The Official SDCC Coverage Thread [Archive] - Page 2

buggs0268

08-01-2007, 04:54 AM

The IMDB boards are loaded with spamming and trolling from the same users though; not very reliable for making any intelligent assumptions.

Check out the USER rating for Superman Returns on RT.com

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/superman_returns/reviews_users.php

Its probably a more reliable way of gauging general movie-going audience reaction overall. 76% is a fair rating. Nothing near the first Spider-man but a decent start for the \S/ franchaise.

Also; its pretty much in line with the SHH ratings poll as well.
Now wait a second. The argument for people liking it was given as IMDB. You go on IMDB and read the user comments on the SR section and most of them are bad. So now that the views of those who go to IMDB is that they don't like the movie. Now all of a sudden IMDB is not trust worthy and only those who feel negative will be more vocal and post in the comments. While other movies that are liked, like Die Hard, don't have that phenomenon. You guys can't have it both ways, and then when a site that you list does not like SR, ignore it and go to another site. The proof is in the pudding as they say. Anyone can vote in a poll, and it was shown here a long time ago that there are people who will vote multiple times. But the user comments are the voice of the people. That is why I don't like those damn polls and trust the comments made more.

buggs0268

08-01-2007, 06:18 AM

good my man, back for a moment. I am really glad the sequel is in limo. So that singer gets fired and we get a proper take on the character. It's safe to say singer knows nothing about superman. Who he is as a character and what he stands for. :o
You know what is even sadder. Since he was following the Donner movies, which understood the character, you would think with that blueprint he could have made a Superman movie that was proper for the character. But nope. We got Singerman. A guy who sits outside an ex girlfriends house and uses his X-ray vision to stalk her.

Qwerty©

08-01-2007, 06:36 AM

That is why I don't like those damn polls and trust the comments made more.
"I don't listen to actual figures and facts and would rather listen to those that share my views"

FlawlessVictory

08-01-2007, 07:54 AM

yeah....I still think Singer made a mistake by not casting Caviezel. Caviezel would have been amazing as Supes.

For the story that Singer was telling, a returns story with a decent amount of history between Supes and Lois and Supes having a son, they should have cast someone older than Routh, like Caviezel. To me, Routh could practically pass as Tristan's brother, esp. at some of the premiere photos. Routh was just too young looking.

It really didn't matter.

Supes/Clark had basically no development and lines. I'm glad Jim didn't get it for this particular film. Wouldn't have fully taken advantage of his skill.

True.

Showtime

08-01-2007, 08:23 AM

Now wait a second. The argument for people liking it was given as IMDB. You go on IMDB and read the user comments on the SR section and most of them are bad. So now that the views of those who go to IMDB is that they don't like the movie. Now all of a sudden IMDB is not trust worthy and only those who feel negative will be more vocal and post in the comments. While other movies that are liked, like Die Hard, don't have that phenomenon. You guys can't have it both ways, and then when a site that you list does not like SR, ignore it and go to another site. The proof is in the pudding as they say. Anyone can vote in a poll, and it was shown here a long time ago that there are people who will vote multiple times. But the user comments are the voice of the people. That is why I don't like those damn polls and trust the comments made more.

By that same token don't you not trust the polls because alot of them are pointing towards the fact that Returns was liked therefore you are turning to the comments because you believe that the majority were negative although they aren't as accurate as the polls? :dry:

Superman_

08-01-2007, 08:36 AM

To be honest the majority of people liked Superman Returns or it would not have made 200 million +. Most people's problem with the movie was not Routh or Kate or even the story; their problem was it had no action.

AVEITWITHJAMON

08-01-2007, 09:12 AM

Fine, everyone loved it, it was a huge success and will spawn 10 sequels. When your head comes out of the sand and you actually look at general publics reactions and thoughts instead of thinking your feelings are everyone's we'll talk.

The public didn't love it because it didn't do well. Movies that do huge business are loved. That's why it makes sense.

Look what we got with Transformers? What was that, a headache inducing void of a film with a middle section that could put an insomniac to sleep. Transformers was all CGI and no bite. $150 million goes far in a vapid piece of crap. Superman needs sets, art direction, real money for real effects. You can't compare the two. My Stealth analogy was a poor one as well.

Sorry, but, this is bull****, the movie didnt do well you say? Well it didnt do badly either, and since when is box office an indicator of quality? Are saying Titanic is the most popular movie ever?

I SEE SPIDEY

08-01-2007, 09:27 AM

Oh the old so when is boxoffice a indicator of quality thing. It's not an indicator of quality for the public (nor should it be) but it is for the studios, who are trying to make money...because they are a business.

I have to say that I disagree with everyone when it comes to internet polls and message boards. If you believe that the internet folk repersent the general movie going public Hulk would have gotten a Ang Lee helmed sequel and Fantastic Four would have not had a sequel. Movie studios, rightfully so, don't care about a bunch of nerds talking about there love of movies on the interenet enough to change anything big about there big budget movies. They are going to do what they can to please the general moviegoing non nerd masses.

These polls are not to be trusted one way or the other IMHO. If the polls said most people hated it I wouldn't believe it and vice versa. I find it amazing that people keep bring up IMDB considering that most moviegoers don't post on the threads or vote on the polls. If you bring IMDB up when responding to my posts I'm not going to aknowlege that part.

FlawlessVictory

08-01-2007, 09:36 AM

^Agreed.

AVEITWITHJAMON

08-01-2007, 09:41 AM

^Doubley agreed.

matthooper

08-01-2007, 10:23 AM

Sorry, but, this is bull****, the movie didnt do well you say? Well it didnt do badly either, and since when is box office an indicator of quality? Are saying Titanic is the most popular movie ever?

I never once said that box office was a measure of quality. Not once. I also never said it did badly. It's all relative, it was a huge dissapointment to the studio's expectations and whether you want to admit it, just about every fan. No one thought $200 million would be the domestic figure. While not bad it's not good.

I simply said that the movie was a bigger box office dissapointment than the defenders care to admit. I also said that because of the low box office figures, it points to the fact that the public didn't embrace it. That's pretty obvious. I never once said anything about quality. ID4, Transformers, Signs, Rush Hour 2, all crap movies that made more money than Superman Returns. I didn't like SR much, but it was better than all those films.

The box office figures for SR is a combination of things. People didn't embrace it for one reason or another, so the word of mouth was not great and there were few repeat viewings. Those are the two things that make a film a big hit. But, there are dozens of films that I have loved that made nothing at the box office. Ed Wood is a perfect example. It was an enormous flop, but I think it's a classic. Box office has nothing to do with quality, and I never said it did. Box office only has to do with how much the public cares to see it and likes it.

matthooper

08-01-2007, 10:31 AM

This is the major problem with web boards. You get one idiot who can’t read and claims someone said something they didn’t, then you get bigger idiots saying “ ^ I agree”.

I don't know if it’s the fact that the board is made up of 12 year olds or adult morons.

I SEE SPIDEY

08-01-2007, 10:41 AM

Excel

08-01-2007, 11:26 AM

I never once said that box office was a measure of quality. Not once. I also never said it did badly. It's all relative, it was a huge dissapointment to the studio's expectations and whether you want to admit it, just about every fan. No one thought $200 million would be the domestic figure. While not bad it's not good.

I simply said that the movie was a bigger box office dissapointment than the defenders care to admit. I also said that because of the low box office figures, it points to the fact that the public didn't embrace it. That's pretty obvious. I never once said anything about quality. ID4, Transformers, Signs, Rush Hour 2, all crap movies that made more money than Superman Returns. I didn't like SR much, but it was better than all those films.

The box office figures for SR is a combination of things. People didn't embrace it for one reason or another, so the word of mouth was not great and there were few repeat viewings. Those are the two things that make a film a big hit. But, there are dozens of films that I have loved that made nothing at the box office. Ed Wood is a perfect example. It was an enormous flop, but I think it's a classic. Box office has nothing to do with quality, and I never said it did. Box office only has to do with how much the public cares to see it and likes it.

Box Office is a measure of what is most popular film at a given moment. While Supes is big...Pirates was far more popular. Very rarely do films coexist and do HUGE numbers when one ofth efilm is not a sequel.

AVEITWITHJAMON

08-01-2007, 11:32 AM

I never once said that box office was a measure of quality. Not once. I also never said it did badly. It's all relative, it was a huge dissapointment to the studio's expectations and whether you want to admit it, just about every fan. No one thought $200 million would be the domestic figure. While not bad it's not good.

I simply said that the movie was a bigger box office dissapointment than the defenders care to admit. I also said that because of the low box office figures, it points to the fact that the public didn't embrace it. That's pretty obvious. I never once said anything about quality. ID4, Transformers, Signs, Rush Hour 2, all crap movies that made more money than Superman Returns. I didn't like SR much, but it was better than all those films.

The box office figures for SR is a combination of things. People didn't embrace it for one reason or another, so the word of mouth was not great and there were few repeat viewings. Those are the two things that make a film a big hit. But, there are dozens of films that I have loved that made nothing at the box office. Ed Wood is a perfect example. It was an enormous flop, but I think it's a classic. Box office has nothing to do with quality, and I never said it did. Box office only has to do with how much the public cares to see it and likes it.

Were are getting it from that it dissapointed nearly every fan please? I'd love to know, because on Bluetights its well loved, and on here it always does very well on polls, that means IMO its well liked on the internet, but there is no possible way to gauge what "Most fans thought."

This is the major problem with web boards. You get one idiot who can’t read and claims someone said something they didn’t, then you get bigger idiots saying “ ^ I agree”.

I don't know if it’s the fact that the board is made up of 12 year olds or adult morons.

So we're idiots now huh?

OobeDoobBenubi

08-01-2007, 11:34 AM

Pirates was far more popular

& a movie about a Ring is more popular then Pirates :cwink: & a movie that takes place on a boat is more popular then both the Rings & Pirates movies

Lightning54SC

08-01-2007, 11:41 AM

ok seriosuly this is getting to ebe like BT.net...

get it through your skulls peole teh movie flopped in the eyes of the studio.. yes it made 390 million when it was expected to make double that...

you want proof it flopped, if ther is a sequel and i say "IF" but if there is one the kid will have a far less role, and there will be more action thus giving the reason why people disliked it, even the average movie goer knows superman shouldnt have akid and that the studio blew their wods to early on the film

matthooper

08-01-2007, 12:25 PM

So we're idiots now huh?

Again you people don't read. I called the people idiots who mis-quoted me. I never once said box office numbers were an indication of the quality of the film. Yet, I was basically quoted that. Do you read posts and forget 2 seconds later?

matthooper

08-01-2007, 12:27 PM

Please.:whatever:

Please what? I was misquoted and I called them on it.

FlawlessVictory

08-01-2007, 12:51 PM

AVEITWITHJAMON

08-01-2007, 01:17 PM

Again you people don't read. I called the people idiots who mis-quoted me. I never once said box office numbers were an indication of the quality of the film. Yet, I was basically quoted that. Do you read posts and forget 2 seconds later?

Basically yes, and whats with the attitude anyway. Ok you said that BO indicates the popularity of a movie, is that what you said?

If you did, then i would still call bull****, many of the most popular movies of today did terrible at the BO. Fightclub anyone?

superbaby

08-02-2007, 01:04 AM

ok seriosuly this is getting to ebe like BT.net...

get it through your skulls peole teh movie flopped in the eyes of the studio.. yes it made 390 million when it was expected to make double that...

you want proof it flopped, if ther is a sequel and i say "IF" but if there is one the kid will have a far less role, and there will be more action thus giving the reason why people disliked it, even the average movie goer knows superman shouldnt have a kid and that the studio blew their wods to early on the film
obviously, WB didn't know. they thought superman can use the incredibles or formula. :cwink:

manofsteel4life

08-02-2007, 01:35 AM

You know what is even sadder. Since he was following the Donner movies, which understood the character, you would think with that blueprint he could have made a Superman movie that was proper for the character. But nope. We got Singerman. A guy who sits outside an ex girlfriends house and uses his X-ray vision to stalk her.
i just dont understand why you insist that what he did makes him a stalker

manofsteel4life

08-02-2007, 01:42 AM

You know what is even sadder. Since he was following the Donner movies, which understood the character, you would think with that blueprint he could have made a Superman movie that was proper for the character. But nope. We got Singerman. A guy who sits outside an ex girlfriends house and uses his X-ray vision to stalk her.
why cant you understand that he wasnt using his xray in a bad way?...he was only using it to try to figure out the best way to approach Lois

Crook

08-02-2007, 01:44 AM

It was eavesdropping, plain and simple. Doesn't help that he was doing it behind some bushes either. :o

buggs0268

08-02-2007, 01:46 AM

i just dont understand why you insist that what he did makes him a stalker
Cause that is what stalkers do, and if stalkers had x-ray vision, they would use it. Stalker stand outside of their ex lover's, or perceived lover's house and watch them. Trust me. I had a few of them. Some of them I had to get restraining orders on. What he did was very much in the patern of what stalkers do.

manofsteel4life

08-02-2007, 01:52 AM

Cause that is what stalkers do, and if stalkers had x-ray vision, they would use it. Stalker stand outside of their ex lover's, or perceived lover's house and watch them. Trust me. I had a few of them. Some of them I had to get restraining orders on. What he did was very much in the patern of what stalkers do.
i understand that ,but you are taking it literal, that isnt the reason he did that, and you know that

buggs0268

08-02-2007, 02:00 AM

i understand that ,but you are taking it literal, that isnt the reason he did that, and you know that
No, what he did is what stalkers do. They look into windows. He knew she was with someone else. All he knew is that the kid was Richard's. And yet, he landed in her back yard and missused one of his powers to violate she and Richard's privacy of their own home and listened in on a private conversation. His motivations were the same as an ex lover stalker. What he did, had a cop seen it and been able to arrest him for doing so, was breaking the law and stalking Lois.

manofsteel4life

08-02-2007, 05:41 AM

No, what he did is what stalkers do. They look into windows. He knew she was with someone else. All he knew is that the kid was Richard's. And yet, he landed in her back yard and missused one of his powers to violate she and Richard's privacy of their own home and listened in on a private conversation. His motivations were the same as an ex lover stalker. What he did, had a cop seen it and been able to arrest him for doing so, was breaking the law and stalking Lois.
i seriously think that supes listening in on Lois and Richard was taking to way out of content....Lois and Supes relationship was more than that. If after Lois had told Supes that she never wanted to see him again, even after he had confronted her, than this whole stalking thing would be understandable

Qwerty©

08-02-2007, 10:50 AM

buggs0268

08-02-2007, 10:52 AM

A guy standing outside his ex-girlfriends house, looking in and listening to her and her current BF's conversation is stanking, super powers or not.

Qwerty©

08-02-2007, 10:53 AM

A guy standing outside his ex-girlfriends house, looking in and listening to her and her current BF's conversation is stanking, super powers or not.
It was an isolated incident. It's only stalking if you constantly follow someone around and spy on them.

FlawlessVictory

08-02-2007, 11:03 AM

It was an isolated incident. It's only stalking if you constantly follow someone around and spy on them.

Still doesn't make it right.

FlawlessVictory

08-02-2007, 11:08 AM

why cant you understand that he wasnt using his xray in a bad way?...he was only using it to try to figure out the best way to approach Lois

Ummm, he's going to her house, where she has a family!!! How could he have possibly thought at any point that would have been a good time to approach her.

Qwerty©

08-02-2007, 11:35 AM

Still doesn't make it right.It makes it not stalking, though.

AVEITWITHJAMON

08-02-2007, 12:39 PM

The whole stalker criticism is just plain ridiculous. Superman wanted to know the truth. Once he found it out, he never bothered her again. It's really no different to Superman using his powers to spy on criminals.

I agree, its not like he was watching Lois undress or in the shower or making love to Richard, he just watched them being a family, which he thinks he will never have.

Dark Knight

08-02-2007, 01:04 PM

I agree, its not like he was watching Lois undress or in the shower or making love to Richard, he just watched them being a family, which he thinks he will never have.

I agree! All this non sense that has been going around saying that Superman was a stalker is completely and utterly ridiculous!

Lighthouse

08-02-2007, 01:09 PM

Dark Knight

08-02-2007, 01:12 PM

I'm not going to jump into an argument I've done over a million times and its something no one will ever agree on, but I found the scene of Superman looking into Lois and Richards house to be creepy, and its something Superman wouldn't do in my eyes, but whatever.

He was just watching them be a family....he was satifiying his own curiosity in that regard.

Calling him a "stalker" is non sense.

Now if he would have kept doing something like that throughout the movie....

Then there would have been a problem....

Lighthouse

08-02-2007, 01:17 PM

He was just watching them be a family....he was satifiying his own curiosity in that regard.

Calling him a "stalker" is non sense.

Now if he would have kept doing something like that throughout the movie....

Then there would have been a problem....

I'm not going to get into it. I've done this argument a million times, and spent hours typing my reasons, so I don't really feel like doing it again. Its just like Superman lifting the kryptonite continent. I don't buy it, and it doesn't work for me at all. Superman's behavior in using his x-ray vision on his ex-girlfriend and her family constitutes as very creepy for me.

Motown Marvel

08-02-2007, 01:19 PM

AVEITWITHJAMON

08-02-2007, 01:22 PM

He was just watching them be a family....he was satifiying his own curiosity in that regard.

Calling him a "stalker" is non sense.

Now if he would have kept doing something like that throughout the movie....

Then there would have been a problem....

Exactly, he only did it the once, and once he heard that Lois didnt love him, he realised he had no place there and left.

while i didnt entirely mind that scene, superman's actions may be questionable, but it wasnt stalking. either way, i think it was just a quick and efficient way to get a plot point across in the film. it was important for supermans character in the film to hear lois say she doesnt love him...and this was a way of getting it done quick and easy. but i can understand people questioning superman's actions there. but you should also understand, superman is not perfect. he is fallable. though kryptonian, he has the same emotions as humans. he's not gonna be perfect all the time. i think thats an important thing to take from that scene.

People seem to forget that, at that point, Superman is probably feeling as lonely as he has EVER felt. He has just come back from a failed mission to possibly find survivors from Krypton, and returns to find the woman he loves has moved on. IMO his action are TOTALLY understandable in the situation.

superbaby

08-02-2007, 09:30 PM

while i didnt entirely mind that scene, superman's actions may be questionable, but it wasnt stalking. either way, i think it was just a quick and efficient way to get a plot point across in the film. it was important for supermans character in the film to hear lois say she doesnt love him...and this was a way of getting it done quick and easy. but i can understand people questioning superman's actions there. but you should also understand, superman is not perfect. he is fallable. though kryptonian, he has the same emotions as humans. he's not gonna be perfect all the time. i think thats an important thing to take from that scene.
is it really necessary for superman to hear lois saying she doesn't love him? for god's sake, a man leaves his lover for 5 years, shouldn't he wish her to move on and find her own happiness. when he found out that she has indeed moved on, should he be happy for her??? why still wanna seduce her???!!! how shameful!!! :cmad:

Optimus Prime.

08-02-2007, 10:10 PM

hmm good question. time to look it up!!

manofsteel4life

08-03-2007, 01:01 AM

Ummm, he's going to her house, where she has a family!!! How could he have possibly thought at any point that would have been a good time to approach her.
i didnt mean him approaching Lois at her house, i meant finding out her vibe, so the next day he could ask the right questions whether as Clark or Supes

Motown Marvel

08-03-2007, 03:16 AM

is it really necessary for superman to hear lois saying she doesn't love him?

yeah, probably. if theres a woman i love that i know once loved me, before i believe she doesnt anymore, i'd have to hear her say it. if you dont agree with that, then you must have never been head over heels in love with a woman before.

for god's sake, a man leaves his lover for 5 years, shouldn't he wish her to move on and find her own happiness.
cant fault a man for trying to be with his soul mate.

when he found out that she has indeed moved on, should he be happy for her???
if he truly believed she really moved on and that she was happy with that, then he would have likely let her be. but he didnt believe that, and he was right! it was pretty obvious that lois wasnt over superman, and it was pretty obvious she was using richard as a sub-par replacement when she was on the rebound.

why still wanna seduce her???!!! how shameful!!! :cmad:
to make sure she's making the right decisions for the right reasons. rather than making the wrong decisions (richard) for the wrong reasons (out of spite for superman leaving).

superbaby

08-03-2007, 03:50 AM

yeah, probably. if theres a woman i love that i know once loved me, before i believe she doesnt anymore, i'd have to hear her say it. if you dont agree with that, then you must have never been head over heels in love with a woman before.

cant fault a man for trying to be with his soul mate.

if he truly believed she really moved on and that she was happy with that, then he would have likely let her be. but he didnt believe that, and he was right! it was pretty obvious that lois wasnt over superman, and it was pretty obvious she was using richard as a sub-par replacement when she was on the rebound.

to make sure she's making the right decisions for the right reasons. rather than making the wrong decisions (richard) for the wrong reasons (out of spite for superman leaving).
how arrogant...
what has superman done for lois?
you know by saying so, you have just make lois and superman the bad persons and richard; a good guy as victim.

superbaby

08-03-2007, 04:06 AM

and it's unlike in notebook, the main male character deserves to have the girl.
he didn't leave her, he wanted her to further her study, he wrote her letter everyday but her mum kept them. after coming back from war, and when he knew that she was going to marry and having a new life, he didn't go to disturb her. he fulfilled his promise; to build their dream house. it was the girl who came back for him.
that's how a love story works. how a triangle love story resolves when everyone playing good guys for example.

it isn't like in SR. superman does nothing and under the name of true love, he deserves the girl.

Qwerty©

08-03-2007, 10:31 AM

what has superman done for lois?
Saved her life a few times?

dark_b

08-03-2007, 10:45 AM

Qwerty©

08-03-2007, 10:50 AM

dude how many stalkers did you have?Knowing buggs, they were probably just salesmen.

FlawlessVictory

08-03-2007, 10:56 AM

i didnt mean him approaching Lois at her house, i meant finding out her vibe, so the next day he could ask the right questions whether as Clark or Supes

When Clark first showed up in Metropolis at the Daily Planet, he found out that Lois was engaged and had a child. What other vibe could he have possibly found out from using his x-ray vision in their house. Was he hoping that maybe they were unhappy, so then he could make a move? It just doesn't make sense to me. He had no reason to be there and it was only done so that Singer could show how alone Superman was now, but Singer in the process created an uncomfortable scene that in a way compromised his character.

A more effective way would have been to have Superman fly through the city, doing a sort of surveillance, and then catch Lois and the family in the backyard eating and having a good time. That way there's no using the x-ray vision to spy in on them, he just happens to fly over or by them.

Crook

08-03-2007, 11:51 AM

Exactly. But I guess that we wouldn't have had the crucial moment of Lois saying she doesn't leave Superman anymore.

Nonetheless. Clark followed her ass home, but not before overhearing her address when she told the cab driver where to go. His ass changed into Superman mad quick. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v132/Dex4788/Smilies/Laughing/004.gif

buggs0268

08-06-2007, 10:52 PM

i just dont understand why you insist that what he did makes him a stalker
Here is a few real world reason's why:

http://www.roanoke.com/news/nrv/wb/xp-28302

http://www.citynews.ca/news/news_2797.aspx

http://kensingtonbrooklyn.blogspot.com/2007/05/security-alert-local-peeping-tom.html

There we go. That is what is wrong about it. And that is why it makes him appear weird in the movie.

merced

08-10-2007, 06:59 PM

No news, no rumors, no nothing. That is what is disturbing. I am hearing nothing from WB's side and nothing from Singer's side at this point. Scary to me.

I hope that means a decision has been made. With all its issues I think WB would be crazy to invest 175 million in another Superman film. The best thing I think is do JLA in 2010 without Superman. Use batman as anchor as IESB reports. Spin off the other characters. In 15 years whn WB is flush with money, maybe, from Flash, WW and GL then try another Superman. No news make me think WB has put Superman on the backburner for the indefinite future.

merced

08-10-2007, 07:05 PM

Every day that passes for me is pretty much a nail in the coffin for a sequel. Although I wish this wasn't the case.

Its depressing in a way but in the long run maybe the best thing for the franchise. I feel they need to go back to the drawing board with new director, writers and actors. Its sad in a way if it maens a 10 year wait until another Superman film. Maybe that is the best thing that can happen to the franchise?

merced

08-10-2007, 07:08 PM

I'm pretty much leaning toward a J.L. film happening now, instead of M.O.S.
\
My question is JLA good for Superman. I am not sure I want him in it. IESB says the focus is batman making me thing they won't use Superman. I hope so because I have a fear WB will write Superman as the boring white bread character in JLA to all the other intersting hip characters like MM and the rest.

merced

08-10-2007, 07:11 PM

You guys dont get it. Any of these film you mention

-"any movie"
-green lantern
-teen titans
-flash
-wonder woman
-even justice league

theyd be hit films, probably...but supermans on a whole other level and they know it.W.B. have 3 huge properties(HP, bats, Supes) and then a bunch of little ones; and their goal is to have 1 huge 1 a year and then a few of their little ones. The huge properties bring in cash every where, box office, merchandise, dvd, tv , everything. Their "little" ones cant do that.

Their the biggest studio in the world, and they know they wont survive a year without one of their bigs guns. Thats the only reason theyve consistently broke 1 billion domestically when nobody else can; they've gotten 1 of em out every year. Every year they always have huge film to fall back on. 2006 was a total disaster till Superman made it just a dissappointment. 2005 was good but not great until potter smashed records.

These films you mentioned; flash, gl, teen titans....these arent fall back films. They could be hits, but their not the kind you base a year around. Thats why it isn't that simple to say "they can put out any film" or "they have 2options: superman or no superman".

To sum up:

NO SUPERMAN means their not gonna be able to realistcally compete for the domestic crown in 2009 as HP7 will be summer 2010 and BATMAN 3 in summer 2011. A Superman film is their only film that would be a guarenteed 200 million dollar hit.

W.B. know it, thats why we will get superman on film in 2009. Even if it means releasing it winter, they will do all they can to get out in 2009 because with Harry Potter ending in 2010, they cant have just one major franchise and continue the dominance theyve had.

I love Superman first but I honestly think Flash, MM and GL could be much more profitable for WB. Superman is too corny. He needs to be written completely differently to please movie audiences I think but that will make fans mad.

merced

08-10-2007, 07:35 PM

that is how their backing thmselves into a corner...jl needs to be rewritten, then sign a director, than cast all the heros. Its not auagust; the script would be ready by october..get a director...thats 6 months max for preduction (compared to the usual 8-10) in order to get cameras rolling by may, which would give them 14 months from filming to release max (compared to the usual 15-17).

Basically it would be rushed, thus upping the risk factor by ten. A rushed superman isnt nearly as big of a risk.

I wish I could just have 1 meeting with w.b...i could tell them exactly how and what they need to get the franchise where they want it...instead they pick guys like singer to make 200 million art movies and put in super kid to perminetly **** up a sequel :cmad:

I think the worst thing WB could do is think they have to have a superhero film in 2009. It is getting to where it it too late for JL. The casting will be a bear. If they use Superman in JL the casting for the new Supes will maybe be the easiest of all.

If its too late for JL in 2009 its too late for an SR sequel.

I think the main thing WB needs to do is get bale into the JL film. If TDK is huge in 2008 it will help JL a lot. Asking bale to film JL for 2009 is too much maybe. I think that may be why the holdup. If WB gets bale they don't need Superman in JL. Using both would be a mistake I think. JL is meant to launch Flash, WW and GL from all i read. Not relaunch Superman or launch batman who is already launched.

Pickle-El

08-10-2007, 07:40 PM

2009 is possible....but I would prefer it be around Christmas if they do that.

merced

08-10-2007, 07:45 PM

Whats really curious is Warners didn't even bother doing a panel with at least Routh or Bosworth or something. They are showing absolutely no support towards a sequel.

That sort of sums it up. Not having Routh at comicCon is curious. I understand WB loved Routh about SR more than anything. I'd think they would be promoting him as the new Superman if they planned a sequel. If they do JL I think no way Routh will be in it so maybe they are distancing themselves. WB is showing no support it seems for any of them is the bottom line.

GreenKToo

08-10-2007, 07:58 PM

\
My question is JLA good for Superman. I am not sure I want him in it. IESB says the focus is batman making me thing they won't use Superman. I hope so because I have a fear WB will write Superman as the boring white bread character in JLA to all the other intersting hip characters like MM and the rest.

If there is no S.R. sequel, you can take it to the bank that superman will be in J.L.
It would be crazy not to have him in it.

merced

08-10-2007, 08:01 PM

My money is honestly on the buzz created by The Incredible Hulk. Like it or not, the two scenarios are very very comprable. We will likely see a trailer either in the winter or at least with the super bowl. They will be able to do market studies, pick up on the buzz created by it, etc. Then they will be able to make their call with plenty of time to get either a late summer or winter release in 2009.

Yes but great buzz for The Hulk, and it looks awesome so far, points to a reboot. New actors, director and writers. No way that can be done for 2009. I don't even think a reboot is on the table for a decade or two.

merced

08-10-2007, 08:06 PM

yeah....I still think Singer made a mistake by not casting Caviezel. Caviezel would have been amazing as Supes.

In hindsight I think Singer made a mistake in casting not just Superman but Lois and lex too.

merced

08-10-2007, 08:17 PM

If there is no S.R. sequel, you can take it to the bank that superman will be in J.L.
It would be crazy not to have him in it.

The IESB report says batman is the focus of JL. I can't see WB using both batman and Superman in a film making it too crowded for heroes like GL and WW the film is meant to lauch in solo franchises. I will be pi**ed if Superman is in it and made to look the uncool character to the rest. WB is going to use the toy sales and buzz of the JL characters to decide who gets solos. I'm afraid Superman will lose that contest. Its why I absolutely hope he is not in the film an am cheered by the IESB story.

GreenKToo

08-10-2007, 08:19 PM

I know, I read it. It says Batman indeed is the anchor, but it says superman is there as well.

http://www.iesb.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2973&Itemid=99

merced

08-10-2007, 08:25 PM

I know, I read it. It says Batman indeed is the anchor, but it says superman is there as well.

http://www.iesb.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2973&Itemid=99

My point exactly. If JL was meant to relaunch the Superman franchise he would be the anchor. he is not. Just another character among 4 or 5 to batman's number one. WB has to use the success of bale/Batman to launch JL. In later drafts my hope and bet is Superman will be dropped. A JL film is like kryptonite to Superman as I see it.

superbaby

08-11-2007, 04:20 AM

My point exactly. If JL was meant to relaunch the Superman franchise he would be the anchor. he is not. Just another character among 4 or 5 to batman's number one. WB has to use the success of bale/Batman to launch JL. In later drafts my hope and bet is Superman will be dropped. A JL film is like kryptonite to Superman as I see it.
i totally don't get it.
since when batman/bale is a success when it made less than SR worldwide??? (don't give me the budget crap. it didn't make the spidey number. it just made as good as FF only. consider how big the fanbase and popular batman is to FF, i thought BB is a disappointment too!!!)

dark_b

08-11-2007, 04:22 AM

2009 is possible....but I would prefer it be around Christmas if they do that.SR was a movie for december. the sequel will be action packed. so it will be a summer movie IMO.

dark_b

08-11-2007, 04:24 AM

i totally don't get it.
since when batman/bale is a success when it made less than SR worldwide??? (don't give me the budget crap. it didn't make the spidey number. it just made as good as FF only. consider how big the fanbase and popular batman is to FF, i thought BB is a disappointment too!!!)succses?
maybe because almost everyone on this world that watched BB liked the movie? maybe ebecause nolan and bale brought the dark knight back after B&R?

superbaby

08-11-2007, 04:38 AM

succses?
maybe because almost everyone on this world that watched BB liked the movie? maybe ebecause nolan and bale brought the dark knight back after B&R?
how did you measure?
i could say the same for SR... blah and blah after SIV.

Steelsheen

08-11-2007, 05:49 AM

merced

08-11-2007, 06:28 AM

a Justice League movie without Superman is not a Justice League movie
a Justice League movie without Batman is not a Justice League movie
a Justice League movie without Wonder Woman is not a Justice League movie

for all of WB's inane decissions, they do have enough common sense to know that when people hear "Justice League" they think Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman at the very least. the most popular incarantion of the League has always had the Big 3 plus Flash and Green Lantern.

i cant believe some of you people cant get this through your thick skulls. this isnt rocket science you know.

I think they only need 2 of the big 3 in JL. If the plan now is to have Batman anchor JL it makes sense. Without Superman WB can spend more on FX showing the powers of the rest. Batman won't cost much FX. I think he makes it easier to put the others front and center. I think WQB is thinking this through. Making Batman the anchor is a good me to me.

Steelsheen

08-11-2007, 07:16 AM

merced you really dont get the concept of The Justice League do you?

read my post again. its not "what i think". its is a summary, a fact backed up by 70 years of DC Comic History.

GreenKToo

08-11-2007, 07:19 AM

a Justice League movie without Superman is not a Justice League movie
a Justice League movie without Batman is not a Justice League movie
a Justice League movie without Wonder Woman is not a Justice League movie

for all of WB's inane decissions, they do have enough common sense to know that when people hear "Justice League" they think Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman at the very least. the most popular incarantion of the League has always had the Big 3 plus Flash and Green Lantern.

i cant believe some of you people cant get this through your thick skulls. this isnt rocket science you know.

Thank you. W.B. may act a little crazy sometimes but, there not stupid.

merced

08-11-2007, 07:33 AM

merced you really dont get the concept of The Justice League do you?

read my post again. its not "what i think". its is a summary, a fact backed up by 70 years of DC Comic History.

I understand. I just think WB is looking at it as a business and not as a fanboy. At first JL was going to be basically a SR sequel. Then it was going to be WW and Superman focused. Now stories say Batman will be the anchor. Superman is still in it. It sounds like his role in JL is being pared back as th concept evolves. I think Superman is not a priority for WB now. I think their priority is getting successful solo WW, GLs and others launched.

Retroman

05-29-2008, 03:04 AM

The official San Diego Comic Con (July 24 -27) schedule for 2008 hasn't yet been announced but on their site they do have a list of companies and studios who have booked exhibit space in the hall.

It's not really big news but at least we know WB and DC will be have some kind of presence there. Hopefully they're bringing along something from SR2 and other in development superhero films.:o

Exhibit space at this show is limited.
List as of May 16, 2008

W. W. Norton
Walt Davis / FM Designs
Walt Disney Studios Home Entertainment
War Machine Marketing
Wardell Brown
Warner Bros Studios
Watts Atelier
Weatherly Studio
What’s Hot Comics & Cards
Who is Rocket Johnson?
Wildcard Ink/Gumby Comics
Wildstar Tempest
William Stout, Inc
William Wu
Willow Jewelry
Windlass Studios
Wizard Closet
Wizard Entertainment
Wizkids, Inc
Write Brothers Inc
http://www.comic-con.org/cci/cci_exhib_4.shtml#W
http://www.comic-con.org/cci/cci_exhib_1.shtml#D

Superark

05-29-2008, 08:52 AM

Kal-El Fan

05-29-2008, 10:57 AM

^Singer made an appearance at SDCC for SR, so why not the sequel? That's assuming MOS is going forward. It would be nice to hear something from WB. :super:

dark_b

05-29-2008, 11:16 AM

give me an example where the director came to SDCC to announce the sequel or a movie.

GreenKToo

05-29-2008, 11:18 AM

I'm sure we'll get some sorta unofficial announcement before then if their planning on going forward with it. Stuff leaks out ya know.

Kal-El Fan

05-29-2008, 01:25 PM

give me an example where the director came to SDCC to announce the sequel or a movie.

http://www.bluetights.net/journals/video_small_wm.php?id=22
or
http://www.bluetights.net/index.php?categoryid=23

Also, please remember that I said Singer made an appearance about SR, not that the appearance was announcing it. I was merely stating the possibility.

Dark Knight

05-29-2008, 01:34 PM

Ya know who I want off this project?

JON PETERS! I want him to have ZERO influence when it comes to MOS!

0...The man brings bad vibes and karma IMO.

Showtime

05-29-2008, 02:56 PM

He had zero influence on Returns, he basically is in charge of "toys".

bgshw44

05-29-2008, 03:14 PM

well the sr toys stunk!

Showtime

05-29-2008, 03:15 PM

They did well with merchandising suprsingly because those toys were bad.

Superark

05-29-2008, 03:31 PM

I didn't think the toys were that bad, but certainly could have been better

Showtime

05-29-2008, 03:32 PM

They were hit or miss.

Dark Knight

05-29-2008, 03:39 PM

They did well with merchandising suprsingly because those toys were bad.

See? Even the toys were horrible and Peters was in charge of that?

That guy Peters needs to go!

Showtime

05-29-2008, 03:41 PM

He'll be there most likely, unless something happens because of the lawsuit he has against him.

dark_b

05-29-2008, 03:41 PM

a lot of toys are bad. plus we are adults. let leave teh toys to little children. i mean if you are a hardcore superma nand want to collect everything . the nfine. but toys are for little children to play.
i think the toys were good enough for a little guy running on the street with hes toy in the hand.

Showtime

05-29-2008, 03:45 PM

dark_b

05-29-2008, 03:48 PM

but if they are collectables then why nto call them like that? why call them toys? why not make it for the fans?

Showtime

05-29-2008, 03:49 PM

It is all one in the same. Kids play with them and adults collect them.

Dark Knight

05-29-2008, 05:36 PM

He'll be there most likely, unless something happens because of the lawsuit he has against him.

Which lawsuit?

FilmNerdJamie

05-29-2008, 05:40 PM

Which lawsuit?

Sexual harrassment lawsuit. Nuff said.

Dark Knight

05-29-2008, 05:45 PM

Sexual harrassment lawsuit. Nuff said.

Sheesh.....that should be enough to let Peters go as a producer for MOS. :o

FilmNerdJamie

05-29-2008, 05:51 PM

Sheesh.....that should be enough to let Peters go as a producer for MOS. :o

With all due respect, his producing skills have nothing to do with what he does or doesn't do away from the set.

That said, he had damn-near nothing to do with Returns and will have nothing to do with The Man of Steel next year...

Dark Knight

05-29-2008, 06:15 PM

With all due respect, his producing skills have nothing to do with what he does or doesn't do away from the set.

That said, he had damn-near nothing to do with Returns and will have nothing to do with The Man of Steel next year...

No one ever said it did....but sometimes karma is a you know what....and knowing the mans history behind trying to get previous Superman films made and how he was pretty much involved in wasting a crap load of money on pre production for each adaptation says alot about his "producing skills" as of late IMO. Each director that was involved with the guy when it came to a Superman film, said it was either a "nightmare experience" or "one of the worst experiences of there film career". Numerous other directors declined his offer to direct. Lucky them....

Now thats what I want to hear...and lets hope that if he truly doesn't have anything to do with MOS as you claim, then his name is NOT listed on end credits as producer.

Showtime

05-29-2008, 06:24 PM

That isn't necessarily true in regards to the producer credit.

Dark Knight

05-29-2008, 06:51 PM

That isn't necessarily true in regards to the producer credit.

Oh no.....:csad:

GreenKToo

05-29-2008, 06:55 PM

The end credits should read.

hair designer: Jon Peters.

Dark Knight

05-29-2008, 07:01 PM

The end credits should read.

hair designer: Jon Peters.

LOL....He would even screw that up! Ooops....:o

GreenKToo

05-29-2008, 07:05 PM

LOL....He would even screw that up! Ooops....:o
^ :hehe: I can't stand him. He ( like u said ) caused alot of grief on past Superman film projects.
I'm sure you've watched the Kevin Smith vid. about him. Priceless stuff.

Anywho, like I said earlier, if they plan an announcement soon, it will prolly leak out beforehand.

FilmNerdJamie

05-29-2008, 07:48 PM

Anywho, like I said earlier, if they plan an announcement soon, it will prolly leak out beforehand.

To be fair., noone expected Marvel Films to come out and announce their entire slate of projects for the next 2 years...besides the Iron Man sequel.

Alot of folks were surprised to see Thor, Avengers and Captain America officially announced including release dates; especially when it looked like for awhile Thor wasn't going to happen.

Regarding the forthcoming Superman sequel, it should be worth noting that for the longest time it was listed in the middle to bottom of the "In Development" area (on the official Legendary Pictures homepage) below stuff like Clash of the Titans, Kung Fu, Akira, etc.

And now, it's right on top of that list. Is that a small thing? Yes. But it's worth mentioning because it appears to have become a higher priority than projects that do officially have writers and what not involved.

Just some food for thought...

GreenKToo

05-29-2008, 08:01 PM

To be fair., noone expected Marvel Films to come out and announce their entire slate of projects for the next 2 years...besides the Iron Man sequel.

Alot of folks were surprised to see Thor, Avengers and Captain America officially announced including release dates; especially when it looked like for awhile Thor wasn't going to happen.

Regarding the forthcoming Superman sequel, it should be worth noting that for the longest time it was listed in the middle to bottom of the "In Development" area (on the official Legendary Pictures homepage) below stuff like Clash of the Titans, Kung Fu, Akira, etc.

And now, it's right on top of that list. Is that a small thing? Yes. But it's worth mentioning because it appears to have become a higher priority than projects that do officially have writers and what not involved.

Just some food for thought...
Apparently W.B. had a ''clash'' of their own revolving around J.L. and M.O.S., and it looks like the M.O.S. proponents won.

Regarding SDCC. I'd geek out if they pull a marvel and announce a whole slate of C.B. films.
Its not likely to happen, but its still something interesting to think about.

FilmNerdJamie

05-29-2008, 08:12 PM

Regarding SDCC. I'd geek out if they pull a marvel and announce a whole slate of C.B. films.
Its not likely to happen, but its still something interesting to think about.

Can't see anything being announced at Comic-Con DC related other than the Superman sequel...maybe Shazam!

My $$$ on the "big news" at SDCC being Star Trek footage and/or official pictures of the cast in costume, Marvel Films make more announcments (i.e. casting, director/writer revealed, etc.) and TMOS.

If WB announces the sequel before SDCC, then they might have a panel consisting of Bryan, the writer(s), producer(s) and maybe Brandon. There wouldn't be anything to show obviously.

The filmmakers behind The Incredible Hulk did something similar during the 2006 SDCC correct me if I'm wrong. It had just been announced a month or so prior and noone had been cast. It was just the filmmakers talking and going over everything with the fans about their intentions, what to expect, etc.

GreenKToo

05-30-2008, 07:33 AM

Can't see anything being announced at Comic-Con DC related other than the Superman sequel...maybe Shazam!

My $$$ on the "big news" at SDCC being Star Trek footage and/or official pictures of the cast in costume, Marvel Films make more announcments (i.e. casting, director/writer revealed, etc.) and TMOS.

If WB announces the sequel before SDCC, then they might have a panel consisting of Bryan, the writer(s), producer(s) and maybe Brandon. There wouldn't be anything to show obviously.

The filmmakers behind The Incredible Hulk did something similar during the 2006 SDCC correct me if I'm wrong. It had just been announced a month or so prior and noone had been cast. It was just the filmmakers talking and going over everything with the fans about their intentions, what to expect, etc.
Your correct. fan interaction at its best.
Side note here. J.F actually opened up blogs and asked fans what they wanted to see in Iron Man. Look at the result of that, $$$$.

dark_b

05-30-2008, 07:38 AM

Superfreak

05-30-2008, 07:42 AM

Apparently W.B. had a ''clash'' of their own revolving around J.L. and M.O.S., and it looks like the M.O.S. proponents won.

Regarding SDCC. I'd geek out if they pull a marvel and announce a whole slate of C.B. films.
Its not likely to happen, but its still something interesting to think about.

thank the gods for that one. Does anyone here think it ludarcis to try and start a justice league franchise, without any of the already established franchises? I just wish that I could understand DC's approach to their movie properties. It's been like a decade since Marvel started pumping out their 'nex-gen' superhero movies... all which feel like they fall in the same, if not similar universe, which totally opens the possibility of crossovers for them. This is what WB/DC should be after IMO... but it never seems like they ever seem to learn/move in that direction.

GreenKToo

05-30-2008, 08:00 AM

FilmNerdJamie

05-30-2008, 08:03 AM

Personally, I think the closest thing you'll ever see to Justice League is a World's Finest-type "team-up" film with Routh's Supes and Bale's Bats (i.e. post Batman trilogy and Superman sequels).

GreenKToo

05-30-2008, 08:06 AM

please. lets not even start to talk about IM. i hope that there are nto people here who think that the movie made so much money because it was faithfull to the comics.

it has nothing to do with the comics. it was just a movie for the masses.
I know that. You have to please the public first since they buy most of the tickets, BUT, if you can please the fans, the public will most likely love it as well.
Go to the I.M. boards and see if their split over I.M. like we are over S.R.
No C.B. film is 100% faithful, but I.M. is mighty close. The fans were pleased as well as the masses. It goes hand in hand IMHO.

FlawlessVictory

05-30-2008, 09:07 AM

thank the gods for that one. Does anyone here think it ludarcis to try and start a justice league franchise, without any of the already established franchises? I just wish that I could understand DC's approach to their movie properties. It's been like a decade since Marvel started pumping out their 'nex-gen' superhero movies... all which feel like they fall in the same, if not similar universe, which totally opens the possibility of crossovers for them. This is what WB/DC should be after IMO... but it never seems like they ever seem to learn/move in that direction.

It's not DC's approach, it's WB. WB's approach to the JLA film was completely asinine and mind boggling. Start a JLA franchise while still making Batman and Superman films with different actors for the JLA and solo films? WTF?!? :huh: Are they purposely looking to sabotage their own franchises? Then, the reasoning goes, that JLA was to be made to create awareness for characters such as Flash and GL and then they would get their own solo movies. But even then, JLA was to feature Stewart GL while the solo film was to focus on Jordan GL. And Roven confirmed his Flash would have nothing to do with JLA Flash, so different casting there too.

I so hope this version of JLA is dead, it just sounds like a complete disaster. And the casting that was put together was completely uninspiring, it was turning to be a joke. However, even though this version is on life support, I won't be entirely relieved until I hear George Miller confirm it is not happening anytime soon.

TheComicbookKid

05-30-2008, 10:06 AM

Singer had better not show is face at Comic-Con. Routh maybe(he just played the part). Just announce the movie and maybe some concept art and move on to Shazam.

dark_b

05-30-2008, 11:12 AM

I know that. You have to please the public first since they buy most of the tickets, BUT, if you can please the fans, the public will most likely love it as well.
Go to the I.M. boards and see if their split over I.M. like we are over S.R.
No C.B. film is 100% faithful, but I.M. is mighty close. The fans were pleased as well as the masses. It goes hand in hand IMHO.i agree. there is a superman script on some table that would be for the masses and for the GP. it can be done .and IMO it can be done with 150 milions. but dont expect grounbdreaking effects. you need spielberg,cameron and ILM or weta for this.

whats funny is that IM didnt have grounbdreaking effects and it didnt have nothing new when it came to action. but the combination of story,humor,main actor,suit,CGI and action was so good that it didnt matter. it was good enough .

dark_b

05-30-2008, 11:15 AM

It's not DC's approach, it's WB. WB's approach to the JLA film was completely asinine and mind boggling. Start a JLA franchise while still making Batman and Superman films with different actors for the JLA and solo films? WTF?!? :huh: Are they purposely looking to sabotage their own franchises? Then, the reasoning goes, that JLA was to be made to create awareness for characters such as Flash and GL and then they would get their own solo movies. But even then, JLA was to feature Stewart GL while the solo film was to focus on Jordan GL. And Roven confirmed his Flash would have nothing to do with JLA Flash, so different casting there too.

I so hope this version of JLA is dead, it just sounds like a complete disaster. And the casting that was put together was completely uninspiring, it was turning to be a joke. However, even though this version is on life support, I won't be entirely relieved until I hear George Miller confirm it is not happening anytime soon.its pretty simple. WB was lying. thats why it didnt make sense about the solo GL and flash. they were lying.

i know that thisis a buisness and that they want make money. but why not be honest? JL was meant to make bilions. it was meant to be a mega blockbuster. simple as that. it was to make money that BB and SR couldnt make.

Dark Knight

05-30-2008, 11:41 AM

Hmm....why can't WB's hire WETA to do the F/X for MOS?

Dark Knight

05-30-2008, 11:42 AM

dark_b

05-30-2008, 12:04 PM

Hmm....why can't WB's hire WETA to do the F/X for MOS?
i think that they sned to the CGI studios some papers what they want. then every studio needs to show them some examples if they can handle it.
i think sonyimageworks did a great city presentation that they liked. but i dont remember the details.
does anyonoe remember the details?

GreenKToo

05-30-2008, 01:00 PM

It's not DC's approach, it's WB. WB's approach to the JLA film was completely asinine and mind boggling. Start a JLA franchise while still making Batman and Superman films with different actors for the JLA and solo films? WTF?!? :huh: Are they purposely looking to sabotage their own franchises? Then, the reasoning goes, that JLA was to be made to create awareness for characters such as Flash and GL and then they would get their own solo movies. But even then, JLA was to feature Stewart GL while the solo film was to focus on Jordan GL. And Roven confirmed his Flash would have nothing to do with JLA Flash, so different casting there too.

I so hope this version of JLA is dead, it just sounds like a complete disaster. And the casting that was put together was completely uninspiring, it was turning to be a joke. However, even though this version is on life support, I won't be entirely relieved until I hear George Miller confirm it is not happening anytime soon.
I think this is a perfect example of too many cooks in the kitchen.
One exec wants this film, while another wants this one, blah blah blah, etc etc.
IMHO, There needs to be a C.B. film division at W.B. and pronto.

Retroman

06-05-2008, 03:31 AM

They should have Singer and company announce the movie there. I'm hoping if he does he has some kind of concept art or Poster of the new Superman movie
That would be great but i wouldn't bet on it just yet.
^Singer made an appearance at SDCC for SR, so why not the sequel? That's assuming MOS is going forward. It would be nice to hear something from WB. :super:
And he was there the following year too to talk up the dvd and the sequel.
give me an example where the director came to SDCC to announce the sequel or a movie.
Jon Favreau, Louis Leterrier, Edgar Wright (Ant Man), Tim Story, Zack Snyder.....

Some news...Jim Lee will be at Comic Con this year. I doubt he knows anything about the sequel but if i'm not mistake he did do the artwork for the DC Comics opening in SR.

Jim Lee
Acclaimed comic book illustrator Jim Lee was born in Seoul, South Korea in 1964. Today Lee is the creative director of WildStorm Studios (which he founded in 1992) and the penciller for many of DC Comics’ best-selling comics and graphic novels, including All Star Batman and Robin, The Boy Wonder; Batman: Hush; and Superman: For Tomorrow.
http://www.comic-con.org/cci/cci_guests.shtml#Lee
http://www.comic-con.org/cci/cci_guests.shtml

mego joe

06-05-2008, 10:23 AM

mego joe

06-05-2008, 10:24 AM

dark_b

06-05-2008, 10:40 AM

it was. but this is not the reason it made mony.

Showtime

06-05-2008, 10:41 AM

I agree. It wasn't the reason it made money, it made money because it resonated with the general public.

mego joe

06-05-2008, 10:43 AM

it was. but this is not the reason it made mony.

I don't think so. I think it's hard to make a hugely successful comic book film without a certrain degree of fideltiy to the source material. I'm not saying it's automatic, but it's a key ingredient.

dark_b

06-05-2008, 10:44 AM

showtime:
agree. i think they used the faithfulnes of the comics and combained it so that the masses could enjoy it.
plus it had a good main actor,cool suit,action and of course humor.all those elements are important for a big budget movie in summer.

dark_b

06-05-2008, 10:46 AM

I don't think so. I think it's hard to make a hugely successful comic book film without a certrain degree of fideltiy to the source material. I'm not saying it's automatic, but it's a key ingredient.the main money is from the masses. they dont know the source material. so how can the faithfulnes of the comic be important for the movie succes?

Showtime

06-05-2008, 10:47 AM

showtime:
agree. i think they used the faithfulnes of the comics and combained it so that the masses could enjoy it.
7plus it had a good main actor,cool suit,action and of course humor.all those elements are important for a big budget movie in summer.

You wonder if one led to the other, but I think you worry about the masses first and fanboys second personally. If you're a studio.

mego joe

06-05-2008, 10:49 AM

the main money is from the masses. they dont know the source material. so how can the faithfulnes of the comic be important for the movie succes?

The comic fans can and will destroy project if they can. Isn't it obvious? Haven't we been discussing SR for 2 years and how well it did with the GP, yet it doesn't have a sequel in production? I guarantee you, if SR had not divided the fans and been more faithful to the comics we would be talking about the already in production sequel and not 'gee, when (or if) production on a sequel will start.'

dark_b

06-05-2008, 10:49 AM

i think the studio was thinking money and masses. jon was there to balance it. he knew what the studio demands. so he needed to use it from the comiss and make it work in a movie for the masses.

or maybe iron mans story is just in the comics already for the masses.

dark_b

06-05-2008, 10:53 AM

The comic fans can and will destroy project if they can. Isn't it obvious? Haven't we been discussing SR for 2 years and how well it did with the GP, yet it doesn't have a sequel in production? I guarantee you, if SR had not divided the fans and been more faithful to the comics we would be talking about the already in production sequel and not 'gee, when (or if) production on a sequel will start.'hmmmm could be....or could not be true.

maybe its just that WB was dumb enough to expect 100 milions more from SR. which is IMO idiotic because SR was nto a movie for such a big BO.
plus we know that there are camps at WB. one wants the sequel. one dont. one wanted teh JL and they won. tehy won until everything felt apart.

maybe its because at WB not everyone wants the same. the sequel. but maybe its really because of the fans.

maybe and really mabye the movie just didnt WOOOW the masses( and we all know it didnt).
people talked like crazy when 300 came out. its not a smart movie. but its a movie that you can enjoy.

mego joe

06-05-2008, 10:54 AM

i think the studio was thinking money and masses.

No doubt.

jon was there to balance it. he knew what the studio demands. so he needed to use it from the comiss and make it work in a movie for the masses.

or maybe iron mans story is just in the comics already for the masses.

That's part of it. I'm just suggesting that the route to success with comic films has to include that faithfulness to the source material. It's never going to be 100%, but it's importance has to be taken seriously. I think the approach you mention above " use it from the comiss and make it work in a movie for the masses" is on target. Adapt it. Don't change it or re-invent it. Make it relevant but don't lose the spirit of the character in the adaptation.
I think the more well known a character is the more closely the comics have to be followed as well.

dark_b

06-05-2008, 10:56 AM

in summer after a movie i go on a beer and a hamburger. i think a lot of people go on a drink after they watch a movei in summer. and if the movie woows you you talk about the movie.

now i dont think that a 15 yr old boy with hes friends will talk about supermans relationship when drinking a coke and eating a hot dog. or will they?
we all know what people talked after 300 and IM and TF. ''WOOOOOOOOW dude do you remember this and that? how awsome was that. wanst this funny? heheh yeah it was. sam's happy time hehehheeh. ''
things like that. to some people it is dumb and to some it is not. but it is what masses do. IMO.

dark_b

06-05-2008, 11:00 AM

No doubt.

That's part of it. I'm just suggesting that the route to success with comic films has to include that faithfulness to the source material. It's never going to be 100%, but it's importance has to be taken seriously. I think the approach you mention above " use it from the comiss and make it work in a movie for the masses" is on target. Adapt it. Don't change it or re-invent it. Make it relevant but don't lose the spirit of the character in the adaptation.
I think the more well known a character is the more closely the comics have to be followed as well.hey making a superman movei for the masses that uses elements from the comics is the way to go.

we all know that the fact that there was no luthorcorp is already bad. but the fact that lex is the same and has the same plan from S:TM is just waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay WRONG. i mean if they would at least tease us with something from the comics like a possible luthorcorp i think a lot of fans would be happy today. but hey we got ''gotham'' right?
i will give singer a second chance. he is the artist. and WB is the one who gives the greenlight and the money.
if singer really used SR as a movie to gring superman back ok. but hte sequel neeeds to fix the problems and have some comic elements in it. if it doesnt its not singers fault but WB's.

so lets hope for lexcorp(i dont care if it doesntm ake sense after SR) and lets hope for some good action,fighting and of course a brighter movie. not a briight suit IMO. the whole color proces needs to be changed. no more desaturated green sky. blue sky with bright white clouds.

mego joe

06-05-2008, 11:01 AM

hmmmm could be....or could not be true.

maybe its just that WB was dumb enough to expect 100 milions more from SR. which is IMO idiotic because SR was nto a movie for such a big BO.

Which really comes down to the approach. SR was a film with a personal relationship story driving it. Not exactly what you would expect from a Superman film. Singer didn't approach it as a SUperman story, but as a busted relationship story.

It's not crazy for WB to have expected big numbers from a new Superman franchise, but it is crazy for them to have expected big numbers from SR after viewing it. But at that point it was too late, budgets, projections and expectations had already been set.

plus we know that there are camps at WB. one wants the sequel. one dont. one wanted teh JL and they won. tehy won until everything felt apart.

maybe its because at WB not everyone wants the same. the sequel. but maybe its really because of the fans.

It's certainly a part of it. It certainly made WB think and it could be the reason there are the different camps you mention above.

maybe and really mabye the movie just didnt WOOOW the masses( and we all know it didnt).

You know and I know, but there are a significant number of people on these boards that are still deluding themseleves into believing that SR was a hit and was liked just fine.

people talked like crazy when 300 came out. its not a smart movie. but its a movie that you can enjoy.

300 was enjoyable. But SR was not smart.

dark_b

06-05-2008, 11:08 AM

''You know and I know, but there are a significant number of people on these boards that are still deluding themseleves into believing that SR was a hit and was liked just fine.''

i think it didnt woow the masses. but that doesnt mean that people didnt like it. it did some good numbers. but to me the WOOW factor is when you hear about the movie every day .
when girls who dont even like this type of movie talk about it.

dark_b

06-05-2008, 11:10 AM

It's not crazy for WB to have expected big numbers from a new Superman franchise, but it is crazy for them to have expected big numbers from SR after viewing it. But at that point it was too late, budgets, projections and expectations had already been set.

WB knew exactly what movie they are getting. they dont give you the money and let you do your thing for the next 12 months. they were the ones who gave singer more money for the extra buller scene because they knew there wasnt enough money shots.
again they knew. its over.its WB money and its the character we love. singer is a tool for WB to bring superman to the big screen.

mego joe

06-05-2008, 11:28 AM

WB knew exactly what movie they are getting.

I don't know. FOlks who have read the original script mention that there's a lot missing in the final cut, much of which was never filmed.

they dont give you the money and let you do your thing for the next 12 months.

But that's what they did. THey greenlit the film on a 30 page treatment, not a full script. I don't think it's out of the real of possibility. We already know that WB gave Singer full control, right? That was their mistake, not expecting big bucks from a SUperman film. The mistake was having their hand in the picture to make sure that the movie was heading in the direction of their expectations.

they were the ones who gave singer more money for the extra buller scene because they knew there wasnt enough money shots.

Exactly, after seeing what was in the can they knew they needed more

again they knew. its over.its WB money and its the character we love. singer is a tool for WB to bring superman to the big screen.

I certainly agree with that!

I Am The Knight

06-05-2008, 11:28 AM

mego joe

06-05-2008, 11:31 AM

I dunno. Maybe if Singer had the power to make 2 movies at the same time...Kinda like what he wanted to do with X3 and SR. But since he chose to do Valkyrie first...You are getting Valkyrie first.

If SR had come out of the gates like gangbusters and perfromed wildly to wildly positive praise from all, then the sequel would have been greenlit right away like TDK, and pre-production would have begun. Didn't Singer pitch a 3 film concept to begin with?

Showtime

06-05-2008, 11:32 AM

Mego, there was a lot in the script that was cut out, but WB knew what they were getting. They didn't just walk into the theater not knowing which cut they were getting.

mego joe

06-05-2008, 11:36 AM

Mego, there was a lot in the script that was cut out, but WB knew what they were getting. They didn't just walk into the theater not knowing which cut they were getting.

Then WB truly are crazy for expecting huge numbers on that film. IMO, they are lucky to get what they got if they knew what they were getting.

SO you think from the very beginning they knew what they were getting?

Mostpowerful

06-05-2008, 11:39 AM

I dunno. Maybe if Singer had the power to make 2 movies at the same time...Kinda like what he wanted to do with X3 and SR. But since he chose to do Valkyrie first...You are getting Valkyrie first.

Exactly.

If SR had come out of the gates like gangbusters and perfromed wildly to wildly positive praise from all, then the sequel would have been greenlit right away like TDK, and pre-production would have begun. Didn't Singer pitch a 3 film concept to begin with?

I disagree. They didn't greenlit TDK right away. They took their sweet time, about a year, wasn't it?

dark_b

06-05-2008, 11:42 AM

Then WB truly are crazy for expecting huge numbers on that film. IMO, they are lucky to get what they got if they knew what they were getting.

SO you think from the very beginning they knew what they were getting? of course :yay:

i think they have meetings every week or at least every two weeks when they see how it is going forward with the movie. the main producer is there all the time.

Mostpowerful

06-05-2008, 11:46 AM

Mego, there was a lot in the script that was cut out, but WB knew what they were getting. They didn't just walk into the theater not knowing which cut they were getting.

IMO, I think they were also counting on the supposedly 'huge' popularity of Superman (or the Donner films), and the film did very well on openning day, or weekend, but nowhere as huge as they wanted it or thought it would. I really think SR is a great film, but it was too serious and mature, perhaps, for a summer movie; it wasn't what lots of people expected, myself included (I got something better than that). I think the majority of people, especially the young ones, were expecting an action driven film, and not a character driven one, I guess.

I Am The Knight

06-05-2008, 11:48 AM

If SR had come out of the gates like gangbusters and perfromed wildly to wildly positive praise from all, then the sequel would have been greenlit right away like TDK, and pre-production would have begun. Didn't Singer pitch a 3 film concept to begin with?

I've posted the Variety article before where it states that Singer wanted to make a non comic book film and that Valkyrie would delay WB's hopes of mounting an SR sequel.

Anyway, WB did sign him up for a sequel back in October 2006. Now, by that time they sure as hell had the BO results. Yet they signed him up. They must have wanted that sequel...

dark_b

06-05-2008, 11:55 AM

I've posted the Variety article before where it states that Singer wanted to make a non comic book film and that Valkyrie would delay WB's hopes of mounting an SR sequel.

Anyway, WB did sign him up for a sequel back in October 2006. Now, by that time they sure as hell had the BO results. Yet they signed him up. They must have wanted that sequel...this is not the whole thing. they singed on october 2006 a contract where singer gets payed not matter what.

so in 2006 after BO numbers they were 100% about the sequel. then the other camp came.

mego joe

06-05-2008, 12:01 PM

Exactly.

I disagree. They didn't greenlit TDK right away. They took their sweet time, about a year, wasn't it?

Here's the news bit from SUperhero HYpe where Robinov talks about hearing NOlan's pitch for the sequel, date? October 11, 2005. 4 months after BB release.

Robinov: Chris Nolan wasn't the obvious choice. Alan trusted that Chris' vision -- the tone, the setting and his skill as director and storyteller -- would ultimately give us the best movie. Chris is going to come in and tell us what the next "Batman" will be today. It all comes down to filmmakers like Alfonso Cuaron on "Harry Potter," or Curtis Hanson on "Lucky You" or Niki Caro on "North Country."

http://www.superherohype.com/news/supermannews.php?id=3545

On February 23, 2006 we have the announcement that Nolan's brother is writing the sequel.

While neither director's deal is closed, the studio has hired Jonathan Nolan -- Christopher's brother -- to write the screenplay for the untitled "Batman" project

"Begins" co-writers David Goyer and Christopher Nolan wrote a treatment for the sequel.

http://www.superherohype.com/news/supermannews.php?id=3890

On JUly 31, 2006 a year and a mont after the release of BB, the sequel was not only greenlit, Ledger had been cast as the Joker and the title announced.

As a follow up to last year's blockbuster Batman Begins, Christopher Nolan is set to direct Warner Bros. Pictures' The Dark Knight, written by Jonathan Nolan, based on a story by Christopher Nolan and David Goyer. The film will be produced by Emma Thomas, Charles Roven and Christopher Nolan. Additionally, Christian Bale will resume his role as Bruce Wayne and Academy Award nominee Heath Ledger has been cast as The Joker. The announcements were made today by Jeff Robinov, President of Production, Warner Bros. Pictures.

http://www.superherohype.com/news/batmannews.php?id=4601

Sweet time? I don't think so. It sounds like they had the ball rolling before BB had hardly left the theaters.

mego joe

06-05-2008, 12:06 PM

IMO, I think they were also counting on the supposedly 'huge' popularity of Superman (or the Donner films),

And that would account for the good opening weekend

and the film did very well on openning day, or weekend, but nowhere as huge as they wanted it or thought it would.

But once people actually saw it word got out and it was over.

I really think SR is a great film, but it was too serious and mature, perhaps, for a summer movie; it wasn't what lots of people expected, myself included (I got something better than that). I think the majority of people, especially the young ones, were expecting an action driven film, and not a character driven one, I guess.

Or perhaps they were expecting an interesting and exciting film instead of a slow boring one.
Or just expecting a good Superman film.

I Am The Knight

06-05-2008, 12:11 PM

this is not the whole thing. they singed on october 2006 a contract where singer gets payed not matter what.

so in 2006 after BO numbers they were 100% about the sequel. then the other camp came.

Exactly. And if they go for a reboot, and fire him, they have to pay him. They gave him a pay or play contract worth 10 million I believe?

I Am The Knight

06-05-2008, 12:21 PM

Here's the news bit from SUperhero HYpe where Robinov talks about hearing NOlan's pitch for the sequel, date? October 11, 2005. 4 months after BB release.

Robinov: Chris Nolan wasn't the obvious choice. Alan trusted that Chris' vision -- the tone, the setting and his skill as director and storyteller -- would ultimately give us the best movie. Chris is going to come in and tell us what the next "Batman" will be today. It all comes down to filmmakers like Alfonso Cuaron on "Harry Potter," or Curtis Hanson on "Lucky You" or Niki Caro on "North Country."

http://www.superherohype.com/news/supermannews.php?id=3545

On February 23, 2006 we have the announcement that Nolan's brother is writing the sequel.

While neither director's deal is closed, the studio has hired Jonathan Nolan -- Christopher's brother -- to write the screenplay for the untitled "Batman" project

"Begins" co-writers David Goyer and Christopher Nolan wrote a treatment for the sequel.

http://www.superherohype.com/news/supermannews.php?id=3890

On JUly 31, 2006 a year and a mont after the release of BB, the sequel was not only greenlit, Ledger had been cast as the Joker and the title announced.

As a follow up to last year's blockbuster Batman Begins, Christopher Nolan is set to direct Warner Bros. Pictures' The Dark Knight, written by Jonathan Nolan, based on a story by Christopher Nolan and David Goyer. The film will be produced by Emma Thomas, Charles Roven and Christopher Nolan. Additionally, Christian Bale will resume his role as Bruce Wayne and Academy Award nominee Heath Ledger has been cast as The Joker. The announcements were made today by Jeff Robinov, President of Production, Warner Bros. Pictures.

http://www.superherohype.com/news/batmannews.php?id=4601

Sweet time? I don't think so. It sounds like they had the ball rolling before BB had hardly left the theaters.

Mego, I think the difference is that Nolan finished production on The Prestige on April 2006. His next project was obviously TDK. The Prestige was a much smaller movie than Singer's Valkyrie, wich has had various delays and has been a troubled production. Singer has yet to even finish Valkyrie. WB needs him to be available to make the movie.

mego joe

06-05-2008, 11:50 PM

Mego, I think the difference is that Nolan finished production on The Prestige on April 2006. His next project was obviously TDK. The Prestige was a much smaller movie than Singer's Valkyrie, wich has had various delays and has been a troubled production. Singer has yet to even finish Valkyrie. WB needs him to be available to make the movie.

But considering that the Harris/ Daugherty script/ treatment for a sequel was already rejected by WB, it's clear that WB were not going to greenlight just any old Superman film. It's clear they feel they got burned by SInger and Co. with SR and are requiring a lot more from him and the writers before proceeding with the green light. The situation is much different.

Retroman

06-10-2008, 04:04 PM

June 05, 2008
Comic-Con 4-day passes sell out
With just under two months to go, Comic-Con Intl. has sold out of four-day passes. One-day passes are still available, but if you want to go and don’t yet have your passes, get on it now or risk losing out. Remember, no passes will be sold on-site; they must be bought in advance. So far, no listings on eBay or Stubhub, but as the show gets closer, that might change.Source:
http://weblogs.variety.com/bags_and_boards/2008/06/comic-con-4-day.html

Showtime

06-10-2008, 04:12 PM

Then WB truly are crazy for expecting huge numbers on that film. IMO, they are lucky to get what they got if they knew what they were getting.

SO you think from the very beginning they knew what they were getting?

I don't understand your logic, how couldn't they know what they were getting? :huh:

I Am The Knight

06-10-2008, 04:31 PM

But considering that the Harris/ Daugherty script/ treatment for a sequel was already rejected by WB, it's clear that WB were not going to greenlight just any old Superman film. It's clear they feel they got burned by SInger and Co. with SR and are requiring a lot more from him and the writers before proceeding with the green light. The situation is much different.

Wich is most likely why they are not attached to MOS anymore. Your point? WB is aware of the fanboy complaints about SR. They are being more careful and will try to please everyone with the sequel. And, doesn't giving a movie the green light means that they have to start paying the producers and such? They won't green lit until it is ready, and Singer is ready, I guess.

Nixon

06-11-2008, 07:20 AM

I don't understand your logic, how couldn't they know what they were getting? :huh:

The appeal of this logic, faulty as it might be, really isn't that hard to figure out. If you say that Warner Bros. was unaware of what Bryan Singer had planned until the movie was released it robs Singer's take on Superman of supporters and legitimacy. It says, even if only implicitly, that Bryan Singer's take on Superman is so wrongheaded that the only way it could've been given the thumbs up by Warner Bros. is if he was somehow pulling the wool over their eyes.

It also feeds a line of reasoning that says that, upset over being tricked into making a bad Superman movie, Warner Bros. will be more likely to can Bryan and start over from scratch.

Showtime

06-11-2008, 07:41 AM

I call that convoluted logic.

Nixon

06-11-2008, 08:40 AM

Agreed.

Good job on the "Who is writing the Superman sequel?" series on the blog btw.

Showtime

06-11-2008, 09:48 AM

Agreed.

Good job on the "Who is writing the Superman sequel?" series on the blog btw.

Thank you. 3rd Part is now up.

FilmNerdJamie pointed me to the following on Supermanhomepage:

http://www.supermanhomepage.com/news.php

Superhero Times (http://www.superherotimes.com/newsarchive/003403.php)conducted a recent Q&A with Mattel regarding some of their upcoming DCU action figures. Mattel indicated that they have “big plans” for their Movie Masters line that will be announced next month at San Diego Comic-Con. Currently the Movie Masters line is being used to market action figures based on the upcoming “The Dark Knight”.

When Mattel was specifically asked about action figures based on the “Superman” movies, the Mattel representative coyly responded: “We’ll have the latest news on the Movie Masters line at San Diego Comic-Con this July 23-27.”
Last summer, when I attended the Mattel panel at Wizard World Chicago 2007, the Mattel representative explained that they were well aware of the demand for action figures based on the original “Superman” movies. Stay tuned to the Superman Homepage for complete coverage of San Diego Comic-Con and for more on DC’s Movie Masters line as it may or may not relate to Superman.

DIRECTOR

06-11-2008, 10:53 AM

what are the latest updates on the sequal guys??????????????

dark_b

06-11-2008, 11:08 AM

the red will be more brown and more static flying shots.
ohhh and there will be a small fight with jason. singer doesnt want to show a big fight in a superman movie because a lot of kids will watch the movie.

Nixon

06-11-2008, 03:30 PM

Thank you. 3rd Part is now up.

FilmNerdJamie pointed me to the following on Supermanhomepage:

http://www.supermanhomepage.com/news.php (http://www.supermanhomepage.com/news.php)

So what are we thinking? An announcement that a Man of Steel line is in the works for 2010? A detailed Chris Reeve Superman figure? Both?

Showtime

06-11-2008, 03:33 PM

No idea, a couple of people I talked to speculated on an annoucement for both. No clue on that one though.

Dark Knight

06-13-2008, 07:34 PM

No idea, a couple of people I talked to speculated on an annoucement for both. No clue on that one though.

Show,

In your opinion and from the scuttlebutt you have heard....do you honestly think that there will be some kind of announcement at Comic Con in July regarding MOS? Because I'm telling you man....if MOS doesn't come out by 2010....I don't think we see an SR sequel....and the next time we see a Supes solo for awhile.

dark_b

06-14-2008, 02:02 AM

the problem is this hitler movie that singer is doing should be already finished in 2007. the movie that singer wanted to have between SR and MOS should be out in 2007.
i think there would be mroe interviews about the sequel and more news about the sequel if singer was free.

GreenKToo

06-14-2008, 06:21 AM

Show,

In your opinion and from the scuttlebutt you have heard....do you honestly think that there will be some kind of announcement at Comic Con in July regarding MOS? Because I'm telling you man....if MOS doesn't come out by 2010....I don't think we see an SR sequel....and the next time we see a Supes solo for awhile.
I agree.
IMHO If there is no announcement from the con, then we'll most likely get a reboot in a few yrs., if even that.:(

Showtime

06-14-2008, 07:47 AM

My personal opinion if there are no leaks in June and nothing after the opening weekend of Batman and going into Con, it isn't a good sign.

Spiderine

06-14-2008, 08:43 AM

I agree.
IMHO If there is no announcement from the con, then we'll most likely get a reboot in a few yrs., if even that.:(
Yeah, hard to imagine a sequel beyond 2010. I would think they would want a 2010 release for a sequel.

Nixon

06-14-2008, 10:30 PM

My personal opinion if there are no leaks in June and nothing after the opening weekend of Batman and going into Con, it isn't a good sign.

Well, we're already halfway through June and things have been very quiet . . . that's already not a good sign.

FlawlessVictory

06-14-2008, 10:44 PM

My personal opinion if there are no leaks in June and nothing after the opening weekend of Batman and going into Con, it isn't a good sign.

Showtime, what do you think of the fact that Variety is now reporting that JLA is expected to go into production soon and there is no mention of MOS? Can we agree that is too late for WB to release MOS or JLA for 2009? So that leaves us with 2010. Wouldn't it be fair to say it would be either JLA or MOS for 2010? And with no mention of MOS in Variety one has to wonder.

Warner Bros. is working on a deal that would reteam Larry and Andy Wachowski (http://www.variety.com/profiles/people/main/29983/Andy%20Wachowski.html?dataSet=1) and producer Joel Silver (http://www.variety.com/profiles/people/main/28447/Joel%20Silver.html?dataSet=1), but in different terms than the $180 million “Speed Racer,” which lost a fortune at the box office.

The trio will produce “Ninja Assassin,” a $50 million action pic directed by James McTeigue (http://www.variety.com/profiles/people/main/711983/James%20McTeigue.html?dataSet=1), but will collect a share of the gross when the film breaks even. And the studio is likely to revisit a gross deal it made a long time ago for director George Miller (javascript:zodInfuser.FillDescriptions('George Miller');) to direct “Justice League,” expected to go into production soon.

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117987471.html?categoryid=13&cs=1

TheComicbookKid

06-14-2008, 11:02 PM

Showtime, what do you think of the fact that Variety is now reporting that JLA is expected to go into production soon and there is no mention of MOS? Can we agree that is too late for WB to release MOS or JLA for 2009? So that leaves us with 2010. Wouldn't it be fair to say it would be either JLA or MOS for 2010? And with no mention of MOS in Variety one has to wonder.

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117987471.html?categoryid=13&cs=1

Damn? Isn't there possibly an actor's strike about to happen? This movie can't catch a break.:woot:

Nightwing1977

06-15-2008, 12:22 AM

My personal opinion if there are no leaks in June and nothing after the opening weekend of Batman and going into Con, it isn't a good sign.

I disagree. I think something will happend, but we won't hear news yet. I mean isn't Singer still busy with Valkyrie? That movie suppose to be out in Feb. next year. I bet once he is done with it & all the publicity to promote, he might have a talk with WB again on MoS. I wouldn't bet on SDCC not talking about MoS mean it's not happending. But of course, they know more than we do. Time will tell.

superbaby

06-15-2008, 09:19 AM

I disagree. I think something will happend, but we won't hear news yet. I mean isn't Singer still busy with Valkyrie? That movie suppose to be out in Feb. next year. I bet once he is done with it & all the publicity to promote, he might have a talk with WB again on MoS. I wouldn't bet on SDCC not talking about MoS mean it's not happending. But of course, they know more than we do. Time will tell.
ya, singer should just take his time. besides him, there is no other director can possible make a better superman movie.

Retroman

06-15-2008, 09:40 AM

^^Sarcasm?lol
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117987471.html?categoryid=13&cs=1
Thanks flawless. I hadn't read this yet.

So JLA will be moving forward soon after all?:huh: That can't be good news for SR2 if it's true.

superbaby

06-15-2008, 09:46 AM

JLA is still alive...

bravo to WB.

FlawlessVictory

06-15-2008, 10:00 AM

^^Sarcasm?lol

Thanks flawless. I hadn't read this yet.

No prob. Biolumen first posted it in the JLA forum though so I can't take credit for the find.
So JLA will be moving forward soon after all?:huh: That can't be good news for SR2 if it's true.

Agreed. I always thought it would be one or the other.

JLA is still alive...

bravo to WB.

I have no confidence in this JLA film and would rather see Singer's MOS over this incarnation of JLA anyday of the week. And that's saying quite a lot considering my feelings on Singer's version of Superman. So no kudos to WB from me. They still seem as lost as ever.

I Am The Knight

06-15-2008, 10:14 AM

So it's back to the MOS vs JLA debate again? Thanks, WB. :whatever:

Nightwing1977

06-15-2008, 05:06 PM

ya, singer should just take his time. besides him, there is no other director can possible make a better superman movie.

Are you trying to put words in my mouth there or something? Just because I'm showing support for him doesn't mean I think no other director can make a better Superman movie. I just felt he deserve a second chance to show he can fix it. If he can't, then let get someone else. Until then, no one know what his idea is for the sequel & if it good or bad. Don't make up your mind already, guys. Unless you're Marty McFly. :oldrazz:

JLA is still alive...

bravo to WB.

Are you serious? JLA is going to be far worse than SR if they still go with the same idea for the film before it was canned. Trust me, many fans don't want that to happend with the direction it was going. And the fact it look more like Generation X than JLA. :wow:

superbaby

06-15-2008, 07:44 PM

Are you trying to put words in my mouth there or something? Just because I'm showing support for him doesn't mean I think no other director can make a better Superman movie. I just felt he deserve a second chance to show he can fix it. If he can't, then let get someone else. Until then, no one know what his idea is for the sequel & if it good or bad. Don't make up your mind already, guys. Unless you're Marty McFly. :oldrazz:
no. no second chance to singer. he has tarnished superman bad enough. i can't stand another round. and i have no interest at all to see what other wicked ideas he has in store for superman.

next!!!

Are you serious? JLA is going to be far worse than SR if they still go with the same idea for the film before it was canned. Trust me, many fans don't want that to happend with the direction it was going. And the fact it look more like Generation X than JLA. :wow:
you didn't see my sarcasm?

bgshw44

06-15-2008, 08:32 PM

ugh i cant believe wb isnt learning from marvel

GreenKToo

06-15-2008, 09:19 PM

IMHO, They will never learn either. It seems they are of the mind that their ideas are best.
I doubt that any of us( well, maybe a few) want to see that J.L. film with the same rumored cast we kept hearing about.
I'm all for a J.L. film, just not that one.

Showtime

06-15-2008, 09:21 PM

It won't be that one.

GreenKToo

06-15-2008, 09:23 PM

It won't be that one.
If your right, then bring it on.

Showtime

06-15-2008, 09:27 PM

If your right, then bring it on.

If the movie ever happens, there will be some changes, actors, script, maybe even the director.

Keep in mind, WB doesn't necessarily need comicbook movies, but they need tentpoles. Huge misteps for the 2009 schedule and they don't want to do the same for 2010.

GreenKToo

06-15-2008, 09:43 PM

Hmmm, possible new director, cast, story, etc? Sounds good. especially the cast part.
I just hope they don't try to do it on the cheap and go with unknowns again. Big mistake if they do IMHO.

superbaby

06-15-2008, 10:45 PM

If the movie ever happens, there will be some changes, actors, script, maybe even the director.

Keep in mind, WB doesn't necessarily need comicbook movies, but they need tentpoles. Huge misteps for the 2009 schedule and they don't want to do the same for 2010.
what are the huge misteps for the 2009 schedule???

i said just let it be. WB loves wasting money.

Lighthouse

06-15-2008, 11:53 PM

what are the huge misteps for the 2009 schedule???

i said just let it be. WB loves wasting money.

Oh, I don't know. Maybe its them not preparing any tent pole features, and then the one they did prepare was so badly rushed and put together that it fell apart halfway through 2008. Terminator is all they got, and they are just distributing it. They need a killer summer for 2010, and I'm wondering if they are willing to so heavily bet on another Superman film.

superbaby

06-16-2008, 12:51 AM

Oh, I don't know. Maybe its them not preparing any tent pole features, and then the one they did prepare was so badly rushed and put together that it fell apart halfway through 2008. Terminator is all they got, and they are just distributing it. They need a killer summer for 2010, and I'm wondering if they are willing to so heavily bet on another Superman film.
i see. you can't blame them for having no confidence in superman. and thanks to the most talented director, bryan singer.

Ita-KalEl

06-16-2008, 06:55 AM

I don't know if at WB they have a single brain able to use properly their sh franchises. I know only that their movies continue to bomb. I'm glad for it.
Infact I'm happy for every dollar wasted in their crappy JLA project.

superbaby

06-16-2008, 10:24 AM

Dark Knight

06-17-2008, 03:10 PM

Hmmm, possible new director, cast, story, etc? Sounds good. especially the cast part.
I just hope they don't try to do it on the cheap and go with unknowns again. Big mistake if they do IMHO.

I agree. Get Routh and Bale (Bale in more of a behind the scenes type of Batman role/cameo) then surround them with some B actors. For example Ryan Gosling would be a good choice for Flash....Dennis Haysbert would be good for Jonn'z/MM. Princess Diana/WW can be a toned up Rachel McAdams or Biel or maybe even Gale (if here acting improves) Arthur/Aquaman can be someone like Jason Lewis or Scott Speedman. Jim Caviezal would be a sound choice for Hal Jordan/GL. They need to get a solo Flash and GL movie out first and then hope to do a JL film with a different director in say 2011 or 2012. A smart move would be to introduce Detective John Jones/Jonn'z/MM in a cameo type of appearance in the MOS film...IF they have one. WB's needs to freakin think creatively yet rationally and wisely! Green Arrow will probably come out within two years.

Superman-Prime

06-18-2008, 12:01 AM

Hmm... I just read the information about ComicCon from IESB. Nothing mention for the sequel of SR.

May WB rot in hell for all I care.

If they plan to make reboot of Superman, then may WB rot in hell.

dark_b

06-18-2008, 03:55 AM

Showtime

06-18-2008, 06:51 AM

GreenKToo

06-18-2008, 08:11 AM

I agree. Get Routh and Bale (Bale in more of a behind the scenes type of Batman role/cameo) then surround them with some B actors. For example Ryan Gosling would be a good choice for Flash....Dennis Haysbert would be good for Jonn'z/MM. Princess Diana/WW can be a toned up Rachel McAdams or Biel or maybe even Gale (if here acting improves) Arthur/Aquaman can be someone like Jason Lewis or Scott Speedman. Jim Caviezal would be a sound choice for Hal Jordan/GL. They need to get a solo Flash and GL movie out first and then hope to do a JL film with a different director in say 2011 or 2012. A smart move would be to introduce Detective John Jones/Jonn'z/MM in a cameo type of appearance in the MOS film...IF they have one. WB's needs to freakin think creatively yet rationally and wisely! Green Arrow will probably come out within two years.
I think the two least known heroes need to be played by well known actors.
Aquaman/Arthur: Viggo Mortensen.
M.M./Jonn: Hugo Weaving or Laurence Fishburne.

I agree with you about having a cameo or two by other heroes in the M.O.S. I just wonder if W.B. will.

I Am The Knight

06-18-2008, 10:13 AM

GreenKToo

06-18-2008, 10:27 AM

As much as I'd love it, I doubt we'll ever see that unless some big changes occur in the board room at W.B. first.
For some reason they just don't seem to have any faith in doing crossover appearences.

I Am The Knight

06-18-2008, 10:51 AM

Imagine seeing Aquaman during the SR sequence where the sea bed is cracking!

GreenKToo

06-18-2008, 11:19 AM

It'd be gold. No doubt about it.

Dark Knight

06-18-2008, 12:52 PM

I think the two least known heroes need to be played by well known actors.
Aquaman/Arthur: Viggo Mortensen.
M.M./Jonn: Hugo Weaving or Laurence Fishburne.

I agree with you about having a cameo or two by other heroes in the M.O.S. I just wonder if W.B. will.

I agree to a certain extent. Viggo would be a solid choice, but he probably will be busy with The Hobbit coming up. What about a gruffy Matthew McConaghey as Arthur/Aquaman? I think Dennis Haysbert would be a good enough choice for MM. The reason being is that he would fit into a supporting like that alot better. He has the voice....and he is a big guy. Hugo and Lawrence have already been in there fair share films with those type of characters. I would rather see Weaving as Braniac if anything. It would very easy to introduce Detective John Jones in MOS as a Metropolis detective possibly toward the end? I'll bet the fans would be happy to see something like that. The way to do it would be have MOS be a lead in to JL film. Leave hints of a bigger threat out there (Darkseid) and let someone like Haysbert to do a cameo of Det John Jones. It would be ideal IMO...

Superman-Prime

06-19-2008, 07:17 PM

What are you talking about? :huh:

Look at this:

Warner Bros. will be featuring RocknRolla, Ninja Assassin, Star Wars: The Clone Wars, Terminator: Salvation, Watchmen and Friday the 13th. Christian Bale, Zack Snyder and the cast of Watchmen, Jared Padalecki are rumored.

http://www.iesb.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=5089&Itemid=99

Hmm. No mention of SR sequel. Nothing.

I'm not happy with this.

ant3ros

06-19-2008, 07:25 PM

MoS isn't in production so of course they won't be showing anything about it.

Showtime

06-19-2008, 07:31 PM

Look at this:

http://www.iesb.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=5089&Itemid=99

Hmm. No mention of SR sequel. Nothing.

I'm not happy with this.

I think you're a bit confused. That is a list of movies they will be showing footage of and the cast will be there to discuss these movies, which I believe are all coming out in 2009. Why would Superman Returns be part of that anyway? :huh:

GreenKToo

06-19-2008, 07:34 PM

I really hope we get some info either way soon, very soon.

Showtime

06-19-2008, 07:56 PM

I actually hope that it is resolved either way we know where the character is going.

Dark_Lord

06-19-2008, 08:03 PM

I actually hope that it is resolved either way we know where the character is going.

If they don't announce a sequel, then I doubt they'll say anything at all. Unless they mention JLA or whatever. But yeah, I hope this ends soon. It's been going on for too long.

GreenKToo

06-19-2008, 08:21 PM

If an announcement is coming from the con, we'll prolly find out soon enough. Its hard to keep stuff like that quite.

\S/JcDc\S/

06-20-2008, 12:10 PM

There was still a group of people holding out hope for a 2009 release (don't argue on this one showtime, you know some do). Obviously without CC coverage that will be a nail in the coffin at that prospect. I think if they know they are going to make the movie even for 2010 it would be nice to get greenlight status at the event. That may be asking too much I suppose.

FaT_tONle

06-20-2008, 01:10 PM

Did we get TDK news at the 06 comic con? What was the deal with that again?

dark_b

06-20-2008, 01:14 PM

no news with batman on cc. never i think.but nolan doesnt care for comic con. he care for chicago.
singer on the other hand like comic con and likes to go.

Showtime

06-20-2008, 01:30 PM

I Am The Knight

06-20-2008, 01:39 PM

no news with batman on cc. never i think.but nolan doesnt care for comic con. he care for chicago.
singer on the other hand like comic con and likes to go.

LOL. :grin:

Come on WB announce something at the Con!

I SEE SPIDEY

06-20-2008, 01:57 PM

In all honesty, I don't know of one poster at this point in time that was holding out hope for 2009, that came and went a long time ago in my opinion.Not in your opinon. It won't make a 2009 release date.

GreenKToo

06-20-2008, 02:11 PM

At this point i'd just like an announcement if it's even happening at all.

Showtime

06-20-2008, 02:37 PM

Not in your opinon. It won't make a 2009 release date.

Right not my opinion, but in reality. :cwink:

\S/JcDc\S/

06-20-2008, 05:01 PM

While it's obvious 2009 is out, look around there are fans still pushing for it :o

Showtime

06-20-2008, 05:40 PM

While it's obvious 2009 is out, look around there are fans still pushing for it :o

From what I have seen on these forums and others, they seem pretty aware it would be 2010. Maybe the general public?

Dark Knight

06-20-2008, 05:57 PM

Guys....I think it's a 95% probability that Summer 2009 is OUT as a release date for MOS...IF MOS even gets the greenlight. No time for pre production, then filming then post to get MOS released by summer 2009 without rushing and ruining the movie IMO.

Showtime

06-20-2008, 06:10 PM

Only 95%?

Dark Knight

06-20-2008, 06:35 PM

Only 95%?

haha....Since your questioning that now....I change it to 99.99999999%!

:woot:

GreenKToo

06-20-2008, 07:58 PM

haha....Since your questioning that now....I change it to 99.99999999%!

:woot:
OoOoOoOo. That still leaves us a .00000001% chance.:oldrazz:

Nightwing1977

06-20-2008, 10:06 PM

Not in your opinon. It won't make a 2009 release date.

Nope. That is impossible to get it out for 2009. Not to mention that would be rushing it & it would be a big, big mess. Sometime patience is a virtue. ;)

\S/JcDc\S/

06-20-2008, 10:58 PM

I'm willing to wait, I just want it to happen. Sequel or reboot I need another Superman movie.

GreenKToo

06-21-2008, 07:47 AM

Wow, Spider-man 4 is already announced for 2011, while we Superman fans sit in limbo waiting and waiting and......

Showtime

06-21-2008, 07:57 AM

GreenKToo

06-21-2008, 08:03 AM

Tenatively scheduled it says. If Spiderman 4 does happen, I don't think it will necessarily be Spiderman 4.

In regards to Superman, don't sweat these things. Be patient. Personally, I want to see Superman on the screen again. I was never one that believed it had to be the sequel, but I think that is what we are going to get.
True true, but at least their talking about spidey 4. As for Superman being a sequel or a reboot, it really doesnt matter to me, I just want something.:)
Ahh well, my sig says it all.

Showtime

06-21-2008, 08:05 AM

Personally, I don't think Spiderman 4 is happening, in other words...it won't be Spiderman 4.

I think WB wants Superman Returns to happy with the right story and the right budget, so it will be much more profitable. Sure it was profitable in the end when everything was all bunched together, but since WB is a business they want more. If they can't get more, it won't happen.

GreenKToo

06-21-2008, 08:10 AM

Showtime

06-21-2008, 08:13 AM

So spidey 4 will most likely be its own film, with a new cast. Reboot of sorts I assume. That kool.

Regarding Superman, i'm sure they know what the public wants by now. Most seem to want a brighter tone with Brainiac as the villain, and some kicka$$ action scenes.

That is what my thought process is on the Spiderman franchise.

I think Bryan Singer and WB have all acknowledged what needs to be done going forward, problem is, they want to make sure it is profitable. :cwink:

GreenKToo

06-21-2008, 08:17 AM

If it has a smooth flowing story, a supervillain(S), and some fantastic action scenes, I have no doubt it will be a success.

Something in your eye? :D

Eggyman

06-21-2008, 08:54 AM

Supes deserves a great film, if it takes longer for that to come about, then so be it. Nothing good comes from rushing to keep up with the Joneses . . . or in this case, the Parkers.

Nightwing1977

06-22-2008, 06:27 PM

I think Bryan Singer and WB have all acknowledged what needs to be done going forward, problem is, they want to make sure it is profitable. :cwink:

I agree. Like I mention before, maybe they should set up a website & ask for fans's opinions on what they should do, doing it this or that, etc. Just like what Favreau did when he made a Iron Man Myspace on talking to fans & asking what they like to see. But some Superman fans asking WB to reboot the film is out of the question though. :D

Supes deserves a great film, if it takes longer for that to come about, then so be it. Nothing good comes from rushing to keep up with the Joneses . . . or in this case, the Parkers.

Umm....who are the Joneses & Parkers? Kinda ring a bell thought. :p :p

Clark Kent

06-28-2008, 05:21 PM

maybe they should set up a website & ask for fans's opinions on what they should do, doing it this or that, etc.

They probably already have employees hang out here. They might be afraid to set up a website for fear that they'd get loads of backlash over Superman Returns.

TheComicbookKid

06-28-2008, 05:37 PM

They probably already have employees hang out here. They might be afraid to set up a website for fear that they'd get loads of backlash over Superman Returns.

Yeah. I wouldn't do that.
Plus, I don't expect the viral marketing to be like TDK. Just give us the damn info. There are a lot of soured fans that won't care about ordering some damn pizza for a clue.

Acknowledging your mistakes is a sure sign of rectifying a mistake.

I Am The Knight

06-29-2008, 10:36 AM

Yeah. I wouldn't do that.
Plus, I don't expect the viral marketing to be like TDK. Just give us the damn info. There are a lot of soured fans that won't care about ordering some damn pizza for a clue.

:up: :applaud

GreenKToo

06-29-2008, 10:49 AM

The marketing on this will have to be on a whole different level than what we saw with S.R.
If its truly going to be all ''wrath of khan'', then they need to market the heck out of it.

Ita-KalEl

06-29-2008, 06:08 PM

The SDCC is one of our last hopes.

Nightwing1977

06-29-2008, 07:24 PM

The SDCC is one of our last hopes.

I don't think SDCC is quite the answer for any talk on the Superman film. They didn't do that with Batman Begins, did they? I know when they did The Dark Knight, they didn't announce Ledger playing Joker at SDCC. I imagine this could be the same for MoS. But we'll see.

Ita-KalEl

06-29-2008, 07:37 PM

I don't think SDCC is quite the answer for any talk on the Superman film. They didn't do that with Batman Begins, did they? I know when they did The Dark Knight, they didn't announce Ledger playing Joker at SDCC. I imagine this could be the same for MoS. But we'll see.

If not the location at least it will be the period. For a sequel that was supposed to be ready for the 2009, they have to say something about it before the end of the Summer. Showtime says that the classic interviews (to the WB execs etc.) in the week of the TDK's release date, should be the occasion to say something.

By now I still hope, but my optimism is almost gone.

Showtime

06-29-2008, 07:51 PM

If not the location at least it will be the period. For a sequel that was supposed to be ready for the 2009, they have to say something about it before the end of the Summer. Showtime says that the classic interviews (to the WB execs etc.) in the week of the TDK's release date, should be the occasion to say something.

By now I still hope, but my optimism is almost gone.

You mean to start filming for 2009? Well they don't really have to say anything to tell you the truth, at SDCC, but the timing seems pretty ripe.

Ita-KalEl

06-29-2008, 08:00 PM

You mean to start filming for 2009? Well they don't really have to say anything to tell you the truth, at SDCC, but the timing seems pretty ripe.

I mean that the movie was originally expected for a 2009 release date. After more than two years of silence, if they really want to do it sometime in the future, they need to say at least something concrete.

I don't think that there will be someone ready to be positive about the sequel, if the summer ends without any official word.

GreenKToo

06-29-2008, 10:24 PM

You mean to start filming for 2009? Well they don't really have to say anything to tell you the truth, at SDCC, but the timing seems pretty ripe.
If they say nothing, then whether it happens or not, it will be pretty obvious its not a priority for them IMO.

dark_b

06-30-2008, 02:35 AM

If they say nothing, then whether it happens or not, it will be pretty obvious its not a priority for them IMO.i think MOS will never be a priority . if it happens it will be like JL or SR. a quick change at WB.

Ita-KalEl

06-30-2008, 04:11 AM

i think MOS will never be a priority . if it happens it will be like JL or SR. a quick change at WB.

IMO at WB they haven't a single idea about the future. They greenlit a new garbage every year hoping to have found their new billionaire franchise.

charl_huntress

06-30-2008, 05:15 AM

IMO at WB they haven't a single idea about the future.

This I agree with. Yet, I do not think this is totally the fault of WB. DC contributed to this madness with their multiverse crap. They could never and probably will never agree on definitive definitions for their heroes. This, of course, has nothing to do with SR since Singer famously ignored the comics, but I think DC's inability to realize their flagship characters in the 90s is a big problem in why WB can't translate said heroes today in live action.

GreenKToo

06-30-2008, 05:54 AM

This I agree with. Yet, I do not think this is totally the fault of WB. DC contributed to this madness with their multiverse crap. They could never and probably will never agree on definitive definitions for their heroes. This, of course, has nothing to do with SR since Singer famously ignored the comics, but I think DC's inability to realize their flagship characters in the 90s is a big problem in why WB can't translate said heroes today in live action.
I agree. I think most of us would love to see a cameo of Bruce Wayne in a Supes film, or Clark Kent in a Bats film.

Sadly though, I think that ship has sailed, and with it lots of B.O. $$$.
That said, I'd never say never because this is W.B. after all, and they can/could change their mind on a dime.

charl_huntress

06-30-2008, 06:09 AM

That said, I'd never say never because this is W.B. after all, and they can/could change their mind on a dime.

They've already spent a fair amount of dimes. Yet, I just hope the get someone at the helm with vision before super hero ship sails away from the public mind.

Showtime

06-30-2008, 07:01 AM

I mean that the movie was originally expected for a 2009 release date. After more than two years of silence, if they really want to do it sometime in the future, they need to say at least something concrete.

I don't think that there will be someone ready to be positive about the sequel, if the summer ends without any official word.

If they say nothing, then whether it happens or not, it will be pretty obvious its not a priority for them IMO.

If they announce a slate and there is nothing involving Superman, then that could mean it is not a priority, but it also depends on the what is going on with Siegel case. They can't go forward with Justice League or a Superman Returns Sequel featuring Superman if they don't know where they stand with the character.

If they don't announce a slate of any kind, related to the comicbook movies, then they just aren't ready yet.