right, they don't need a rough draft. They're even forgoing the test screenings that summer blockbusters are famous for.:rolleyes:

Internet Buzz isn't as insignificant as we were lead to believe after all.

It certainly seems that anything negative coming forth post-trailer is being heavily silenced without an explanation

[Cinemaman]

Bottem line, bad reviews are coming forth, and damage control is on high alert to preserve opening weekend. If SR isn't guilty of being a bad movie, then it shouldn't be afraid of some bad reviews.

Yet SR employees assure us that all bad reviews are unfounded, without offering any proof to substantiate their claims other than, they said so,(please pay no attention to the conflict of interest behind the curtain.)
Dougherty, would even have us believe there is no rough draft of this movie, appearantly everyone at WB has so much faith in Ottoman to edit it right, they don't need a rough draft. They're even forgoing the test screenings that summer blockbusters are famous for.:rolleyes:

Internet Buzz isn't as insignificant as we were lead to believe after all.

Look, I cant see SR having only 2 action sequences. Because there are: ocean sequencse, a bank robbery, New Krypton and train sequence.

So I don't think Moriarty read final script and UGO have already seen this movie.

[TimDrakeRobin45]

The review and all topics were pulled because it was BULL****

Bottom Line! The review was fake. There is a rough cut, however there were things mentioned in that review that were NEVER filmed for this movie, but were in a second draft script of the movie. That script is FAR from the shooting script. Execs at WB got a copy of the old script in the mail a few weeks ago and now this Bull**** review pops up.

I am not saying this will be the best movie of the year, but there have been no screenings of the rough cut, save for Singer, the writers, the actors and a few of the execs, so unless one of them wants to see this movie bomb, dont believe what you read.

Save opinions for when you see the movie yourself. Don't let some biased Hate Monger who doesnt even give sources ruin a movie for you.

[Matt]

All I know is BT has pretty much lost all credibility.

[Super Adw]

Dougherty, would even have us believe there is no rough draft of this movie, appearantly everyone at WB has so much faith in Ottoman to edit it right, they don't need a rough draft. They're even forgoing the test screenings that summer blockbusters are famous for.:rolleyes:

Internet Buzz isn't as insignificant as we were lead to believe after all.

Well so far UGO is the only one that posted a rough cut review,where are all the other people who have seen this rough cut? This kinda stuff usually hits sites quickly.I'm not saying their isnt a rough cut,but its odd that UGO is the only site that posted a review about one and it turns out to be fake.

[Fatboy Roberts]

(peeks in)

This is the "Plausible Deniability" Thread, right? Is that correct?

Let the handwringing continue, just wanted to make sure what was going on.

Now, here's MY question: If mentioning a tie between Legendary Films/Warner Bros and BlueTights is delete worthy, then WHY? It's pretty damned obvious. Instead of trying to cover up the link between the two (I know Wingnut/New Line didn't with Kong is King or The OneRing.net) why not use that to your advantage when making your arguments? You can then speak from a position of authority because you've been co-opted by the majors, right? Isn't that the smart move as opposed to deleting threads and mentions that simply shine a light on the obvious?

Really no reason to it. counterproductive, actually. Hell, if I'm on the production team, watching the fanboys stumble around aimlessly bumping into each other confused and questioning is great stuff. It's mystery. It's countermanding the spoiler brigade's raw need to know, and ensuring that they REALLY don't know what's gonna happen when they get in there.

And they're going in there. It's not a question--these reviews aren't REALLY turning anyone off buying a ticket, and even if it were, the percentage of people NOT going is so small, in a subset (internet fanboys) that is so small as to not even make a sizable dent in the box office

Right?

So why the cloak and dagger rigmarole concerning these thread deletions? Let the obfuscation run rampant, kids. It's doing you a favor, even if the questions center around possible negatives. You're going to get those anyway, look where you are: THE INTERNET.

But this is handling it in completely the wrong way. Daugherty weighed in. Igle weighed in. Harry weighed in. Meanwhile, you've got Drew's script review and the very shady UGO.com review that seems based on Drew's review. Hell, let the chips fall where they may. You're trying to put out a fire that's not gonna start, at least not this close to release. And in the effort, you're going to end up drawing MORE ATTENTION TO YOURSELVES. Which is the exact opposite of what you want, right?

[ohmshalone]

are we his buddy??? messing with us??? fool!
(sigh) I could get annoyed with something like this and say "fool" back, but I'll show I've matured somewhat on the boards, grit my teeth and say "yes, like how he messed with the x-men fans on several occasions "

[Michael Corleone]

(peeks in)

This is the "Plausible Deniability" Thread, right? Is that correct?

Let the handwringing continue, just wanted to make sure what was going on.

Now, here's MY question: If mentioning a tie between Legendary Films/Warner Bros and BlueTights is delete worthy, then WHY? It's pretty damned obvious. Instead of trying to cover up the link between the two (I know Wingnut/New Line didn't with Kong is King or The OneRing.net) why not use that to your advantage when making your arguments? You can then speak from a position of authority because you've been co-opted by the majors, right? Isn't that the smart move as opposed to deleting threads and mentions that simply shine a light on the obvious?

Really no reason to it. counterproductive, actually. Hell, if I'm on the production team, watching the fanboys stumble around aimlessly bumping into each other confused and questioning is great stuff. It's mystery. It's countermanding the spoiler brigade's raw need to know, and ensuring that they REALLY don't know what's gonna happen when they get in there.

And they're going in there. It's not a question--these reviews aren't REALLY turning anyone off buying a ticket, and even if it were, the percentage of people NOT going is so small, in a subset (internet fanboys) that is so small as to not even make a sizable dent in the box office

Right?

So why the cloak and dagger rigmarole concerning these thread deletions? Let the obfuscation run rampant, kids. It's doing you a favor, even if the questions center around possible negatives. You're going to get those anyway, look where you are: THE INTERNET.

But this is handling it in completely the wrong way. Daugherty weighed in. Igle weighed in. Harry weighed in. Meanwhile, you've got Drew's script review and the very shady UGO.com review that seems based on Drew's review. Hell, let the chips fall where they may. You're trying to put out a fire that's not gonna start, at least not this close to release. And in the effort, you're going to end up drawing MORE ATTENTION TO YOURSELVES. Which is the exact opposite of what you want, right?


I think you're on to something. :) :up:

[Oldguy]

(peeks in)

This is the "Plausible Deniability" Thread, right? Is that correct?

Let the handwringing continue, just wanted to make sure what was going on.

Now, here's MY question: If mentioning a tie between Legendary Films/Warner Bros and BlueTights is delete worthy, then WHY? It's pretty damned obvious. Instead of trying to cover up the link between the two (I know Wingnut/New Line didn't with Kong is King or The OneRing.net) why not use that to your advantage when making your arguments? You can then speak from a position of authority because you've been co-opted by the majors, right? Isn't that the smart move as opposed to deleting threads and mentions that simply shine a light on the obvious?

Really no reason to it. counterproductive, actually. Hell, if I'm on the production team, watching the fanboys stumble around aimlessly bumping into each other confused and questioning is great stuff. It's mystery. It's countermanding the spoiler brigade's raw need to know, and ensuring that they REALLY don't know what's gonna happen when they get in there.

And they're going in there. It's not a question--these reviews aren't REALLY turning anyone off buying a ticket, and even if it were, the percentage of people NOT going is so small, in a subset (internet fanboys) that is so small as to not even make a sizable dent in the box office

Right?

So why the cloak and dagger rigmarole concerning these thread deletions? Let the obfuscation run rampant, kids. It's doing you a favor, even if the questions center around possible negatives. You're going to get those anyway, look where you are: THE INTERNET.

But this is handling it in completely the wrong way. Daugherty weighed in. Igle weighed in. Harry weighed in. Meanwhile, you've got Drew's script review and the very shady UGO.com review that seems based on Drew's review. Hell, let the chips fall where they may. You're trying to put out a fire that's not gonna start, at least not this close to release. And in the effort, you're going to end up drawing MORE ATTENTION TO YOURSELVES. Which is the exact opposite of what you want, right?

:up:

A lot of people are going to a hell of an extent to silence unfounded internet rumours that indeed, have little or no effect on the B.O. big picture, as you pointed out.

Hell, after reading the reviews, I'm even more stoked to see SR, to get a chance to finally see what's what.

[ultimatefan]

Well, this is the reply that Dougherty gave to my e-mail. He emphasized again that it was an old draft and a lot changed. He addressed my biggest concern, that Supes would come off angsty and mopey in the movie:

It was a very very VERY early draft of the script, filled with a lot
> of ideas that were abandoned ages ago.
>Superman is not angsty or mopey. We tried to show an emotional side
>of him that no one has seen
>before, but he is not mopey.

Now I ask, why would the guy respond to my e-mail to BS me? He didn´t have to answer, I would guess he´s too busy, he could send me a standard response e-mail saying he couldn´t answer due to busy working schedule or something. He knows I´m gonna be pissed if he´s lying, He knows the Internet geeks he responded to will not leave him alone. Someone will tell the press that filmmakers are responding fan e-mails with total BS, the movie press would LOVE that...

[TimDrakeRobin45]

No rough cut? That's horse****. The editor has to work from something, something has to be put together for studio approval. Test screenings are standard operating procedure for a super-hero franchise movie.

When Mike says "theres No rough cut" he means no rough cut available to anyone outside of the studio. It has not been screened and no one has seen it aside from Bryan, the writers the actors and a few execcs. Not to mention the editor. He is not stating that there is No rough cut at all and the movie will magically appear.

[Hunter Rider]

In the reply i got He told me that the Lex we see in the FOS has more screentime than the ranting one later but there is a balance between the two

[ultimatefan]

:up:

A lot of people are going to a hell of an extent to silence unfounded internet rumours that indeed, have little or no effect on the B.O. big picture, as you pointed out.

Hell, after reading the reviews, I'm even more stoked to see SR, to get a chance to finally see what's what.
shutting down fake or unfounded reviews and related Internet threads is common practice, it happened to a fake review of X3 as well, there´s no "major conspiracy" behind this.

[Cinemaman]

Well, this is the reply that Dougherty gave to my e-mail. He emphasized again that it was an old draft and a lot changed. He addressed my biggest concern, that Supes would come off angsty and mopey in the movie:

It was a very very VERY early draft of the script, filled with a lot
> of ideas that were abandoned ages ago.
>Superman is not angsty or mopey. We tried to show an emotional side
>of him that no one has seen
>before, but he is not mopey.

Now I ask, why would the guy respond to my e-mail to BS me? He didn´t have to answer, I would guess he´s too busy, he could send me a standard response e-mail saying he couldn´t answer due to busy working schedule or something. He knows I´m gonna be pissed if he´s lying, He knows the Internet geeks he responded to will not leave him alone. Someone will tell the press that filmmakers are responding fan e-mails with total BS, the movie press would LOVE that...

What is mopey???

[Mr. Thing]

In the reply i got He told me that the Lex we see in the FOS has more screentime than the ranting one later but there is a balance between the two

What's his email adress?

[Cinemaman]

In the reply i got He told me that the Lex we see in the FOS has more screentime than the ranting one later but there is a balance between the two

WOW! So we will get more screentime of Lex in the FOS? Cool.

[ultimatefan]

What is mopey???
Sad, depressed, downbeat.

[Showtime]

I was impressed the he has been emailing us back to answer our questions and concerns.

[Cinemaman]

Sad, depressed, downbeat.

I hope we will not get Clark to be so. Dougherty, I hope you telling us truth!

[TimDrakeRobin45]

If people want to think there is a conspiracy going on then they will think that, but that is simply stupid. Damage control like this happens with any Major movie with a large budget. WB has spent a lot of money on this project and they know that the real fans are on the net reading this so they want to make sure that fake or fradulent reviews are put to rest fast in order to keep the fans interested.

wait for the International trailer on the 14th and you will see that both the script review and the supposed "roigh cut" review are wrong

[ohmshalone]

Whats the point of leaving threads about innacurate reviews up. It will just spread confusion and make them seem official...despite them being debunked by the actual writers.
this is the only argument that makes sense to me. I dont understand your post, fatboy roberts - are you saying that us arguing is all part of the plan?

[Hunter Rider]

I was impressed the he has been emailing us back to answer our questions and concerns.

I was also,i mean the truth his he basically could have just ignored them

What's his email adress?

Michaeldougherty.com-go here and his contract adress is in the top right hand corner:up:

[Mr. Thing]

Michaeldougherty.com-go here and his contract adress is in the top right hand corner:up:

Cheers. :up:

[Oldguy]

I was impressed the he has been emailing us back to answer our questions and concerns.

Too bad his employment at WB and his involvement with SR creates such a conflict of interest that anything he says is biased, and therefore invalid.

You think it's impressive that he's covering his ass, hopefully long enough to suck us all into opening weekend? It is impressive, not the kind to be proud of, but whatever.

[Showtime]

Too bad his employment at WB and his involvement with SR creates such a conflict of interest that anything he says is biased, and therefore invalid.

You think it's impressive that he's covering his ass, hopefully long enough to suck us all into opening weekend? It is impressive, not the kind to be proud of, but whatever.

Impressed that he answered at all rather than just ignoring mine and other emails all together. I guess your take is that the only reason he answered was because of the situation has become.

[Cinemaman]

Too bad his employment at WB and his involvement with SR creates such a conflict of interest that anything he says is biased, and therefore invalid.

You think it's impressive that he's covering his ass, hopefully long enough to suck us all into opening weekend? It is impressive, not the kind to be proud of, but whatever.

Hey, I cant believe he is telling us lie. It cant be.

So you should understand that his answers are keys of SR script.

And as I can understand, you are hater, because only hater can say words like you have just said.

[ultimatefan]

Too bad his employment at WB and his involvement with SR creates such a conflict of interest that anything he says is biased, and therefore invalid.

You think it's impressive that he's covering his ass, hopefully long enough to suck us all into opening weekend? It is impressive, not the kind to be proud of, but whatever.
He knows most of us will be there opening weekend, regardless of him answering or not. He´d have all the excuses to not answer these e-mails. How do we know the UGO guy is not biased, that he doesn´t work for a competing company, why would Moriarty be any less biased than the people from the same site he works for that claimed it was an early draft?

[TimDrakeRobin45]

Too bad his employment at WB and his involvement with SR creates such a conflict of interest that anything he says is biased, and therefore invalid.

You think it's impressive that he's covering his ass, hopefully long enough to suck us all into opening weekend? It is impressive, not the kind to be proud of, but whatever.

When someone involved in a multi million dollar movie takes time to answere e-mails about it, it is impressive, especially since it is so close to being released and he is extremly busy. I say he deserves some credit. He isnt covering his ass either, he is standing up for his work. He didnt make a public speech or anything he answered some e-mails from us...the fans.

[The Game]

Yes, I am right. He answered me, I can give you his letter, if you don't believe me.

Show us the proof!!!

[ultimatefan]

When someone involved in a multi million dollar movie takes time to answere e-mails about it, it is impressive, especially since it is so close to being released and he is extremly busy. I say he deserves some credit. He isnt covering his ass either, he is standing up for his work. He didnt make a public speech or anything he answered some e-mails from us...the fans.
Yeah, if the guy just wanted to do damage control for BO sake he could send a letter to AICN, which would be much more effective.

[ohmshalone]

Okay, I've made up my mind. The boards were simply deleted by the mods because the review's fake and there's on sense getting worked up over it. No conspiracy, no damage control, nothing. They won't bother telling us cause some will say they are lying again and wont believe it anyway

[Cinemaman]

Show us the proof!!!

Here you go...

It was not the final shooting script. Not even close.

Moriarty's review is based on a very old draft from January 2005.
Much has changed since
then, including the addition of several action scenes, among other
things.

He also answered Showtime029, hunter rider and ultimatefan.

[Showtime]

Show us the proof!!!

He emailed me back as well, I don't want to post his exact response without asking permission, but Cinnamon has posted it.

He said that the script Moriarty read was from January 2005, as he did to Cinnamon. He also said that the UGO review was based on this script and Moriarty's review and there isn't a "rough cut" available for public viewing.

Take it anyway you want.

[Oldguy]

Impressed that he answered at all rather than just ignoring mine and other emails all together. I guess your take is that the only reason he answered was because of the situation has become.

Bingo. A test screening occured of a possible cut of SR. They got some bad feedback and decided to make changes, and remove any traces of it, so that it doesn't poison the B.O. audience before opening weekend.

You think Dougherty is maintaining communications out of respect of the fans, I say it's out of fear. We are Internet buzz, and we aren't as insignificant as we are lead to believe.

[ultimatefan]

Okay, I've made up my mind. The boards were simply deleted by the mods because the review's fake and there's on sense getting worked up over it. No conspiracy, no damage control, nothing. They won't bother telling us cause some will say they are lying again and wont believe it anyway
And there´s no censorship of discussion. In this very thread we´re still taking about the subject, we just don´t have the thread that point to the review anymore because the review was deleted, because it was based on an old draft and would misguide people.

[The Game]

Here you go...

It was not the final shooting script. Not even close.

Moriarty's review is based on a very old draft from January 2005.
Much has changed since
then, including the addition of several action scenes, among other
things.

He also answered Showtime029, hunter rider and ultimatefan.


He emailed me back as well, I don't want to post his exact response without asking permission, but Cinnamon has posted it.

He said that the script Moriarty read was from January 2005, as he did to Cinnamon. He also said that the UGO review was based on this script and Moriarty's review and there isn't a "rough cut" available for public viewing.

Take it anyway you want.

Cool guy's :up:

Dunno man this whole saga sounds dodgy.

[Oldguy]

Show us the proof!!!

lol what proof? Dougherty held an investigation into himself and found himself not guily?

No wonder Cheney/Bush got 2 terms.:rolleyes:

[ultimatefan]

Bingo. A test screening occured of a possible cut of SR. They got some bad feedback and decided to make changes, and remove any traces of it, so that it doesn't poison the B.O. audience before opening weekend.

You think Dougherty is maintaining communications out of respect of the fans, I say it's out of fear. We are Internet buzz, and we aren't as insignificant as we are lead to believe.
If there were test screenings AICN would be getting lots of reviews right now. It was a single review by an anonymous guy on a single site with most information taken from an existing review of a previous draft. Like I said, if Dougherty was so afraid of the buzz for BO reasons, he´d send an e-mail to AICN, it´d be much more effective than answering individual e-mails from hardcore fans.

[Dark_Lord]

Does anyone have this UGO review that got deleted? If so PM me. Thanks.

He's telling the truth. He wouldnt lie. Dougherty I mean. Oh! As long as he's replying why dont you guys ask some other stuff too... :)

I remember reading that Singer had the script when they were shooting so he could change stuff so a lot could have changed that we cant know until we see the film.

[Showtime]

Bingo. A test screening occured of a possible cut of SR. They got some bad feedback and decided to make changes, and remove any traces of it, so that it doesn't poison the B.O. audience before opening weekend.

You think Dougherty is maintaining communications out of respect of the fans, I say it's out of fear. We are Internet buzz, and we aren't as insignificant as we are lead to believe.

You're theory would hold a little better for me if UGO didn't call the movie "a rough cut" without special effects. Why would the movie not have any special effects at this point? I mean, maybe I am mispresenting his posting, but that's what I thought he said. If it is a test screening this close to guage public reaction wouldn't he have seen a more finished product?

If he did indeed in fact see a rough cut with no special effects could it possible be an older version before more editing? Just throwing some spaghetti on the wall...

[TimDrakeRobin45]

IF there was a test screening there would be more reviews, they dont let one person in for a test screening, there would be at least 100 people who saw it, at least. There have been NO test screenings as of yet. None. At least not for the general public. The fact that the reviewer mentions scenes that have never been shot proves it is bogus.

[Backdrifter]

Why cant people simply accept the fact that this movie might not be what they're expecting?

Because they spend hours everyday on a message board discussing every detail, wanting with all their hearts for it to be the greatest Superman movie ever...and when something as damaging to their dreams like a bad review surfaces the only reaction they can muster is to question its credibility.

[Backdrifter]

IF there was a test screening there would be more reviews, they dont let one person in for a test screening, there would be at least 100 people who saw it, at least. There have been NO test screenings as of yet. None. At least not for the general public. The fact that the reviewer mentions scenes that have never been shot proves it is bogus.
You do not know if their have been test screenings. This guy very well may have been part of one and broken a non-disclosure agreement that he signed.

[Cinemaman]

Because they spend hours everyday on a message board discussing everyday wanting with all their hearts for it to be the greatest Superman movie ever...and when something as damaging to their dreams like a bad review surfaces the only reaction they can muster is to question its credibility.

UGO's review was fake, Moriarty read only very old script draft.

Dougherty and others made enough changes to get final script.

[ultimatefan]

Because they spend hours everyday on a message board discussing everyday wanting with all their hearts for it to be the greatest Superman movie ever...and when something as damaging to their dreams like a bad review surfaces the only reaction they can muster is to question its credibility.
A review deserves to have its credibility questioned when it´s by an anonymous guy, it has been debunked by several sources as fake, its information basically comes from a script review, and no other reviews have surfaced, when the movie allegedly had test screenings or whatever.

[TimDrakeRobin45]

Because they spend hours everyday on a message board discussing everyday wanting with all their hearts for it to be the greatest Superman movie ever...and when something as damaging to their dreams like a bad review surfaces the only reaction they can muster is to question its credibility.

Not true at all. If there was credibilty to the review then I would take it at face value, however, the review was made at a time when there have been No test screenings and no rough cut made available to anyone outside of the studio.

[Nightwing1977]

Why cant people simply accept the fact that this movie might not be what they're expecting?

What fact are you getting that it's not going to be what we're expecting? Because 1 or 2 website claim to see it & gave it a negative reviews? Sorry, but you can't trust everything on the Internet. Of course, I think you probably do with asking why we can't accept the fact the movie won't be good. :rolleyes:

Thing is, don't trust everything on the Internet. I'm willing to wait & keep an open mind on the film before I start thinking it will suck & what not like some Internet said.

[Tzigone]

The problem with claiming "conflict of interest" regarding the denials of authenticity is that the only people who can legitimately confirm/deny the veracity of these reviews are those working on the movie.

[TimDrakeRobin45]

What fact are you getting that it's not going to be what we're expecting? Because 1 or 2 website claim to see it & gave it a negative reviews? Sorry, but you can't trust everything on the Internet. Of course, I think you probably do with asking why we can't accept the fact the movie won't be good. :rolleyes:

Thing is, don't trust everything on the Internet. I'm willing to wait & keep an open mind on the film before I start thinking it will suck & what not like some Internet said.


:up:

[ultimatefan]

You do not know if their have been test screenings. This guy very well may have been part of one and broken a non-disclosure agreement that he signed.
If there were test screenings there would be reviews popping up on AICN and a lot of buzz, I have seen lotsa movies have reviews from test screenings on sites like AICN, many of them negative, and they don´t get shut down and "debunked" for damage control reasons. The logical explanation is the review is fake.

[Backdrifter]

Not true at all. If there was credibilty to the review then I would take it at face value, however, the review was made at a time when there have been No test screenings and no rough cut made available to anyone outside of the studio.

A review deserves to have its credibility questioned when it´s by an anonymous guy, it has been debunked by several sources as fake, its information basically comes from a script review, and no other reviews have surfaced, when the movie allegedly had test screenings or whatever.

Curious, would you be saying this if the review was postive? Somehow, I do not think you would be.

[TimDrakeRobin45]

You do not know if their have been test screenings. This guy very well may have been part of one and broken a non-disclosure agreement that he signed.

actually i do know that there have been no test screenings.

Even if the review was posotive i would be questioning it's validity if it claimed to have seen things that were never comitted to film.

[Backdrifter]

What fact are you getting that it's not going to be what we're expecting? Because 1 or 2 website claim to see it & gave it a negative reviews?

That coupled with the trailer. The trailer was pretty cringe worthy

[Super Adw]

You do not know if their have been test screenings. This guy very well may have been part of one and broken a non-disclosure agreement that he signed.

And everyone else who went to a test screeing of this huge movie has been good little boys and girls and not posted about it....sure I'll believe that one :\

This is the internet,people who go to test screenings post reviews as soon as possible.

[Backdrifter]

actually i do know that there have been no test screenings
Oh yeah? How is that?

[ultimatefan]

Curious, would you be saying this if the review was postive? Somehow, I do not think you would be.
I would say if it was fake, but would be sorry that it is. Whatever my reaction would be, doesn´t change the facts, and the facts point out to a fake review.

[TimDrakeRobin45]

Oh yeah? How is that?

Because of the fact that no one listens to a non-disclosure agreement on a movie this large. ppl even film test screenings and bootleg them to the internet. If there was a test screening it would have been well known to everyone on this board the night it happened. Hell Serenity's test screenings were known about and sold out, that movie was no where near as high profile as this.

Not to mention that in previous posts members have shown e-mails the Writer Mike that stated that there have been none, as a rough cut has not been shown to the public

[Backdrifter]

I would say if it was fake, but would be sorry that it is. Whatever my reaction would be, doesn´t change the facts, and the facts point out to a fake review.

Come on, if the review was overly positive you would too busy with excitement to even point out the fact that it could be a false review. Let's be real here.

[TimDrakeRobin45]

Come on, if the review was overly positive you would too busy with excitement to even point out the fact that it could be a false review. Let's be real here.

I don't think thats true either. Even people on this board that are excited about the movie are quick to call something when it looks off. Most ppl here loved the new trailer, however, ppl were calling some of the digital fx that looked a little off, even those who liked it. Just because they want it to be good does not mean they can fool themselves into thinking it is so.

If i were to read a great review of the film, with obvious fraudulant information, I wouldnt get so excited about that review.

[Super Adw]

Come on, if the review was overly positive you would too busy with excitement to even point out the fact that it could be a false review. Let's be real here.

How would you feel if the review was overly positive?

I get the feeling based off your posts you love the fact that the review slammed it,I mean the trailer itself is cringe worthy in your view.

[ultimatefan]

Come on, if the review was overly positive you would too busy with excitement to even point out the fact that it could be a false review. Let's be real here.
Whatever my reaction would be, the facts do point out to a fake review. Now I say c´mon, fake reviews are posted on the Internet every other day, and they´re deleted and so are their threads, there´s no reason to put any more stock on this one.

[TimDrakeRobin45]

Whatever my reaction would be, the facts do point out to a fake review. Now I say c´mon, fake reviews are posted on the Internet every other day, and they´re deleted and so are their threads, there´s no reason to put any more stock on this one.

:up: agreed

[Nightwing1977]

That coupled with the trailer. The trailer was pretty cringe worthy

Well, the trailer wasn't cringe worthy to me. Just because one don't like the trailer shouldn't think the movie will be pure "suckage". This isn't "Batman & Robin", folks. :p

[Showtime]

I thought the trailer had a nice wow factor. It made me excited about this flick. I gave it an 8/10, only because it was a bit choppy and some of the CGI was a little to noticable. Looks like visually stunning film though.

[Venom71]

Well, the trailer wasn't cringe worthy to me. Just because one don't like the trailer shouldn't think the movie will be pure "suckage". This isn't "Batman & Robin", folks. :p
I agree..the trailer was great IMHO...even though Oldguy thinks I am a retarded simpleton for liking what I have seen of SR.

[Backdrifter]

How would you feel if the review was overly positive?

I get the feeling based off your posts you love the fact that the review slammed it,I mean the trailer itself is cringe worthy in your view.
I'd feel better. Not convinced, but better. I was very postive about this untill the trailer and Morarity's comments about the script and then the info about the kid...

[Showtime]

I agree..the trailer was great IMHO...even though Oldguy thinks I am a retarded simpleton for liking what I have seen of SR.

I am pretty sure he said he liked parts of the trailer, CGI and some other comments aside.

[BareKnucklez]

As a Hulk fan, when all that crap went down with the Work-cut Leak, I was more furious that Drew/Moriarty only mentioned "Negative" reviews were coming in. Then everyone (or at least the fanboys exspecting it to be bad) assumed it was indeed bad, and the stain never went away.

I actually was very negative toward ang Lee's take on Hulk, and after seeing it, really appreciated alot of Hulk elements he brought to the film. It isn't as bad, as a Hulk fan, as people made it out to be.

I went into the hulk really hyped up, and I remember standing in line waiting to be let into the theater, and having people walk out from the show that just let out, and hearing people say that the movie sucked.
I agreed after I saw it... I was very upset because I was expecting something Epic, and all we got was a load of horse poo.
The movie "The Hulk" was just terrible, and Ang Lee is 100% at fault... He was the wrong director the job.
He's a good director just not good for superhero movies.

[Oldguy]

If there were test screenings AICN would be getting lots of reviews right now...

Test screenings aren't press conferences. Brainiac could well have been in a test group that don't care enough to post a review on the internet. Most likely what happened is Brainiac was the only one who was stupid enough to violate the confidentiality agreement.

[Oldguy]

I am pretty sure he said he liked parts of the trailer, CGI and some other comments aside.

Yup, gave it a 7/10. Venom is misrepresenting me as usual, big surprise.

[Oldguy]

You're theory would hold a little better for me if UGO didn't call the movie "a rough cut" without special effects. Why would the movie not have any special effects at this point?...

So studio heads can give final approval with an accurate sense of where the movie is going, so crew can guage the timing, and pacing of a movie, and so it can be tested against sample audiences, who sign confidentiality agreements to remain silent.

Rough cuts exist of every movie made. Think of it as a collection of dailies. So some shots might still be green screened, some scenes might only be animatics, or storyboard panels with accompanying dialogue and camera moves, interwoven with more polished scenes.

[JamalYIgle]

So studio heads can give final approval with an accurate sense of where the movie is going, so crew can guage the timing, and pacing of a movie, and so it can be tested against sample audiences, who sign confidentiality agreements to remain silent.

Rough cuts exist of every movie made. Think of it as a collection of dailies. So some shots might still be green screened, some scenes might only be animatics, or storyboard panels with accompanying dialogue and camera moves, interwoven with more polished scenes.

Rough cuts are almost NEVER seen outside of a movie studio. All of the screenings that I've ever been to(quite a few)have always been of nearly completed material. Men in Black, ID4, Spider-man. I worked briefly at sony animation so they would use us for lot screenings. Gen public screenings are usually held by the studios marketing department.

[Oldguy]

Rough cuts are almost NEVER seen outside of a movie studio....I worked briefly at sony animation so they would use us for lot screenings...

Did you ever manage to sneak a friend or roomate into a screening of a rough cut?

I have.

[TimDrakeRobin45]

once again, Rough cuts do not contain footage that was NEVER SHOT in the first place. And since it was never shot the only place to get the info would be to read the old script, so it seems whoever this is got his hands on what he thought was a final script ( or knew was not the final script) and gave a false review based on that.

[TimDrakeRobin45]

All I care about is the truth.

IF the UGO review was real, I would just stay quiet,
grit my teeth and deal with it. I have a thick skin
and can do that. I might get a little mopey, but life
goes on.

BUT -- the review is a lie. A fabrication. It made the
mistake of mentioning ideas that were abandoned,
scenes that were NEVER shot, and dialogue that was cut
from the script over a year ago. Therefore, the review
was pulled from the site. Not for "damage control"
reasons as some skeptics and conspiracy theorists
have claimed, but because it was proven untrue. The
person who wrote it read the same extremely outdated
draft that Moriarty did, and falsely submitted it as a
review of a rough cut.

Now ask yourself, what kind of person would go out of
their way to submit a false review, other than
someone who wants to intentionally hurt the film? The
type of person who wants you guys to have doubts and
start fighting with each other? Is this the type of
person you want to listen to?

If a news site like CNN or NYTimes published a film
review, but later discovered the critic never actually
saw the movie, you can bet they'd pull it from their
site. Not because of conspiracy reasons, or fear of
studio reprisal, but because a reputable news site
cares about the truth, and wouldn't want a false
review or a shady critic to tarnish their reputation.

Again, if that review was true, I'd stay quiet, or
maybe tell people to sit tight because it's a rough
cut, then let the film speak for itself when it's
released. But I only feel like saying something
because that review was a lie, and people deserve to
know that.

P.S.
If you still don't believe me, then watch the trailer
and count the action beats. I think you'll find more
than just two (as both reviews have claimed)...and
there are still more to come.

[tonytr1687]

Can somebody tell me where I can find this review? I went to the UGO site and cant find it.

[Oldguy]

...P.S.
If you still don't believe me, then watch the trailer
and count the action beats. I think you'll find more
than just two (as both reviews have claimed)...and
there are still more to come.

Judging from the fact that you don't know what a sequence is, and how it's different from a scene, I will remain unconvinced in light of your "proof".

[TimDrakeRobin45]

Can somebody tell me where I can find this review? I went to the UGO site and cant find it.

It has been aken down because it was found to be false

[Oldguy]

Can somebody tell me where I can find this review? I went to the UGO site and cant find it.

No you sure cannot, amazing what an army of corperate lawyers can get done with a mere threat of litigation isn't it?

[TimDrakeRobin45]

Judging from the fact that you don't know what a sequence is, and how it's different from a scene, I will remain unconvinced in light of your "proof".

the p.s. was actually from mike not from me, and he is actually part of the editing process, so I tend to take his word.

And I actually am in film school and work with movies so yea, I have an idea.

[Backdrifter]

the p.s. was actually from mike not from me, and he is actually part of the editing process, so I tend to take his word.

And I actually am in film school and work with movies so yea, I have an idea.

Lol, who is Mike? Hell, if Mike says so, then you know it is the truth!

[Oldguy]

the p.s. was actually from mike not from me, and he is actually part of the editing process, so I tend to take his word.

Well I thought the cheese ass dialogue from the trailer was proof of what in idiot he was, now he passes on this little gem of ignorance?

LMFAO! The script writer doesn't know the difference between a sequence and a scene. Rao save us all.

[TimDrakeRobin45]

Lol, who is Mike? Hell, if Mike says so, then you know it is the truth!

Mike Dougherty THE WRITER

[TimDrakeRobin45]

Well I thought the cheese ass dialogue from the trailer was proof of what in idiot he was, now he passes on this little gem of ignorance?

LMFAO! The script writer doesn't know the difference between a sequence and a scene. Rao save us all.

I think it's fun how everyone in here knows more about making movies than the pros

[FreeRadical]

I think it's fun how everyone in here knows more about making movies than the pros

I know what you mean :up: .

Everyone's a critic.

[Backdrifter]

Mike Dougherty THE WRITER
Why don't you pass on to Mike that he cannot write believeable dialogue for ****... Tell him Stewie said so. Tell him he is lucky Bryan Singer is carrying his ass along in hollywood, because if he had to fend for himself like the rest of us he would be spending the rest of his days submitting query letters and never getting his crap produced. Tell Mike that. And, tell him his shirts are too small on him.

[Oldguy]

I think it's fun how everyone in here knows more about making movies than the pros

I think it's terribly ****ing sad, that you consider Singer's klingons "pros".

[Oldguy]

Why don't you pass on to Mike that he cannot write believeable dialogue for ****... Tell him Stewie said so. Tell him he is lucky Bryan Singer is carrying his ass along in hollywood, because if he had to fend for himself like the rest of us he would be spending the rest of his days submitting query letters and never getting his crap produced. Tell Mike that. And, tell him his shirts are too small on him.

Co-sign.

[TimDrakeRobin45]

Actually it is widley beleived that X2 is the second best comic book film ever made second only to STM I believe mike had a hand in that.

[TimDrakeRobin45]

I think it's terribly ****ing sad, that you consider Singer's klingons "pros".


Are you kidding? Usual Suspects is only one of the best movies ever made, as is X2.

[Oldguy]

Actually it is beleives that X2 is the second best comic book film ever made second only to STM I believe mike had a hand in that.

Oh please, pull your head out of Singer's ass long enough to hear one word:

Spider-man.

[Backdrifter]

Actually it is beleives that X2 is the second best comic book film ever made second only to STM I believe mike had a hand in that.
Oh is that so? I guess I know what kind of person I am dealing with now. Does Mike share the same reservations about this so called list of best comic book films? If so tell Mike not only is he a ****ty writer, but he is a ****ing idiot.

[TimDrakeRobin45]

Spiderman was brilliant, but X2 delivered

[TimDrakeRobin45]

Oh is that so? I guess I know what kind of person I am dealing with now. Does Mike share the same reservations about this so called list of best comic book films? If so tell Mike not only is he a ****ty writer, but he is a ****ing idiot.

I have a feeling i am younger than both of you yet I am the one who has not resulted to petty name calling to protect my opinion. funny?

[FreeRadical]

Why is there all this hate for Singer and the writers? Some of this hate against them is going way beyond SR.

[TimDrakeRobin45]

Oh is that so? I guess I know what kind of person I am dealing with now. Does Mike share the same reservations about this so called list of best comic book films? If so tell Mike not only is he a ****ty writer, but he is a ****ing idiot.

there have been a few published lists in comic related mags and all place STM as #1 and X2 as #2

[Backdrifter]

I have a feeling i am younger than both of you yet I am the one who has not resulted to petty name calling to protect my opinion. funny?
Sorry, I am just an angry person. But, I also enjoy having a good laugh..I hope other are entertained by my posts.

[TimDrakeRobin45]

Why is there all this hate for Singer and the writers? Some of this hate against them is going way beyond SR.

I agree, i have a feeling that there is just a distaste for them and not this movie.

[Backdrifter]

there have been a few published lists in comic related mags and all place STM as #1 and X2 as #2
I don't care. S:TM and X2 are both pretty lame in my opinion, kept afloat only by their casts...S:TM is carried soley on the shoulders of Reeve.

[TimDrakeRobin45]

What is your fav comic adaptation?

[Naite22]

All I care about is the truth.

IF the UGO review was real, I would just stay quiet,
grit my teeth and deal with it. I have a thick skin
and can do that. I might get a little mopey, but life
goes on.

BUT -- the review is a lie. A fabrication. It made the
mistake of mentioning ideas that were abandoned,
scenes that were NEVER shot, and dialogue that was cut
from the script over a year ago. Therefore, the review
was pulled from the site. Not for "damage control"
reasons as some skeptics and conspiracy theorists
have claimed, but because it was proven untrue. The
person who wrote it read the same extremely outdated
draft that Moriarty did, and falsely submitted it as a
review of a rough cut.

Now ask yourself, what kind of person would go out of
their way to submit a false review, other than
someone who wants to intentionally hurt the film? The
type of person who wants you guys to have doubts and
start fighting with each other? Is this the type of
person you want to listen to?

If a news site like CNN or NYTimes published a film
review, but later discovered the critic never actually
saw the movie, you can bet they'd pull it from their
site. Not because of conspiracy reasons, or fear of
studio reprisal, but because a reputable news site
cares about the truth, and wouldn't want a false
review or a shady critic to tarnish their reputation.

Again, if that review was true, I'd stay quiet, or
maybe tell people to sit tight because it's a rough
cut, then let the film speak for itself when it's
released. But I only feel like saying something
because that review was a lie, and people deserve to
know that.

P.S.
If you still don't believe me, then watch the trailer
and count the action beats. I think you'll find more
than just two (as both reviews have claimed)...and
there are still more to come.
I really wanna believe this!! Especially since I think that the part about the kid throwing a piano sounds a bit weird.... However in the set reports just posted on this very site, it does say that there's a clear see-through-floor on the yacht, and the only thing standing there is a PIANO... I hope this is true though.

[Backdrifter]

Why is there all this hate for Singer and the writers? Some of this hate against them is going way beyond SR.
I do not hate them, I just think they are not talented enough to be working on 180 million features.

[Venom71]

Oh please, pull your head out of Singer's ass long enough to hear one word:

Spider-man.
Actually Spider-Man 2 is the best comic book movie ever...but I can see SR not being to far behind it :D

[ohmshalone]

Scenes or sequences, what difference does it make? We've been on these boards long enough to know there's a lot more than 2 for both

[Oldguy]

Are you kidding? Usual Suspects is only one of the best movies ever made,...

In no small part because Christopher McQuarrie wrote the script.

Don't get me wrong, i think Singer is a great director, but as a writer, he's a complete hack, because he devolves every story he writes into a tale of a misfit outcast trying to fit in. He can only write what he knows, and so all his stories become autobiographical tales of outcast jewish homosexuals trying to find their place in the world.

Instead of learning the about the established characters as they exist, like an angry child, he pounds round pegs into his own personal square hole, turning his characters into romanticized versions of himself.

[TimDrakeRobin45]

Scenes or sequences, what difference does it make? We've been on these boards long enough to know there's a lot more than 2 for both

agreed:up:

[FreeRadical]

I do not hate them, I just think they are not talented enough to be working on 180 million features.

But is the name calling needed? If you had 180 million, how would you make this film?

[Backdrifter]

Actually Spider-Man 2 is the best comic book movie ever...but I can see SR not being to far behind it :D
I agree, I left the theater completely satisfied with Spider-Man 2. Sure some of the effects were not all that great...but Spider-Man features three dimensional characters that the audience cares about. I wanted to cheer when I saw MJ's reaction to Peter being Spider-Man! X2's characters were weak, I never cared about Jean Grey for her death to stir any emotion.

[TimDrakeRobin45]

In no small part because Christopher McQuarrie wrote the script.

Don't get me wrong, i think Singer is a great director, but as a writer, he's a complete hack, because he devolves every story he writes into a tale of a misfit outcast trying to fit in. He can only write what he knows, and so all his stories become autobiographical tales of outcast jewish homosexuals trying to find their place in the world.

Instead of learning the about the established characters as they exist, like an angry child, he pounds round pegs into his own personal square hole, turning his characters into romanticized versions of himself.


Comic books are about outcasts trying to fit in. that is why he is perfect, he can connect with his story and that makes for a better story. things come out bad when you write about something you dont know about or care for. Superman IS an Outcast.

[Backdrifter]

In no small part because Christopher McQuarrie wrote the script.

Don't get me wrong, i think Singer is a great director, but as a writer, he's a complete hack, because he devolves every story he writes into a tale of a misfit outcast trying to fit in. He can only write what he knows, and so all his stories become autobiographical tales of outcast jewish homosexuals trying to find their place in the world.

Instead of learning the about the established characters as they exist, like an angry child, he pounds round pegs into his own personal square hole, turning his characters into romanticized versions of himself.
Man, I thought I was the only one who noticed this trend. I am glad I am not alone.

[Backdrifter]

But is the name calling needed? If you had 180 million, how would you make this film?
The creative process involved in producing a 180 Million feature can not be summed up in a single post. But, I know for sure that I would be retelling his origins. And, I know for sure that Lex Luthor would not be wearing wigs. I know for sure that Luthor Corp would exist. I know for sure that Superman would be played by someone who looks like a man and does not invoke images of Superboy. I know Krypton would not feature costumes that glow in the dark. I know his origin has been done. But I think there is room for improvement.

[TimDrakeRobin45]

that is absolute bull****. So because Singer is Gay everything he writes is gay and Superman will be a bad movie becasuse singer was involved in more than just the directing? Please. Peddle you homophobic hatred somwhere else.

[Venom71]

But is the name calling needed? If you had 180 million, how would you make this film?
See that just it...so many people want different things in the Superman movie no matter who was directing/writing/whatever..still not everyone would agree that that writer/director made the right choices.

[Oldguy]

Scenes or sequences, what difference does it make?

Theoretically, an action sequence could be an hour long. So if someone tells you theres 2 action sequences, and someone else refutes that they shot way more than 2 scenes, the refuter is a moron, who's trying to confuse the issue in an attempt to dismiss the original claim.

[Oldguy]

Man, I thought I was the only one who noticed this trend. I am glad I am not alone.

Well if I get banned for exposing this trend, say bye to all the guys for me, will ya?

[TimDrakeRobin45]

The creative process involved in producing a 180 Million feature can not be summed up in a single post. But, I know for sure that I would be retelling his origins. And, I know for sure that Lex Luthor would not be wearing wigs. I know for sure that Luthor Corp would exist. I know for sure that Superman would be played by someone who looks like a man and does not invoke images of Superboy. I know Krypton would not feature costumes that glow in the dark. I know his origin has been done. But I think there is room for improvement.

I agree, an Origin story would be great, however, people want to see Superman in action. In an Origin story they would take half the movie to tell the tale by todays standards of movie making. So we get a continuing story.

[tonytr1687]

It doesnt matter what any of you think. The majority has already spoken about Singer's past works. The Usual Suspects, X-men, and X2 are all critically acclaimed. None of them are perfect (although Suspects is close), but they're considered successes on a critical level by most of the moviegoing community and especially the film buff community, and no amount of fanboy whining from a select few can change that. The writers on the other hand, the only movie they've written is X2 and that had very good dialogue, but its possible that was a fluke. We shall see. All I can say is Singer certainly cuts loose when he's not held back by a restricted budget and production schedule (i.e. his situation w/Fox and the X-flicks). Say what you want about the approach they're taking (that being more lighthearted), but that trailer was definitely epic.

[Oldguy]

Comic books are about outcasts trying to fit in.

No, Marvel comic books are about outcasts trying to fit in.

[Backdrifter]

that is absolute bull****. So because Singer is Gay everything he writes is gay and Superman will be a bad movie becasuse singer was involved in more than just the directing? Please. Peddle you homophobic hatred somwhere else.
Oh come off it. Singer does not deny this fact. He himself said that the X-Men movies were all about being gay. Nobody is being homophobic. We are simply saying that Singer has overexamined this angle in his movies and needs to move on to other ideas...it is getting old.

[Oldguy]

It doesnt matter what any of you think. The majority has already spoken about Singer's past works. The Usual Suspects...

Was written by Christopher McQuarrie.

[TimDrakeRobin45]

and Superman isnt? Pick up a comic now and then

[TimDrakeRobin45]

Oh come off it. Singer does not deny this fact. He himself said that the X-Men movies were all about being gay. Nobody is being homophobic. We are simply saying that Singer has overexamined this angle in his movies and needs to move on to other ideas...it is getting old.

It's not getting old, because these are the issues that people are dealing with n modern day society.

[tonytr1687]

Was written by Christopher McQuarrie.

And?

[tonytr1687]

Oh come off it. Singer does not deny this fact. He himself said that the X-Men movies were all about being gay. Nobody is being homophobic. We are simply saying that Singer has overexamined this angle in his movies and needs to move on to other ideas...it is getting old.

Last time I checked his X-flicks were the only films of his that had gay metaphors.

[Backdrifter]

It's not getting old, because these are the issues that people are dealing with n modern day society.
It is getting old coming from the same artist. Much the same as Spielberg constantly has fathers in conflicting realtionships with their children and Burton always has sons in conflict with their fathers.. I would like to see Singer explore other ideas instead of sociologial metaphors of homosexuality.

[TimDrakeRobin45]

Was written by Christopher McQuarrie.
Reguardless of who it is written by a movie can change dramatically from page to film depending on the directors views and purpose. Look at AI. Kubrick was gonna make one twisted story, but when he passed and Spielberg came on board it was a whole different movie.

[FreeRadical]

The creative process involved in producing a 180 Million feature can not be summed up in a single post. But, I know for sure that I would be retelling his origins. And, I know for sure that Lex Luthor would not be wearing wigs. I know for sure that Luthor Corp would exist. I know for sure that Superman would be played by someone who looks like a man and does not invoke images of Superboy. I know Krypton would not feature costumes that glow in the dark. I know his origin has been done. But I think there is room for improvement.

Good ideas :up: .

His origin could be improved upon, considering that they keep changing it in the comics. I am looking forward to SR, but kind of disappointed that the Post-Crisis continuty is not being used, because it works perfectly today.

I am viewing the film more like a elseworlds tale.

[tonytr1687]

Reguardless of who it is written by a movie can change dramatically from page to film depending on the directors views and purpose. Look at AI. Kubrick was gonna make one twisted story, but when he passed and Spielberg came on board it was a whole different movie.

I still dont see the point you are trying to make. The fact that Chris McQuarrie wrote the Usual Suspects script is irrelevant to my earlier post.

[ohmshalone]

Theoretically, an action sequence could be an hour long. So if someone tells you theres 2 action sequences, and someone else refutes that they shot way more than 2 scenes, the refuter is a moron, who's trying to confuse the issue in an attempt to dismiss the original claim.
but do you really believe the entire action SEQUENCE, even if it's an hour long, is just one earthquake?

[Backdrifter]

Reguardless of who it is written by a movie can change dramatically from page to film depending on the directors views and purpose. Look at AI. Kubrick was gonna make one twisted story, but when he passed and Spielberg came on board it was a whole different movie.

Spielberg has the writing credit. He took Kubricks ideas and wrote a screenplay and added his own sentimentalities to it. Bad example. Singer does not have a writing credit on The Usual Suspects...which is probably a good thing.

[TimDrakeRobin45]

Spielberg has the writing credit. He took Kubricks ideas and wrote a screenplay and added his own sentimentalities to it. Bad example. Singer does not have a writing credit on The Usual Suspects...which is probably a good thing.

Just because he does not have a writing credit does not mean that it didnt change from page to script it always happens. Look at Halloween 6, that was a beautifully done fantastic script and it was shot that way, however there were re-shoots done because the director upon seeing the final piece did not like where it went so he reshot his and the studios new ideas. He does not have a writing credit on it, but the story changed because of him

[TimDrakeRobin45]

I still dont see the point you are trying to make. The fact that Chris McQuarrie wrote the Usual Suspects script is irrelevant to my earlier post.

I wasnt debating you i was trying to say that the fact he wrote it was irrelevant

[tonytr1687]

I wasnt debating you i was trying to say that the fact he wrote it was irrelevant

Gotcha.

[Showtime]

Where was that statment from Mike taken from, an email or a posting on a website?

[Backdrifter]

Just because he does not have a writing credit does not mean that it didnt change from page to script it always happens. Look at Halloween 6, that was a beautifully done fantastic script and it was shot that way, however there were re-shoots done because the director upon seeing the final piece did not like where it went so he reshot his and the studios new ideas. He does not have a writing credit on it, but the story changed because of him

Generally, when a director takes a written script does a hack job the original writer is given a "Story by" credit. For example. Ted Elliot and Terry Rossio wrote, from what I hear, a great screenplay for Godzilla. Roland Emmerich and Dean Delvin were hired to produce and direct. They proceeded to write their own version of the screenplay in about 2 weeks. The results speak for themselves. I am not saying Singer is a bad writer, according to the credits, he did not make any significant story changes to The Usual Suspects to merit a writing credit.

[Showtime]

So studio heads can give final approval with an accurate sense of where the movie is going, so crew can guage the timing, and pacing of a movie, and so it can be tested against sample audiences, who sign confidentiality agreements to remain silent.

Rough cuts exist of every movie made. Think of it as a collection of dailies. So some shots might still be green screened, some scenes might only be animatics, or storyboard panels with accompanying dialogue and camera moves, interwoven with more polished scenes.

I am of what a rough cut is and why it exists. As you said above it's for a crew to guage pacing or studio heads to give final approval on.

I was under the impression that a rough cut containing no special effects as described by the review wouldn't be shown to a test audience.

[Oldguy]

but do you really believe the entire action SEQUENCE, even if it's an hour long, is just one earthquake?
In StM, after CR is freed from the K-trap, it's one long action sequence all the way to the the point where he leaves Lois and Jimmy safe and sound in the desert.
The other action sequence in StM is saving Lois from the helicopter, and first night patrol.

[TimDrakeRobin45]

Where was that statment from Mike taken from, an email or a posting on a website?

It was from an e-mail response that I got from him

[TimDrakeRobin45]

Generally, when a director takes a written script does a hack job the original writer is given a "Story by" credit. For example. Ted Elliot and Terry Rossio wrote, from what I hear, a great screenplay for Godzilla. Roland Emmerich and Dean Delvin were hired to produce and direct. They proceeded to write their own version of the screenplay in about 2 weeks. The results speak for themselves. I am not saying Singer is a bad writer, according to the credits, he did not make any significant story changes to The Usual Suspects to merit a writing credit.

The point I am trying to make is, that even a Bad script can become a great movie with the right director. On the flip side of that a great script can be come a turd with the right director. I have a feeling Batman Forever would have been much cooler with another director.