The Official Mike Dougherty & Dan Harris Thread

[Porygon]

Only thing I'd love to see return is Spacey as Lex, he was wonderful, not some bafoon like Hackman, his name sure fits, he is a hack. So just because Hackman played a version of Luthor you view as 'incorrect' (even though it was pretty accurate considering the time period it came out, and was the inspiration for the modern Lex Luthor, as admitted by Marv Wolfman himself) he is no longer a good actor? All those films hes done, and just because his Lex Luthor wore a wig he is a bad actor?

I don't care if you disliked his interpretation or not, but don't say he is a bad actor because of it. That's the kind of logic I expect from children.

I don't care about any of his other movies, I never thought he was all that special.But his wig-wearing Luthor was the last straw, I bet :whatever:

But Spacey, now there's a man who gave the character the respect he deserved, it is just a darn shame they went for the same old motives, land. ...his Luthor was even goofier than Hackman's, and had considerably less depth (although that was the script's problem). Spacey's Luthor danced. The goofiest thing Hackman did was make jokes.

But if you do it respectfully to both you have a hit. The fact is, the faithful ones are the good successful ones.The first two X-Men movies were successful, despite not being faithful AND directed by Bryan Singer. Funnily enough, these are the movies that I see you complain about the most.

Which goes to prove that faithfulness does not mean success, I DO believe that staying close to the comics will make a film the general audience love, simply because the outlandishness is what attracts people anyway. But it is impossible for faithfulness to have any impact, because the general audience don't read comics, so they have no idea what is faithful or not.

I appreciate that all you want is a faithful comic book movie (what everyone here wants) but you are being far too aggressive and unreasonable.

[GarudA]

Just heard it, great news :D

[matrix_ghost]

The guy as IESB made a good point. Singer is under a pay or play contract unless he walks away, then they don't have to pay him. And it is confirmed that Dan Lin and another top guy at the WB was pissed at Superman Returns. I believe this is to get Singer to walk away on his own. If he doesn't, they will just keep pushing a green light back till he does.

If singer is under a pay or play contract , wouldn't that mean that WB would still have to mako pay even even if he walked away :huh:
I was under the impression that under such a contract a person would be paid regardless of what happened to a production. However he wouldn't get paid if he himself would screw up the production. In this case singer being the one who would eventually quit the project.

Also buggs about that conformation of Dan Lin , do you have the link ?
And is it a confirmation straight from himself , kinda like how Horn said that he was disappointed with the BO performance of SR or just some Variety article mentioning that Lin was pissed

[buggs0268]

If singer is under a pay or play contract , wouldn't that mean that WB would still have to mako pay even even if he walked away :huh:
I was under the impression that under such a contract a person would be paid regardless of what happened to a production. However he wouldn't get paid if he himself would screw up the production. In this case singer being the one who would eventually quit the project.

Also buggs about that conformation of Dan Lin , do you have the link ?
And is it a confirmation straight from himself , kinda like how Horn said that he was disappointed with the BO performance of SR or just some Variety article mentioning that Lin was pissed
Iesb stated it from their sources.
Like I have said in the past, Jeff Robinov and Dan Lin are not a fans of Superman Returns
http://www.iesb.net/index.php?option=com_fireboard&Itemid=170&func=view&id=3135&catid=20#3135

From the same link:
There was interest from the WB people to use Bryan Singer since he signed his very lucrative deal to direct the sequel. If he gets fired from TMOS, WB will have to pay him a lot of money. If he quits from the TMOS then they don’t have to pay him squat.

[bgshw44]

Iesb stated it from their sources.
Like I have said in the past, Jeff Robinov and Dan Lin are not a fans of Superman Returns
http://www.iesb.net/index.php?option=com_fireboard&Itemid=170&func=view&id=3135&catid=20#3135

From the same link:
There was interest from the WB people to use Bryan Singer since he signed his very lucrative deal to direct the sequel. If he gets fired from TMOS, WB will have to pay him a lot of money. If he quits from the TMOS then they don’t have to pay him squat.

they wouldnt have signed him to do a sequel if they didnt want him, its common sense, and there is no way he would walk away from that cash

[Matt]

they wouldnt have signed him to do a sequel if they didnt want him, its common sense, and there is no way he would walk away from that cash

Sure they would have. Do you think studio execs geniunely enjoy the "____ Movie" franchise? Of course not. They green light them because they are easy cash during a dead time of the year. They signed Singer to develop a sequel because at the time they were not sure if they had an alternative such as JLA and they felt they would need a 2009 tent pole movie. That doesn't mean they like it. In fact, it seems Lin and Robinov have been very vocal that they did not.

[teseract]

But, still, all that tragedy doesn't leave the viewer with much hope, with much empathy with the character. After all, if Superman can't really triumph over normal life, then what hope for the rest of us!? It's far too downbeat.
No it's not, The message of SR was not that, the message was:

When things around you break apart you sometimes can't heroically triumph over them but you can stand up, take a deep breath, take what you have and shape your own future instead of letting the tragedies in life take the reign and shaping his own future, that's exactly what he did at the end with him visiting his son et al.

[teseract]

Superman had to save the whole world because he got sloppy and left his fortress exposed. Where was the giant lock with his giant key?!? :cmad:

Where it belonged, on the trash heap of Superman lore.

[wellsy]

From IESB (link (http://www.iesb.net/index.php?option=com_fireboard&Itemid=170&func=view&id=3135&catid=20#3135)):

Something else to think about, does WB really want to piss off Bryan Singer considering that he has been asked to testify in the Superman/Siegel/WB lawsuit? I think not.

This is starting to get confusing. OK, Dan Lin and Jeff Robinov didn't like SR, but they don't what to piss off Singer so they can keep him on side for the trial over Supes...

What a bloody mess.

Still, I don't think that anyone here can say that WB is going to keep on stonewalling Singer (because then he gets pissed, and WB cops it in court in 5 years), or that Singer is definately going to do the sequel (what with all the rumours of stonewalling and senoirs at WB not liking SR). So, I think we can all agree, there isn't much to give us a judgement one way or another on this.

Sheesh, Singer should make a movie about making a Superman movie. Heaps of drama and action right there :woot: .

[Sebastos]

I wouldn't mind if they drop Singer, if things come to that. Though I liked SR. I'd be find if they drop him as long as Routh is still Superman.

[VenomsMom]

No. It will bring him into today's world and will make him actually interesting for today's audiences!
No one gives a hoot about cookie villains with land schemes anymore. Today's threats are politicians and global companies, not wacky bald guys who want to own worthless soil. They want to own the people!
Pre-Crisis Luthor would be a ruthless dictator. Post-Crisis Luthor would be a generally beloved leader, because no one would know what he was really up to! That's the actual plot point in the Post-Crisis stories: Superman needs to show and convince the people of who Lex really is to stop him!

Funny how you guys always ***** about "marvelising" the character when it's actually the main reason Superman is still around. That step was necessary for the comics (and worked perfectly) and it's damn well overdue for the movies! :oWonderful post....I love when others see the big picture. Big problems call for big solutions.

[Dark_Lord]

I wouldn't mind if they drop Singer, if things come to that. Though I liked SR. I'd be find if they drop him as long as Routh is still Superman.

:up:

[FlawlessVictory]

The more I think about this, the more I believe that a Superman solo movie is looking at an entirely new continuity and new franchise without Singer and without Routh. News has already slipped that a new director has been hired to direct a Flash movie specifically spun off from the JL movie. I find it out hard to believe that we will have a Superman in JL(not Routh) and then Routh in a follow up to SR which wasn't that loved by SR execs anyway.

The plan from WB is to get solo movies out of the characters that appear in the JL and I believe this now includes Superman. Batman is a bit trickier since they seem to be pleased with that franchise now. However, after TDK, there would be only one more movie with Nolan and Bale anyway, so that's not a big deal.

[Grinder]

No it's not, The message of SR was not that, the message was:

When things around you break apart you sometimes can't heroically triumph over them but you can stand up, take a deep breath, take what you have and shape your own future instead of letting the tragedies in life take the reign and shaping his own future, that's exactly what he did at the end with him visiting his son et al.
And then he flew off back into space were he came from in the beginning. So what? Will he return in another 5 years and take a look around and leave again? :woot:

[The Guard]

I will agree Luthor has been done to death. I don't agree that he's been done right yet. No one's hit on what makes him an interesting character yet. Hating Superman isn't enough.

Well since we know that Superman doesn't take a WORMHOLE to get here, and travels in his ship at light speed until he gets to earth, and crash lands then well the trip he takes while it ages the baby only 5 years literally a thousand years have passed on his planet.

How the hell do you know how the details would have shaken out between the scripts? For all we know he did take a workhome? JJ's SUPERMAN only shows him blasting off, it doesn't show the journey. I imagine SUPERMAN 2 would have.

So the people from Krypton would still be slaves a thousand years later? Sorry that story makes little to no sense at all.

How the hell should I know? It doesn't make sense because you assume it doesn't make sense. But you never read the proposed new SUPERMAN 2 script. In fact, I don't believe it was ever written.

That's just bad writing if you ask me... Same as Superman going back to Krypton after he was told it blew up, and thats why he was sent to earth, and then going back on a story ran in a news paper, and getting back here to earth without having anyone age any! (Superman Returns stupid script.)

He goes back to save his people, who have been enslaved. That's not bad writing at all. That's Superman doing what Superman does: Help people. In a way that keeps Krypton central to his storyline over the course of a trilogy and makes it's explosion have some actual impact on him.

Could you lack any more of an imagination?

[KaptainKrypton]

Man, I love when people try to argue with The Guard. I did a tour of duty with that a year or so back, then realized I needed to quit because of all the time I had to denote to replying. That and my wife kept calling me a loser.

[hammy]

Endless loop arguments are like the staff of life at hype. But yeah, it does get old. Most everybody leaves for a while, then comes back to face a new round. :up: :woot: It's the hype way.

[FlawlessVictory]

Man, I love when people try to argue with The Guard. I did a tour of duty with that a year or so back, then realized I needed to quit because of all the time I had to denote to replying. That and my wife kept calling me a loser.

LOL

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

No it's not, The message of SR was not that, the message was:

When things around you break apart you sometimes can't heroically triumph over them but you can stand up, take a deep breath, take what you have and shape your own future instead of letting the tragedies in life take the reign and shaping his own future, that's exactly what he did at the end with him visiting his son et al.

Well said and agree, the movie was about standing up and dealing with problems in a normal way. It also humanised Superman for me.

[KaptainKrypton]

Endless loop arguments are like the staff of life at hype. But yeah, it does get old. Most everybody leaves for a while, then comes back to face a new round. :up: :woot: It's the hype way.
Well, I'm never one to shy away from some prime geek discussion, but it really makes me re-evaluate my priorities when I realize I'm still awake at 3 am discussing cape attachments and the like.

[hammy]

Cape attachments ... http://bestsmileys.com/lol/1.gif

been there done that. :ninja:

[buggs0268]

they wouldnt have signed him to do a sequel if they didnt want him, its common sense, and there is no way he would walk away from that cash
He was only signed to develop. And he gave two pitches which the WB didn't like, as evidence of them getting new writers, no matter what you guys think, the WB replaced them. This is how it goes. Before they signed him to develop 2, there was a rumor that the casting offices in LA were told there would be no 2 unless SR makes 200 domestic. When it did, which it took months to do, all of a sudden there was a deal the next day, and the film was out of theaters the next week. So I think there was a contractual thing from him signing onto 1 that 2 had to make 200 mill dom. in order for there to be a sequel, and if it did make that, then they had to sign for him to at least develop a sequel. However, they don't have to greenlight that sequel. If he stays, he has some control in his agency contract, but the WB is not happy with his approach, and they want drastic changes. Changes that he is not going to do as he is arrogant and egotistical. So they are stalling it till he leaves so that they can do what they want and not lose money paying him for doing nothing. This kind of things happens all the time.

However, someone at the WB must have been reading the boards all over the net and seen that a lot of people hate SR and that number is growing all the time ( no matter what the ones who love the movie will spout, or bring in the damn RT poll or critics ratings) and they comissioned the JLA script and that has taken priority as they can actually see making money with it, and win back the fans and GA that didn't like or were pissed with SR.

[BenReilly]

He was only signed to develop.

That's not what the trades reported last year...

Bryan Singer has inked a deal with Warner Bros. Pictures to direct and produce a sequel to "Superman Returns," with Legendary Pictures expected to co-finance.

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117952909.html?categoryid=13&cs=1

Not saying the films happening but WB signed Singer to do more than just "develop" the next Superman film, they signed him to direct and produce it and this happened months after SR was released. Dougherty and Harris were never signed for another film.

[buggs0268]

that is a development deal provided that they greenlight his pitch he will direct and produce. Had SR been more successful, he would not have really had to pitch. But since it had to crawl to 200 mill, he had to pitch it and it is obvious that the WB shot down his pitches as the film is not green lit yet and in limbo.

the article states-
Sequel is apparently at the very beginning of the development process and, as with any other project, there are any number of factors that must be addressed before it is greenlit.

Pact with Singer signals that Warners isn't ready to walk away from the iconic franchise -- or Singer --even though "Superman Returns," while grossing more than $390 million worldwide, wasn't the performer studio had hoped for.

That is a development contract. When he is signed to produce and direct is when the film was greenlit.

[bgshw44]

He was only signed to develop. And he gave two pitches which the WB didn't like, as evidence of them getting new writers, no matter what you guys think, the WB replaced them. This is how it goes. Before they signed him to develop 2, there was a rumor that the casting offices in LA were told there would be no 2 unless SR makes 200 domestic. When it did, which it took months to do, all of a sudden there was a deal the next day, and the film was out of theaters the next week. So I think there was a contractual thing from him signing onto 1 that 2 had to make 200 mill dom. in order for there to be a sequel, and if it did make that, then they had to sign for him to at least develop a sequel. However, they don't have to greenlight that sequel. If he stays, he has some control in his agency contract, but the WB is not happy with his approach, and they want drastic changes. Changes that he is not going to do as he is arrogant and egotistical. So they are stalling it till he leaves so that they can do what they want and not lose money paying him for doing nothing. This kind of things happens all the time.

However, someone at the WB must have been reading the boards all over the net and seen that a lot of people hate SR and that number is growing all the time ( no matter what the ones who love the movie will spout, or bring in the damn RT poll or critics ratings) and they comissioned the JLA script and that has taken priority as they can actually see making money with it, and win back the fans and GA that didn't like or were pissed with SR.

so they will stall, not make the movie and lose money by not having a superman movie so they can wait till he walks so they can then bring in one of the hacks that signed on to do GL or Flash?

[buggs0268]

so they will stall, not make the movie and lose money by not having a superman movie so they can wait till he walks so they can then bring in one of the hacks that signed on to do GL or Flash?
Right now they are not happy with SR. And they know that a lot of Superman fans weren't and it had to crawl to 200 mill. It was supposed to be a tentpole for them and it wasn't. They lost money when you factor in advertising. So they really don't want a sequel, but they signed a developement deal for a smaller fee. if the film is greenlit, then he gets the big fee for directing and producing it. However, his deal is if he is fired from the project, he still is paid as if he wasn't anyway. Only if he walks do they not have to pay him any more then they have for development. if they fire him, they have to pay him his fee anyway. If he walks on his own, then they don't. He also had a percentage of the films profits from SR into his pocket, which the WB was not happy with as it underperformed. So they are not really happy with him at the moment, but they need him to testify for them so they are stringing him along. Trust me studios do this all the time. Same thing happened with Emmerich/Devlin and Godzilla 2. Almost exact same thing, except it was kept out of the trades as the trades knew the eventual outcome.

They put a lot of extra money advertising the film that they didn't want to, or think they woudl have to to get it to 200 mill dom.

[wellsy]

Right now they are not happy with SR. And they know that a lot of Superman fans weren't and it had to crawl to 200 mill. It was supposed to be a tentpole for them and it wasn't. They lost money when you factor in advertising. So they really don't want a sequel, but they signed a developement deal for a smaller fee. if the film is greenlit, then he gets the big fee for directing and producing it. However, his deal is if he is fired from the project, he still is paid as if he wasn't anyway. Only if he walks do they not have to pay him any more then they have for development. if they fire him, they have to pay him his fee anyway. If he walks on his own, then they don't. He also had a percentage of the films profits from SR into his pocket, which the WB was not happy with as it underperformed. So they are not really happy with him at the moment, but they need him to testify for them so they are stringing him along. Trust me studios do this all the time. Same thing happened with Emmerich/Devlin and Godzilla 2. Almost exact same thing, except it was kept out of the trades as the trades knew the eventual outcome.

They put a lot of extra money advertising the film that they didn't want to, or think they woudl have to to get it to 200 mill dom.

Please buggs. I know I live half way around the world, but how come my money is owrth less to WB execs than the US $? Or is it because we're smart and use different colours and sizes of plastic, rather than green paper (I kid, I kid). Seriously though, please stop ignoring the other $US190 million that they got from around the world. As I understand it, thats actually a fairly good international taking (even if the US box office was lacking).

Though as a tentpole, it may be considered a failure, as a movie on its own, it was successful.

Also, I believe that WB is jumping the gun signing directors to Flash and GL before JL has even started filming. To me, thats just asking for trouble. I also have said that if the script is half as bad as what has been leaked on the internet, then I'm not sure that it will be much more successful than SR all up (even if it takes $300 million at the US box office, I don't think it will go down well elsewhere). And if thats the case... then where are we in three years time?

WB is just making a pigsty of its franchises. Problems with SR can be fixed (and Singer knows they need them fixed) and can achieve a better US box office result, while still maintaining the attraction that saw the International taking almost hitting $US200 million. JL can be as much mindless action WB can cram in, but if there is horrid acting, then no amount of punches will save it from being just as much a tentpole failure as SR is considered to be.

I think WB execs need counselling for gambling... :ninja:

[Angeloz]

Please buggs. I know I live half way around the world, but how come my money is owrth less to WB execs than the US $? Or is it because we're smart and use different colours and sizes of plastic, rather than green paper (I kid, I kid). Seriously though, please stop ignoring the other $US190 million that they got from around the world. As I understand it, thats actually a fairly good international taking (even if the US box office was lacking).

Though as a tentpole, it may be considered a failure, as a movie on its own, it was successful.

Also, I believe that WB is jumping the gun signing directors to Flash and GL before JL has even started filming. To me, thats just asking for trouble. I also have said that if the script is half as bad as what has been leaked on the internet, then I'm not sure that it will be much more successful than SR all up (even if it takes $300 million at the US box office, I don't think it will go down well elsewhere). And if thats the case... then where are we in three years time?

WB is just making a pigsty of its franchises. Problems with SR can be fixed (and Singer knows they need them fixed) and can achieve a better US box office result, while still maintaining the attraction that saw the International taking almost hitting $US200 million. JL can be as much mindless action WB can cram in, but if there is horrid acting, then no amount of punches will save it from being just as much a tentpole failure as SR is considered to be.

I think WB execs need counselling for gambling... :ninja:

LOL on the gambling. :)

If they don't do a sequel then I think it crap. I know I'm not alone. I really want to see Singer and especially Routh back. Anyone else is second best to me.

Angeloz

[Porygon]

I just think it's pointless discussing studio politics and domestic/international gross, because when it all comes down to it, we just want another Superman movie.

We just want two different Superman movies.

[SuperDaniel]

Im sure we all want a good Superman movie. Wether from Singer or anybody else.

I dont want Snger back though cause i think he blew the first time. And he is probably fired right now...otherwise we would have a confirmation of some sorts on the sequel.

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

LOL on the gambling. :)

If they don't do a sequel then I think it crap. I know I'm not alone. I really want to see Singer and especially Routh back. Anyone else is second best to me.

Angeloz

Agreed, if Singer leaves, i will be gutted but still on board if they keep Routh, but if both leave, then i am officially not going to see the sequel.

[Super Kal]

I welcome a new movie if Singer is gone

[matthooper]

Although Singer had some script input, I never gave all the blame to Singer. Most of the blame lies with Dougherty and Harris and the WB for approving the film in the first place. However, since it's not the film that Singer and Co. promised the WB, I let the studio off the hook a bit on that one.

Dougherty and Harris along with their loose Donnerverse, lack of action, uninteresting story and cookie cutter characters are to blame. Singer can put a fine film together, that we know from his previous work. If we get a script from people who know who Superman is, and write an exciting screenplay, Singer can do fine. SR aside from the hoorid colors, looks like a good film, and Singer knows where the mistakes lie, and can come out swinging with a good script.

All that said, if a sequel is ever made, which I doubt. Singer isn't coming back. He had complete autonomy during SR and this time he will have no control. He is a successful director with an ego, he will never allow the studio to breathe down his neck for 3 months of filming and 6 months of post.

[buggs0268]

Please buggs. I know I live half way around the world, but how come my money is owrth less to WB execs than the US $? Or is it because we're smart and use different colours and sizes of plastic, rather than green paper (I kid, I kid). Seriously though, please stop ignoring the other $US190 million that they got from around the world. As I understand it, thats actually a fairly good international taking (even if the US box office was lacking).

Though as a tentpole, it may be considered a failure, as a movie on its own, it was successful.

Also, I believe that WB is jumping the gun signing directors to Flash and GL before JL has even started filming. To me, thats just asking for trouble. I also have said that if the script is half as bad as what has been leaked on the internet, then I'm not sure that it will be much more successful than SR all up (even if it takes $300 million at the US box office, I don't think it will go down well elsewhere). And if thats the case... then where are we in three years time?

WB is just making a pigsty of its franchises. Problems with SR can be fixed (and Singer knows they need them fixed) and can achieve a better US box office result, while still maintaining the attraction that saw the International taking almost hitting $US200 million. JL can be as much mindless action WB can cram in, but if there is horrid acting, then no amount of punches will save it from being just as much a tentpole failure as SR is considered to be.

I think WB execs need counselling for gambling... :ninja:
Because there is a bigger split with the foreign box office. But what the industry up here recognizes as successful or not is the Domestic box office. That is just the way it is. And a film is really considered a hit by studios if it makes close to or over twice the production budget in domestic returns. That is just the state of the industry. Unless a movie takes in a really big amount oversees, if it doesn't do what is expected, or well domestically, then it is considered a failure. And it is no secret that the top brass at the WB consider SR a failure. That is pretty much fact. They wont come out and outright say it, but privately they have said it. And what they have come out and publically said is basically the same thing they saw when a film is considered a failure to them.

And the fact is that a lot of people here have been offering theories of what they think will happen based on some post of some guy who knows nothing about the industry says and everyone here congratulates him. And then that thing he said never happens. Showtime can verify that I have a good track record of predicting what will happen with this movie before the first one even came out. Everything I have said has happened. I know the inustry and how they do things.

[wellsy]

buggs, I'm not questioning your knowledge of the industry, or your predictions. Whatever happens, happens. I can't change the minds of the WB suits. I do happen to disagree with their decision, and I thought it only right to make that disagreement known.

What I am trying to say is that, epsecially with all the rumours around JL and the spin offs, WB is getting a long way ahead of itself, and it could easily ruin all its major superhero franchises in one fell swoop. Thats the last thing I want to see (and I'm sure we're both agreed on that). To me, that is just asking for trouble, and is threatening to really cause the company to struggle financially if they put money into developing films that never eventuate because their base was a flop.

I'm not saying JL will be a flop (I haven't got a crystal ball, unlike you buggs ;)), but I think a wait and see approach is definately more warranted with the JL spin offs than MoS. I think being the operative word.

But then again, if JL ends up being classified as Australian...

Or not :whatever: .

[romeogbs19]

YAY!!!! I'm so glad those two are gone ... they might work for the X-Men but their SR script was terrible -- simply terrible.

[Porygon]

YAY!!!! I'm so glad those two are gone ... they might work for the X-Men but their SR script was terrible -- simply terrible.Actually, their script was much better than the actual film itself.

[Sebastos]

I enjoyed both the script and the movie.

[Porygon]

I enjoyed both the script and the movie.So did I.

[Super Kal]

I didn't... two down, one to go.

[Sebastos]

I didn't... two down, one to go.

To each their own kakarot. :cwink:

But I'm ok with them leaving. I wouldn't mind a new director even though I liked what Singer did with his version of Superman.

[Nightwing1977]

But I'm ok with them leaving. I wouldn't mind a new director even though I liked what Singer did with his version of Superman.



Same here. It not like they did all movies with Singer & that Singer doesn't direct with any scripts from them. I'm curious to see if they hire Christopher McQuarrie & what his story will be if that happend.

[Sebastos]

Same here. It not like they did all movies with Singer & that Singer doesn't direct with any scripts from them. I'm curious to see if they hire Christopher McQuarrie & what his story will be if that happend.

Exactly. If Singer left, I would be interested as to what some of the other directors have in mind for Supes.

[nintendo nerd]

I didn't... two down, one to go.

lol.

Nice Kakarot.

As long as Routh stays I don't mind if Singer leaves.

[Super Kal]

I thoroughly enjoyed Routh... I want him to stay on. :up:


the rest can leave.

[Showtime]

Kak is out as Braniac, that was just a rumor.

[Nightwing1977]

Kak is out as Braniac, that was just a rumor.

No wonder he's been messing with our mind. You weren't strong enough to use me, Kak. :D :supes:

[Roland]

I ran across the following while time travelling:


April 11, 2024

Variety reports that Warner Bros. is planning its fifteenth reboot of the "Superman" franchise.

WB studios spokesman Jerry Thunderkunt reports that studio execs are greenlighting another reboot of the ancient and enervated superhero franchise. "We've learned from the last fourteen critically panned flops which failed to recoup their initial budget," said Thunderkunt. "Clearly, audiences did not respond to the characterization of Lois Lane as a whored-up Jezebel attempting to seduce a bisexual autistic Man of Steel."

According to Thunderkunt, the WB Studio's nearly $320 billion combined loss on the past fourteen "Superman" trainwrecks has done nothing but steel studio executives' resolve to "buckle down, lay off the coke for fifteen minutes, and attempt to wring another dime from a bloodless and lifeless franchise."

"Clearly, having Superman undergo sexual transgendered reversal at the hands of Brainiac, travel back in time, impregnate himself, and then give birth to his own son who was--in fact---himself, confused audiences and accounted for the Burbank WB studios being firebombed by Underoo-wearing fanboys."

The Superman reboot saga goes back to the first decade of the century when forgotten director Bryan "Coxsman" Singer produced "Superman Returns" on a budget of over $200 million. The massively budgeted movie featured miniature train sets being destroyed by a home crystal-growing set, a super-powered bastard child, a seventeen-year-old Lois Lane, and a Superman on loan from the "Man-Hole" corner bar in San Francisco's Castro district. Years after the debacle, Singer remarked, "I was attempting to pull the greatest subversive act in the history of cinema: to slip right under the noses of unsuspecting straight Americans a totally gay superhero with virtually no interesting qualities, conflicts, or action. In the end, I simply made an unwatchable movie that sucked almighty balls."

[Angeloz]

Bugger and I was hoping for a "Superman :heart: 's Batman" film already. ;) :oldrazz: :D

Angeloz

[Milu]

Get Timm and Dini!!!!!

[Ita-KalEl]

Get Timm and Dini!!!!!

I agree, even if we would risk to have a sense of deja vou

[ThanosOfTitans]

I ran across the following while time travelling:


April 11, 2024

Variety reports that Warner Bros. is planning its fifteenth reboot of the "Superman" franchise.

WB studios spokesman Jerry Thunderkunt reports that studio execs are greenlighting another reboot of the ancient and enervated superhero franchise. "We've learned from the last fourteen critically panned flops which failed to recoup their initial budget," said Thunderkunt. "Clearly, audiences did not respond to the characterization of Lois Lane as a whored-up Jezebel attempting to seduce a bisexual autistic Man of Steel."

According to Thunderkunt, the WB Studio's nearly $320 billion combined loss on the past fourteen "Superman" trainwrecks has done nothing but steel studio executives' resolve to "buckle down, lay off the coke for fifteen minutes, and attempt to wring another dime from a bloodless and lifeless franchise."

"Clearly, having Superman undergo sexual transgendered reversal at the hands of Brainiac, travel back in time, impregnate himself, and then give birth to his own son who was--in fact---himself, confused audiences and accounted for the Burbank WB studios being firebombed by Underoo-wearing fanboys."

The Superman reboot saga goes back to the first decade of the century when forgotten director Bryan "Coxsman" Singer produced "Superman Returns" on a budget of over $200 million. The massively budgeted movie featured miniature train sets being destroyed by a home crystal-growing set, a super-powered bastard child, a seventeen-year-old Lois Lane, and a Superman on loan from the "Man-Hole" corner bar in San Francisco's Castro district. Years after the debacle, Singer remarked, "I was attempting to pull the greatest subversive act in the history of cinema: to slip right under the noses of unsuspecting straight Americans a totally gay superhero with virtually no interesting qualities, conflicts, or action. In the end, I simply made an unwatchable movie that sucked almighty balls."


LMAO I found this quite amusing. Creative.

[Sebastos]

I thoroughly enjoyed Routh... I want him to stay on. :up:


the rest can leave.

My sentiments exactly.

[Super Kal]

good to hear :up:

[Joe-El]

"Industry chatter claimed the studio would start fresh with a new take on the Man of Steel, as if the previous pic never happened."


Music to mah ears!!!

[Super Kal]

that sounds glorious :D:up:

[Mister J]

I liked SR and I wouldn't mind a complete reboot at all. There were a number of things in the movie I could definitely do without being referenced in MOS. I'd be fine by me if the only thing than SR had to do with MOS was Brandon.

[wellsy]

"Industry chatter claimed the studio would start fresh with a new take on the Man of Steel, as if the previous pic never happened."


Music to mah ears!!!
Pardon me, but could we get a link for that please?

Much appreciated.

[Showtime]

http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i267/IronGiant29/VoteBellaEnvironment.jpg

When: Tuesday
Where: Hype Community

[X-Maniac]

Something crossed my mind regarding Harris and Dougherty.

They are widely held to acclaim over X-Men 2. However, there are stark differences between that and the SR project.

X2 was based on the comicbook material - combining four storylines: God Loves Man Kills (Stryker), Operation Zero Tolerance (mansion raid), Weapon X (Wolverine's past) and Phoenix Saga (Jean's expanding power). All brilliantly combined.

The original X2 story treatment was by David Hayter (who worked on X1) and Zak Penn. Singer brought in Harris and Dougherty, Hayter left the project under bad terms (he was seriously pissed off) and Penn insisted on a story credit but was also pushed out.

The point being that Harris and Dougherty came up with the screenplay that was filmed.. but not the story nor the original ideas, which were down to Hayter/Penn and the comics respectively.

So, with SR, I think Harris and Dougherty needed a stronger foundation upon which to write. They needed to be doing what X2 did - basing it on key comicbook stories and story ideas from people experienced with the mythos. What they did seems so loosely connected to the mythos that this is part of the reason the fanbase is so divided.

I really wanted to love SR. I thought it would be 'X2-plus'....but it wasn't. It's not crap, but it's not an epic Superman movie either.

[TheComicbookKid]

Something crossed my mind regarding Harris and Dougherty.

They are widely held to acclaim over X-Men 2. However, there are stark differences between that and the SR project.

X2 was based on the comicbook material - combining four storylines: God Loves Man Kills (Stryker), Operation Zero Tolerance (mansion raid), Weapon X (Wolverine's past) and Phoenix Saga (Jean's expanding power). All brilliantly combined.

The original X2 story treatment was by David Hayter (who worked on X1) and Zak Penn. Singer brought in Harris and Dougherty, Hayter left the project under bad terms (he was seriously pissed off) and Penn insisted on a story credit but was also pushed out.

The point being that Harris and Dougherty came up with the screenplay that was filmed.. but not the story nor the original ideas, which were down to Hayter/Penn and the comics respectively.

So, with SR, I think Harris and Dougherty needed a stronger foundation upon which to write. They needed to be doing what X2 did - basing it on key comicbook stories and story ideas from people experienced with the mythos. What they did seems so loosely connected to the mythos that this is part of the reason the fanbase is so divided.

I really wanted to love SR. I thought it would be 'X2-plus'....but it wasn't. It's not crap, but it's not an epic Superman movie either.

Good points. I thought the movie had great dialogue. Adding a third party would have certainly helped. I made the point that Superman doesn't have any real definitive stories outside of his introduction to Metropolis that aren't Elseworld stories. IMO.

You really need to know the mythos if you're going to cobble together a bunch of stoies.

[Sebastos]

http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i267/IronGiant29/VoteBellaEnvironment.jpg

When: Tuesday
Where: Hype Community

Will do.

[Sebastos]

Double Post

[gdw]

Something crossed my mind regarding Harris and Dougherty.

They are widely held to acclaim over X-Men 2. However, there are stark differences between that and the SR project.

X2 was based on the comicbook material - combining four storylines: God Loves Man Kills (Stryker), Operation Zero Tolerance (mansion raid), Weapon X (Wolverine's past) and Phoenix Saga (Jean's expanding power). All brilliantly combined.

The original X2 story treatment was by David Hayter (who worked on X1) and Zak Penn. Singer brought in Harris and Dougherty, Hayter left the project under bad terms (he was seriously pissed off) and Penn insisted on a story credit but was also pushed out.

The point being that Harris and Dougherty came up with the screenplay that was filmed.. but not the story nor the original ideas, which were down to Hayter/Penn and the comics respectively.

So, with SR, I think Harris and Dougherty needed a stronger foundation upon which to write. They needed to be doing what X2 did - basing it on key comicbook stories and story ideas from people experienced with the mythos. What they did seems so loosely connected to the mythos that this is part of the reason the fanbase is so divided.

I really wanted to love SR. I thought it would be 'X2-plus'....but it wasn't. It's not crap, but it's not an epic Superman movie either.

I mostly agree with you here. Although, I think the large problem was not a poor base to build on, but rather that they all, including, and especially Singer, lost sight of the forest through the trees.

A lot of what made the whole idea behind Returns great was lost through editing and things cut even before and during shooting.

Initially a lont more focus was meant to be put on the dealing with whether or not he should be back, and being re-accepted. Instead, it ended up all being rushed over, outside of Lois, and he's instantly accepted again, no doubts for him or anyone, again, besides Lois.

Now I know that many thought 'not enough action,' and they're right, and this would have been focus on more non action material, BUT, leaving it out, along with the actual return to Krypton sequence, essentially negated the entire purpose of the film. That is, the fact that he left and came back served absolutely no purpose in the end, out side of Lois.

Everything else in the film could have been done without that. That's a hell of a lot of movie to have nothing to do with main concept.

Even the whole connection Luthor had with it all was written out.

If this was all put back in, AND the conflict/danger/ action was brought on earlier, it would have been a phenomenal film.

Also, given that these three were a large part of the reason X2 was so damned great, I was hopping they would have been around for the sequel, should there ever be one.

Still surprised people are 'cheering' over Harris and Dougherty leaving after X2, even with story elements coming from Penn and Hayter.

[Hand Duet]

Something crossed my mind regarding Harris and Dougherty.

They are widely held to acclaim over X-Men 2. However, there are stark differences between that and the SR project.

X2 was based on the comicbook material - combining four storylines: God Loves Man Kills (Stryker), Operation Zero Tolerance (mansion raid), Weapon X (Wolverine's past) and Phoenix Saga (Jean's expanding power). All brilliantly combined.

The original X2 story treatment was by David Hayter (who worked on X1) and Zak Penn. Singer brought in Harris and Dougherty, Hayter left the project under bad terms (he was seriously pissed off) and Penn insisted on a story credit but was also pushed out.

The point being that Harris and Dougherty came up with the screenplay that was filmed.. but not the story nor the original ideas, which were down to Hayter/Penn and the comics respectively.

So, with SR, I think Harris and Dougherty needed a stronger foundation upon which to write. They needed to be doing what X2 did - basing it on key comicbook stories and story ideas from people experienced with the mythos. What they did seems so loosely connected to the mythos that this is part of the reason the fanbase is so divided.

I really wanted to love SR. I thought it would be 'X2-plus'....but it wasn't. It's not crap, but it's not an epic Superman movie either.

Good point there but let's not hide the truth. The movie was crap. Point blank.

[Mikelus]

I mostly agree with you here. Although, I think the large problem was not a poor base to build on, but rather that they all, including, and especially Singer, lost sight of the forest through the trees.

A lot of what made the whole idea behind Returns great was lost through editing and things cut even before and during shooting.

Initially a lont more focus was meant to be put on the dealing with whether or not he should be back, and being re-accepted. Instead, it ended up all being rushed over, outside of Lois, and he's instantly accepted again, no doubts for him or anyone, again, besides Lois.

Now I know that many thought 'not enough action,' and they're right, and this would have been focus on more non action material, BUT, leaving it out, along with the actual return to Krypton sequence, essentially negated the entire purpose of the film. That is, the fact that he left and came back served absolutely no purpose in the end, out side of Lois.

Everything else in the film could have been done without that. That's a hell of a lot of movie to have nothing to do with main concept.

Even the whole connection Luthor had with it all was written out.

If this was all put back in, AND the conflict/danger/ action was brought on earlier, it would have been a phenomenal film.

Also, given that these three were a large part of the reason X2 was so damned great, I was hopping they would have been around for the sequel, should there ever be one.

Still surprised people are 'cheering' over Harris and Dougherty leaving after X2, even with story elements coming from Penn and Hayter.


Good analysis gdw, X-Maniac made some great points too, well done guys. ;)

Also the "superson" was a terrible idea, not only it goes against the mythos, but most fans are not interested on seeing an emoSuperman anyway. Singer totally blew it right there, is just angsty drama, similar to Smallville's relationships, triangles... emoClark anyone? I think a reboot à la Batman Begins is what the franchise needs, no big deal, they did the same with the Hulk. The best Superman movie is waiting to be made, someone will finally get it right someday, lets hope is sooner than later.

[El Payaso]

Good point there but let's not hide the truth. The movie was crap. Point blank.

No. Period. :)

[Nightwing1977]

Good point there but let's not hide the truth. The movie was crap. Point blank.

The truth? More like your opinion it's crap, not truth. If it was the truth, then not one people would like it or even see it. Even if some dislike SR, there are some that have supporters too.

[mego joe]

The truth? More like your opinion it's crap, not truth. If it was the truth, then not one people would like it or even see it. Even if some dislike SR, there are some that have supporters too.

I guess that's why the sequel's already been greenlit and Singer and Co. had such an easy time of getting the script approved.

[El Payaso]

I guess that's why the sequel's already been greenlit and Singer and Co. had such an easy time of getting the script approved.

It's about the amount of money executives wanted.

If for people watching SR, numbers are higher than BB.

But they wanted more money.

Movies can be crap but if the BO is good they go with sequels. We all know that. So there's no relationship between quality of a movie and having sequels.

[SolidSnakeMGS]

I guess that's why the sequel's already been greenlit and Singer and Co. had such an easy time of getting the script approved.

You're right. We all know Fantastic Four (a whopping 26% on RT!) was a great movie, so naturally it got a sequel.

[FlawlessVictory]

You're right. We all know Fantastic Four (a whopping 26% on RT!) was a great movie, so naturally it got a sequel.

Budget, budget, budget. Tim Story wasn't busy leaving 10 million dollar scenes on the cutting room floor.

[VenomsMom]

I guess that's why the sequel's already been greenlit and Singer and Co. had such an easy time of getting the script approved.
And why we are getting a conclusion to this great story.

[mego joe]

And why we are getting a conclusion to this great story.


Oh, that's right, I forgot how great this story was and that it demands a conclusion to "Paternity Test For Superman."

How careless of me, how could I forget.

[El Payaso]

Oh, that's right, I forgot how great this story was and that it demands a conclusion to "Paternity Test For Superman."

How careless of me, how could I forget.

Not your first time. We forgive you. :)

[mego joe]

OK, so Harris and Daugherty are gone and WB is soliciting pitches for the next Superman film.

Since SInger got the Superman gig with a pitch that included three movies, what's the liklihood that an open solicitation for pitches is going to have anyting to do with Singer's original ideas?

I understand that director's work with more than 1 writer/ set of writers, but would it makes sense for someone other than SInger or 'his choice' of writers to be pitching a direct sequel to SR?

If MOS is going to be a direct sequel to SR, wouldn't it makes sense that Singer would be involved with developing the story?

If SInger had story and just not a script that WB liked would WB have an open solicit for pitches?

This is what makes me think most stronly that SInger is off of SUperman.

[Nixon]

They might be looking for people to work with Singer in a similar capacity to what Harris and Dougherty did.

[mego joe]

They might be looking for people to work with Singer in a similar capacity to what Harris and Dougherty did.

Then why openly solicit a new pitch instead of contacting writers to work on Singer's existing story.

[Showtime]

http://www.shocktillyoudrop.com/news/topnews.php?id=5377


Call this "sci-fi." Call this "action." Call it unworthy of Shock coverage. But we're...

a.) Big fans of Mike Dougherty (Trick 'r Treat, Superman Returns).
b.) Fans of the creators involved in this project.
c.) Anyone who cites their movie is inspired by "Godzilla" flicks wins instant kudos in our bloody book.

Dougherty is going to direct the animated feature Calling All Robots for Walt Disney Pictures and Robert Zemeckis' ImageMovers. He's co-scripting with Breehn Burns and Simeon Wilkins. Furthermore, because of the scope of the project, he's using the same performance capture Zemeckis used on Beowulf.

"I grew up watching Godzilla movies. This film is very much rooted in those movies," Dougherty tells Variety. The plot is being kept secret at this time.

We hoped that, with this news, will come a break in release date info for Warner Bros.' Trick 'r Treat. Alas, Variety offered nothing new other than it was pushed from last October's slot to avoid competing with the slasher fare opening that month.

http://www.joblo.com/index.php?id=20354

Disney is giving another shot at the whole "performance capture" style of computer animation with a new flick called CALLING ALL ROBOTS.

The project comes from X2 and SUPERMAN RETURNS co-writer Mike Dougherty, who's teaming with Robert Zemeckis' company ImageMovers for the flick. Details on the story are scarce, but it's a sci-fi adventure that Dougherty (who hails from an animation background) cryptically describes as a "throwback to old Godzilla movies." Don't be too surprised if it's available in three dimensions as well.

Zemeckis' company was also responsible for BEOWULF and POLAR EXPRESS, and is currently working on A CHRISTMAS CAROL with digitized Jim Carrey. Meanwhile, Dougherty's directing debut TRICK r TREAT was curiously not released last Halloween.

Extra Tidbit: One of the reasons the human characters in BEOWULF look so spooky and lifeless: nobody really blinks.

[X-Maniac]

Oh God. More performance crapture stuff.

We already had 300 and Beowulf. Style over substance. Visual feast but emotional famine.

The golden age of cinema has gone. Welcome to the MTV/Playstation generation and to a selfish world that spawns selfish 'heroes' like Beowulf and Singer's Superman.... and overhyped tripe like Harry Potter.... Just rewatch the old movies of yesteryear, there's the quality. We might have better FX but we certainly don't have better writing.

Meltdown over.

[Mostpowerful]

Oh God. More performance crapture stuff.

We already had 300 and Beowulf. Style over substance. Visual feast but emotional famine.

The golden age of cinema has gone. Welcome to the MTV/Playstation generation and to a selfish world that spawns selfish 'heroes' like Beowulf and Singer's Superman.... and overhyped tripe like Harry Potter.... Just rewatch the old movies of yesteryear, there's the quality. We might have better FX but we certainly don't have better writing.

Meltdown over.

:word: You forgot to mention X3..

[X Knight]

or ghost rider.....

[X-Maniac]

:word: You forgot to mention X3..

Well, X3 isn't part of the golden era of film-making, nor is it performance capture! Nor is it some Oscar-worthy greatest movie of all time. None of the X-Men movies are.

It's part of today's pop-culture action-adventure entertainment. And, in that category, it's fine. Of course I wish it had reached higher and deeper.

I've only ever seen one superhero movie - Superman The Movie - on a 'best sci-fi movies' of all time list.

In order to get more superhero movies to be that iconic, you need master directing and solid storytelling. There's a reason why Titanic, Gone with The Wind, Star Wars, are on best movie lists.

[M.O.Steel]

Well, X3 isn't part of the golden era of film-making, nor is it performance capture! Nor is it some Oscar-worthy greatest movie of all time. None of the X-Men movies are.

It's part of today's pop-culture action-adventure entertainment. And, in that category, it's fine. Of course I wish it had reached higher and deeper.

I've only ever seen one superhero movie - Superman The Movie - on a 'best sci-fi movies' of all time list.

In order to get more superhero movies to be that iconic, you need master directing and solid storytelling. There's a reason why Titanic, Gone with The Wind, Star Wars, are on best movie lists.

gone with the wind is a sci-fi? wtf?

[Mostpowerful]

Well, X3 isn't part of the golden era of film-making, nor is it performance capture! Nor is it some Oscar-worthy greatest movie of all time. None of the X-Men movies are.

It's part of today's pop-culture action-adventure entertainment. And, in that category, it's fine. Of course I wish it had reached higher and deeper.

I've only ever seen one superhero movie - Superman The Movie - on a 'best sci-fi movies' of all time list.

In order to get more superhero movies to be that iconic, you need master directing and solid storytelling. There's a reason why Titanic, Gone with The Wind, Star Wars, are on best movie lists.

No, dear, you were talking about lots of different things, read your post again. You mentioned "style over substance," and that's why I mentioned X3, which is a fine example of that, IMO. :cwink:

[X-Maniac]

gone with the wind is a sci-fi? wtf?

Please learn to read properly.

I'm not clarifying, my post was clear enough if you didn't just scurry through it like some ADD crackhead.

[X-Maniac]

No, dear, you were talking about lots of different things, read your post again. You mentioned "style over substance," and that's why I mentioned X3, which is a fine example of that, IMO. :cwink:

I think X3 had some substance, and certainly more substance than either 300 or Beowulf, and more emotional drama than SR (which had people doing the opposite of what they felt in order for us to try to work out their neurotic states of mind). But, of course, X3 could certainly have done with more substance although that's difficult in a multi-character ensemble movie that by virtue of the number of characters is going to be story-driven or theme-driven rather than character-driven.

And please don't call me 'dear'. It smacks of being patronising and supercilious, and we wouldn't want that, would we?:word:

[Showtime]

Well, X3 isn't part of the golden era of film-making, nor is it performance capture! Nor is it some Oscar-worthy greatest movie of all time. None of the X-Men movies are.

It's part of today's pop-culture action-adventure entertainment. And, in that category, it's fine. Of course I wish it had reached higher and deeper.

I've only ever seen one superhero movie - Superman The Movie - on a 'best sci-fi movies' of all time list.

In order to get more superhero movies to be that iconic, you need master directing and solid storytelling. There's a reason why Titanic, Gone with The Wind, Star Wars, are on best movie lists.

A superhero movie is never going to be Titantic or Gone With the Wind, they are all there for pop culture entertainment only.

[Mostpowerful]

I think X3 had some substance, and certainly more substance than either 300 or Beowulf, and more emotional drama than SR (which had people doing the opposite of what they felt in order for us to try to work out their neurotic states of mind). But, of course, X3 could certainly have done with more substance although that's difficult in a multi-character ensemble movie that by virtue of the number of characters is going to be story-driven or theme-driven rather than character-driven.

And please don't call me 'dear'. It smacks of being patronising and supercilious, and we wouldn't want that, would we?:word:

Ok, I won't call you 'dear' again.

And most people disagree with you regarding X3. Just check rotten tomatoes, which says that X3 is clearly inferior to the first two Xmen movies. SR, on the other hand is certified fresh by both critics and the mainstream with a score of 77%. And the consensus is that it's a exciting and emotional COMPLEX Man of Steel adaptation. :cwink: And I agree.

[X-Maniac]

A superhero movie is never going to be Titantic or Gone With the Wind, they are all there for pop culture entertainment only.

Well, the entertainment market has changed, for sure. We're in a fast-moving hi-tech world. We no longer have event movies that everyone must see many times. It's all about a big opening weekend, then a nosedive ready for the next movie to claim top spot. We're saturated with information prior to a movie, ticket prices are higher, home entertainment technology is amazing - none of which existed at the time of those big iconic movies. There are no real icons anymore - the days of big movies and big pop icons are probably gone. Look at the hysteria over the Beatles etc, you don't get that kind of reaction today to the latest bimbette created by 'talent' shows like American Idle (in which they really want an idle way to get famous without learning stagecraft or who they really are, it's about getting fame not having talent).

Sci-fi/fantasy movies do seem to struggle to get wider recognition, although LoTR and Harry Potter have become iconic, though i believe Potter to be overhyped and derivative.

I don't suppose an X-Men movie is ever going to be on a 'best sci-fi of all time' or 'best movie of all time' list. I think Superman The Movie probably deserves a place on those lists.

[X-Maniac]

Ok, I won't call you 'dear' again.

And most people disagree with you regarding X3. Just check rotten tomatoes, which says that X3 is clearly inferior to the first two Xmen movies. SR, on the other hand is certified fresh by both critics and the mainstream with a score of 77%. And the consensus is that it's a exciting and emotional COMPLEX Man of Steel adaptation. :cwink: And I agree.

I actually agree that X3 is, in moviemaking terms, probably inferior to the first two movies. That's for a number of reasons. But I don't think the first two are perfect X-Men movies. I know people whose favourite is X1 for its moody atmospherics, some whose favourite is X2 for its balance of drama and action, and some who prefer X3 for its comicbook feel and visual flair.

I think a perfect X-Men movie would be something epic and 'wow' with Xavier gathering together a team from across the world (giving us the reasoning for the X-Men to exist, which was not really covered in the first movie, where they were just 'there') - and fighting a threat like Magneto. But that would take an entirely different approach.

I have no problem with your love of SR; I just don't share it. But I don't think SR is rubbish either. It's just a very odd attempt at Superman in many places. In my view, the storytelling wasn't sewn up properly and the editing was atrocious. I think the movie would have a lot more heart, focus and depth if Superman had said goodbye and if we'd seen the scenes of him viewing the wreckage of his home world.

It's interesting that you are a girl/woman. I heard a woman at the cinema say she loved SR when i went to see it. I think perhaps it appeals to females who can relate to Lois's pain and inner strength in getting on with her life, surviving, moving on, forgiving.

[Mostpowerful]

Oh, there is NO doubt in my mind that X3 is inferior to the previous movies, which are very good to great, IMO. And I won't get into any more detail about them, I'm not an expert at them, I just enjoy them a lot.

SR, on the other hand is totally fascinating to me, I'm a huge fan. And FYI, my favorite character in SR is actually well Superman. I feel so much for his struggles, desires, needs, wants, etc. It's logical to me, based on the previous franchise, that he would feel this way. I think SR is brilliant, even if there are a few flaws in the execution, the concept, however, is oustanding. But let's agree to dis.. well you know.

[BMM]

Please learn to read properly.

I'm not clarifying, my post was clear enough if you didn't just scurry through it like some ADD crackhead.

And please don't call me 'dear'. It smacks of being patronising and supercilious, and we wouldn't want that, would we?:word:

Please, tell me you're joking.

[FilmNerdJamie]

I've always wondered just what the Hell Singer, Dougherty and Harris had in mind for X-Men 3...

[Mostpowerful]

I've always wondered just what the Hell Singer, Dougherty and Harris had in mind for X-Men 3...

Something awesome, I'm pretty sure, and very different to what we got with Ratner..:csad:

[M.O.Steel]

A superhero movie is never going to be Titantic or Gone With the Wind, they are all there for pop culture entertainment only.

I never would have have star wars, star trek, superhero films, harry potter films ever winning anything, until LOTR.

to be honest, i never ever thought LOTR would ever win an oscar. them winning is actaully a huge opening for fantasy movies to win. With that, i do see someday a superhero movie winning best pic/director and/or actor.

[FilmNerdJamie]

Something awesome, I'm pretty sure, and very different to what we got with Ratner..:csad:

To be fair, Ratner was brought in very late (i.e. only a few weeks before filming started). He really didn't bring much to the table...other than tell the D.P. where to point the camera and ******** with the actors between takes. In fact, his big contribution was casting Ellen Page and moving the Golden Gate bridge sequence to the 3rd Act (i.e. it was originally in the first half-hour).

If you hate The Last Stand, blame Fox (along with the writers and original helmer Matthew Vaughn); not Ratner imo.

I've heard conflicting reports about just how deep into writing Singer & his boys were on X-Men 3. I remember reading that they had a fully-completed treatment ready for Fox; one that was subsequently 100% thrown out after their fall out with Singer.

I've also heard that only about 1/3 of a treatment was completed by them. So...*Shrugs*

[Mostpowerful]

To be fair, Ratner was brought in very late (i.e. only a few weeks before filming started). He really didn't bring much to the table...other than tell the D.P. where to point the camera and ******** with the actors between takes. In fact, his big contribution was casting Ellen Page and moving the Golden Gate bridge sequence to the 3rd Act (i.e. it was originally in the first half-hour).

If you hate The Last Stand, blame Fox (along with the writers and original helmer Matthew Vaughn); not Ratner imo.

I've heard conflicting reports about just how deep into writing Singer & his boys were on X-Men 3. I remember reading that they had a fully-completed treatment ready for Fox; one that was subsequently 100% thrown out after their fall out with Singer.

I've also heard that only about 1/3 of a treatment was completed by them. So...*Shrugs*

I don't hate The Last Stand. I just think it should have been sooo much better with Singer at the helm. I feel sad for the hardcore Xmen fans, though. Still, Ratner is no Singer.

[X-Maniac]

Please, tell me you're joking.

Of course, don't let the absence of emoticons deceive you. Although I'm not sure why you're seizing upon those two comments and offering no other contribution!

[X-Maniac]

I don't hate The Last Stand. I just think it should have been sooo much better with Singer at the helm. I feel sad for the hardcore Xmen fans, though. Still, Ratner is no Singer.

But, still, if you watch Red Dragon you see a very different Ratner to the one directing Last Stand.

Clearly, Ratner was under the authority of the producers of X3 and what they wanted in the script and in the movie. He was able to make some structural changes, probably to ensure he got the movie done on time. He should have had eight months prep time, not eight weeks.

Also, we don't know exactly what Singer and co had suggested for X3 or what Fox really thought of what he suggested. All we know is that an X3 was, for some reason, not immediately approved (something I've never understood). There's been talk that Singer wanted an X3/X4 to be filmed back to back, charting Jean's return as Phoenix and her gradual descent to Dark Phoenix, with Emma Frost and Gambit as new characters and Storm written out or relegated to a cameo because Halle and Singer fell out on the set of X2. Alan Cumming also had difficulty with Singer so Nightcrawler would not have returned in Singer's version. That's about all we know, unless someone else close to the Singer camp has any more details.

[BMM]

Of course, don't let the absence of emoticons deceive you. Although I'm not sure why you're seizing upon those two comments and offering no other contribution!

With little news, there’s not much else to discuss that’s Superman related. The rest of this conversation is just an extension of debate that’s more appropriate to the X-Men forums. If you want, I will offer that Alan Cumming would have returned to X-Men 3, as he was contractually obligated to do so and has said on multiple occasions that he was ready to begin filming before and after the director changes. He was written out by Kinberg and Penn. That information is available in the archives of the homepage on this very site for anyone who’s interested… so I’m not sure where you’re getting that Cumming said he wouldn’t return. :huh:

http://www.superherohype.com/news/x-mennews.php?id=1059
http://www.superherohype.com/news/x-mennews.php?id=1701
http://www.superherohype.com/news/featuresnews.php?id=2517 (http://www.superherohype.com/news/featuresnews.php?id=2517)
http://www.superherohype.com/news/x-mennews.php?id=3165

[X-Maniac]

With little news, there’s not much else to discuss that’s Superman related. The rest of this conversation is just an extension of debate that’s more appropriate to the X-Men forums. If you want, I will offer that Alan Cumming would have returned to X-Men 3, as he was contractually obligated to do so and has said on multiple occasions that he was ready to begin filming before and after the director changes. He was written out by Kinberg and Penn. That information is available in the archives of the homepage on this very site for anyone who’s interested… so I’m not sure where you’re getting that Cumming said he wouldn’t return. :huh:

http://www.superherohype.com/news/x-mennews.php?id=1059
http://www.superherohype.com/news/x-mennews.php?id=1701
http://www.superherohype.com/news/featuresnews.php?id=2517 (http://www.superherohype.com/news/featuresnews.php?id=2517)
http://www.superherohype.com/news/x-mennews.php?id=3165

Good catch... but if he hated both the make-up process and Singer's directing style then I'd think that would become clear to everyone concerned. Contractual obligations aren't always honoured. I recall that Graham Norton show well, as mentioned in one of the links. The links also mention how he 'didn't enjoy' working with Bryan, for some reason he doesn't elaborate upon.

But, Cumming may have had to do X3, that's true. Raquel Welch was forced to do One Million Years BC (just watched the reissue including her interview) for contractual reasons. The silly woman still doesn't seem to realise it made her career and is her only memorable movie role.

And, yes, we are just floundering in a no-news vacuum here! Still, a bit of chat is fine!

[BenReilly]

Also, we don't know exactly what Singer and co had suggested for X3 or what Fox really thought of what he suggested. All we know is that an X3 was, for some reason, not immediately approved (something I've never understood).

Actually, Lauren Shuler Donner confirmed in an interview that Singer never expressed any of his ideas for X-Men 3, before he left.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/search/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002538543

But Singer leaving to do "Superman Returns" -- which he discussed openly with Shuler Donner and her husband Dick Donner, the director of the 1978 "Superman"-- was tough to take. Particularly since he took all his unexpressed ideas for "X-Men 3" with him. "It was a blow," Shuler Donner admits. "He's my friend, I respect him, and saw us doing all the 'X-Men.' "

[Nightwing1977]

I know for sure the Dark Phoenix thing was still Singer's idea for X3. He left it open when we saw Jean starting to show some of the Phoenix's power & the ending when we saw the Phoenix-shape symbol in the lake after she supposely drowned.

[Showtime]

Not a good day for "The Superman Team", first Singer's Valkeryie is delayed and now Mike Dougherty's Trick R Treat is dropped by WB.

[Super Kal]

sounds good to me...

[Showtime]

That Trick R Treat was dropped?

[FilmNerdJamie]

The word from everyone whose seen is it's damn good.

[X-Maniac]

Valkyrie did look good... but Tom Cruise is not a very hot commodity at present. Everyone thinks he's just a loony. However, I want to see this movie.

I recently rewatched Singer's Triangle miniseries (Night One suffers from the too dark, too filtered, lighting syndrome that plagued parts of SR - a scene at an airport in Triangle showed an orange sky in the middle of the day!!!). A quite good miniseries though. Except Catherine Bell, who has a frog-like mouth and kept pouting oddly. Bruce Davison's character speaks of there being 'mystique' in the Bermuda Triangle and i knew immediately Singer had put that in the script as one of his little nods.

[Super Kal]

well, actually, I was referring to the delay of Valkyrie

[nintendo nerd]

Not a good day for "The Superman Team", first Singer's Valkeryie is delayed and now Mike Dougherty's Trick R Treat is dropped by WB.

Why was it delayed?

[Gotham]

Why was it delayed?

A spot opened up in February, and there's barely what they'd consider competition for the film in that month.

[Showtime]

Which means because the budget went over, they need to hit a bigger payday in order to come up with some profitability against their projections.

[Angeloz]

When was it meant to come out? I'm not obsessed by those details so don't know it.

Angeloz

[bgshw44]

When was it meant to come out? I'm not obsessed by those details so don't know it.

Angeloz

origionally it was suppose to be a july 4th release, then august i believe

[bgshw44]

Valkyrie did look good... but Tom Cruise is not a very hot commodity at present. Everyone thinks he's just a loony. However, I want to see this movie.

I recently rewatched Singer's Triangle miniseries (Night One suffers from the too dark, too filtered, lighting syndrome that plagued parts of SR - a scene at an airport in Triangle showed an orange sky in the middle of the day!!!). A quite good miniseries though. Except Catherine Bell, who has a frog-like mouth and kept pouting oddly. Bruce Davison's character speaks of there being 'mystique' in the Bermuda Triangle and i knew immediately Singer had put that in the script as one of his little nods.

watch the pilot of House and the colors are aweful too. I watched the History of Superman documentary that Singer did, and any time you saw footage from SR the colors were crisp and rich. I couldnt believe how bad it was butchered in post production(obviously the doc came out before the color correction etc..)

[zerohour films]

watch the pilot of House and the colors are aweful too. I watched the History of Superman documentary that Singer did, and any time you saw footage from SR the colors were crisp and rich. I couldnt believe how bad it was butchered in post production(obviously the doc came out before the color correction etc..)


You know I finally got to see this the other night on USA. Love the show, but man that filter/color correction used was terrible. It was almost like a bad color job on an old black/white movie.

Didn't make the connection at the time with Singer and SR. Yeah he really needs to stay away from that area of filmmaking. Leave it to professionals who know how to use it the right way.

[Mostpowerful]

Not a good day for "The Superman Team", first Singer's Valkeryie is delayed and now Mike Dougherty's Trick R Treat is dropped by WB.

When was Trick R Treat dropped?

According to Legendary Pics, the film is listed as coming soon,

www.legendarypictures.com (http://www.legendarypictures.com)

[Showtime]

Warner Bros dropped Trick R Treat, Legendary is still trying to get the picture made with other distributors.

[Mostpowerful]

Warner Bros dropped Trick R Treat, Legendary is still trying to get the picture made with other distributors.

Oh, I see. But the movie was finished, isn't it? And I remember hearing good things about it, what do you think happened?

[TheComicbookKid]

I hope Sony picks it up for this Halloween. They do know how to market movies. And I hope it makes 80 million to show the WB how stupid they were.

[Showtime]

It is completely finished.

There are a number of things that could be a factor, budget, timing, executive reaction,...maybe something connected to his departure from Returns. Now he is working with Disney I believe on his Robot movie.

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Personally I thought that Valkrie looked pretty awful. Pushing it back once is okay, but when a studio does that a second time, that usually spells trouble. Singer and Cruise can't afford to have this movie underperform. I don't know about it making a 100mil now. Some movies are put in Feb because honestly they will perform better there, but this is suppose to be a prestige Oscar flick. More often than not the Oscars don't remember movies that come out at the first part of the year. This is isn't a romantic comedy or low rent action flick, so I call dumps ville on this one.

[StylishHokie21]

Great news. That script was a mess.

[Angeloz]

origionally it was suppose to be a july 4th release, then august i believe

Thanks. :)

watch the pilot of House and the colors are aweful too. I watched the History of Superman documentary that Singer did, and any time you saw footage from SR the colors were crisp and rich. I couldnt believe how bad it was butchered in post production(obviously the doc came out before the color correction etc..)

I don't remember the pilot being awful. But it's been awhile (that said it got me to watch the series and I hate or really am generally sick of medical dramas or even comedies so don't watch them any more. "House" is the exception).

Angeloz

[Retroman]

Shame that Trick R Treat was dropped. What i've seen so far looks decent and the buzz has been good so this decision is somewhat surprising.
I hope Sony picks it up for this Halloween. They do know how to market movies. And I hope it makes 80 million to show the WB how stupid they were.
They shouldn't have a hard time finding a distributor.Lionsgate or Sony would be good.:up:

[Showtime]

I can picture it at Sony.

[Nightwing1977]

They shouldn't have a hard time finding a distributor.Lionsgate or Sony would be good.:up:



I think Lionsgate would be a great choice from your list. They're known for releasing many horror films. Especially several that Trick 'n' Treats would be another good one for them. :up:

[FilmNerdJamie]

You know...why didn't they just move it to New Line (i.e. once again, an outlet for genre fare...like Trick R Treat?!?)

[DoctorJones]

New Line has been merged into WB now.

[FilmNerdJamie]

New Line has been merged into WB now.

I know. My point is that New Line is now turned back into an outlet for genre films...and Trick R Treat would have been perfect to put there.

[Retroman]

Dan Harris's followup to SR -I, Lucifer- which he wrote and was going to direct doesn't look like it's going to happen....at least not soon.

Transcript from a recent Total Film magazine interview Ewan McGregor courtesy of anika1 from the imdb boards (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0444646/board/thread/103024917?d=108284795#108284795).

One project now unlikely to go ahead is I, Lucifer with Daniel Craig. "It was something I was going to do," says McGregor, "but the truth is it's been a long time that the film has been in limbo. Over two years now, so as far as I know it's not happening. Shame, because it was a great script."

[Lighthouse]

Man, after WB dumped Dougherty's Trick 'R Treat, those two can't get a break.

[Matt]

Dan Harris's followup to SR -I, Lucifer- which he wrote and was going to direct doesn't look like it's going to happen....at least not soon.

Transcript from a recent Total Film magazine interview Ewan McGregor courtesy of anika1 from the imdb boards (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0444646/board/thread/103024917?d=108284795#108284795).

Its really no suprise. I do not see how any studio could think a movie that romanticizes Satan could be profitable in any way.

[epc11223]

Its really no suprise. I do not see how any studio could think a movie that romanticizes Satan could be profitable in any way.


there are so many movies that are bad that get made with the thought that it can be a profit. look at the saw franchises or the comedy bedazzled. bedazzled had liz hurley as the devil. look at interview with a vampire. that was a disgusting movie but because it had brad pitt and tom cruise, there was a profit. i think there was a profit, didnt really do much research on the film, but it was made nonetheless.

[Lighthouse]

Heh. I really liked Interview With A Vampire.

[turtlefocker]

Interview with a Vampire is a fantastic movie - "The world changes, we do not, there lies the irony that finally kills us." -

"I'm going to give you the choice I never had."

[Matt]

As did I. Bedazzled is a different scenario. Satan was the antagonist. You can't make a movie with Satan as the protagonist and expect Middle America to respond well to that. It would've bombed.

[I Am The Knight]

Interview with the Vampire is a pretty good film. Shame The Queen of the Damned was more or less a horrible movie, although I did like the guy who played Lestat. (Guess they couldn't get Cruise again) I love The Vampire Chronicles!

[epc11223]

you really never know. there are a ton of movies that you would think would bomb but end up doing well and vice a versa. snakes on a plane was supposed to do extremely well in the box office and look at that mess. people didn't expect spider-man to do so well and look how that turned out. to say it would have bombed is simply just a guess.

[I Am The Knight]

It could have bombed, but not because of the romanticizing Satan thingy...A lot of good movies bomb.

[I SEE SPIDEY]

you really never know. there are a ton of movies that you would think would bomb but end up doing well and vice a versa. snakes on a plane was supposed to do extremely well in the box office and look at that mess. people didn't expect spider-man to do so well and look how that turned out. to say it would have bombed is simply just a guess.I don't know one person who expected the first ever live action Spider-Man movie to bomb.:huh:

[Retroman]

Man, after WB dumped Dougherty's Trick 'R Treat, those two can't get a break.

That's Hollywood for you.:o I'm surprised though that that movie hasn't found a new studio yet.

Dougherty is also doing a new animated film at Disney with Robert Zemeckis producing.
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117982959.html?categoryid=1050&cs=1
Its really no suprise. I do not see how any studio could think a movie that romanticizes Satan could be profitable in any way.

Even so...surely there must be someone out there with money willing to take a chance on a dark comedy with Daniel Craig and Ewan McGregor.I'd rather that than another lame spoof film.
It could have bombed, but not because of the romanticizing Satan thingy...A lot of good movies bomb.

Yeah, there's many good movies that don't make a lot of money at the box office.

[epc11223]

I don't know one person who expected the first ever live action Spider-Man movie to bomb.:huh:

i never said people thought spider-man would bomb, just not do nearly as well as it did. spider-man had a comic book fan base, but the general audience is who fell in love with the character, making it such a huge success at the box office. i don't think anyone ever imagined it to make the amount of money that it did. it broke a lot of records, and so did the sequels. the third movie in that franchise was not received well at all and it still made alot of money and broke records. thats the thing with movies, you never really can tell if a movie is going to be a bomb or not and to say that the movie that a movie about satan being the protagonist is going to fail without really knowing the story is just ignorant. it could tell a really good story and that is what people are interested in. hell, people can sometimes be into bad stories lol. thats all i meant, you really cant predict whats going to bomb.

[\S/JcDc\S/]

I easily imagined Spidey doing the big numbers and I'm a much bigger Supes fan :o

[dark_b]

I easily imagined Spidey doing the big numbers and I'm a much bigger Supes fan :oi dont belive you. you are now thinking completely different then in 2002 IMO.
noone knew that this would happen.

[\S/JcDc\S/]

i dont belive you. you are now thinking completely different then in 2002 IMO.
noone knew that this would happen.

It was always my take that people moved on from Superman but were ready for new superhero movies. When I heard Spidey was happening I was damned sure it would dominate box office.

[epc11223]

It was always my take that people moved on from Superman but were ready for new superhero movies. When I heard Spidey was happening I was damned sure it would dominate box office.

dominate is different than pulverize. maybe you thought this (which i dont really believe), but most others didn't lol. spider-man for the most part, really came out from nowhere.

[SatEL]

there are so many movies that are bad that get made with the thought that it can be a profit. look at the saw franchises or the comedy bedazzled. bedazzled had liz hurley as the devil. look at interview with a vampire. that was a disgusting movie but because it had brad pitt and tom cruise, there was a profit. i think there was a profit, didnt really do much research on the film, but it was made nonetheless.
No it bloody was not, I guess you really have to understand the story I recommend all of Anne Rice books kick ass to the end.

[SatEL]

there are so many movies that are bad that get made with the thought that it can be a profit. look at the saw franchises or the comedy bedazzled. bedazzled had liz hurley as the devil. look at interview with a vampire. that was a disgusting movie but because it had brad pitt and tom cruise, there was a profit. i think there was a profit, didnt really do much research on the film, but it was made nonetheless.
Double post.

[I SEE SPIDEY]

i never said people thought spider-man would bomb, just not do nearly as well as it did. spider-man had a comic book fan base, but the general audience is who fell in love with the character, making it such a huge success at the box office. i don't think anyone ever imagined it to make the amount of money that it did. it broke a lot of records, and so did the sequels. the third movie in that franchise was not received well at all and it still made alot of money and broke records. thats the thing with movies, you never really can tell if a movie is going to be a bomb or not and to say that the movie that a movie about satan being the protagonist is going to fail without really knowing the story is just ignorant. it could tell a really good story and that is what people are interested in. hell, people can sometimes be into bad stories lol. thats all i meant, you really cant predict whats going to bomb.I get you but I still don't get how thinking that Spider-Man would make 300mil is far fetched, even with StarWars coming out. It was a bit of surprise but not as surprising as second teir Iron Man making 300mil IMHO. But i'll concide that 400mil was a surprise.

[Clark Kent]

What exactly is the purpose of this thread?

[mojo-x]

i never said people thought spider-man would bomb, just not do nearly as well as it did. spider-man had a comic book fan base, but the general audience is who fell in love with the character, making it such a huge success at the box office. i don't think anyone ever imagined it to make the amount of money that it did. it broke a lot of records, and so did the sequels.

IMO the reason why the general audience fell in love with the character was because the movie had the same spirit and elements of the comic that made comic book fans fell in love with the character and made it such a hit. Something SR was very much lacking.

[El Payaso]

IMO the reason why the general audience fell in love with the character was because the movie had the same spirit and elements of the comic that made comic book fans fell in love with the character and made it such a hit. Something SR was very much lacking.

In fact by comparision the comics are more mature and less caricaturesque than the movies (at least 1 and 3). And caricatures are easier to get and enjoy therefore not many people would complain.

[Chris B]

I know I'm late commenting on this, but I didn't find out about this recently until I became curious to see what was going on with a sequel to SR. That said, I'm a bit surprised that Dougherty and Harris wanted to use Darkseid as a villain. I've always gotten the sense that Brainiac and possibly Bizarro were going to appear as the villains in MOS.

[Showtime]

http://www.shocktillyoudrop.com/news/topnews.php?id=7274

I for one am happy about this. I want to see this movie badly. It is right up my alley. That being said, I am wondering if Singer is partly responsible for helping this back into WB, since he is still working with them or is production company is (Bad Hat Harry). Bad Hat Harry is also attached to Trick R Treat along with Legendary.

[batman44]

Cool, I've been interested in seeing that film.

[FilmNerdJamie]

http://www.shocktillyoudrop.com/news/topnews.php?id=7274

I for one am happy about this. I want to see this movie badly. It is right up my alley. That being said, I am wondering if Singer is partly responsible for helping this back into WB, since he is still working with them or is production company is (Bad Hat Harry). Bad Hat Harry is also attached to Trick R Treat along with Legendary.

It's interesting considering Trick R Treat was in fact dropped by WB (despite being fully finished) and Legendary was left looking for someone else willing to take it.

I don't doubt Singer played a big hand in this act. And one wonders just how much clout he has at the studio at the moment.

Yes, he's lining up producing gigs with WB. But simply that wouldn't be able to get the studio to take the film back...unless the sequel is moving forward.

Just some food for thought...

[Mostpowerful]

http://www.shocktillyoudrop.com/news/topnews.php?id=7274

I for one am happy about this. I want to see this movie badly. It is right up my alley. That being said, I am wondering if Singer is partly responsible for helping this back into WB, since he is still working with them or is production company is (Bad Hat Harry). Bad Hat Harry is also attached to Trick R Treat along with Legendary.

Cool!

[Superark]

It's interesting considering Trick R Treat was in fact dropped by WB (despite being fully finished) and Legendary was left looking for someone else willing to take it.

I don't doubt Singer played a big hand in this act. And one wonders just how much clout he has at the studio at the moment.

Yes, he's lining up producing gigs with WB. But simply that wouldn't be able to get the studio to take the film back...unless the sequel is moving forward.

Just some food for thought...


Does make you wonder...unfortunately that's all we've been able to do at this point.

[FilmNerdJamie]

UPDATE: Trick 'r Treat NOT Back With Warner Bros!

**UPDATE: All right, we just got 100% confirmation from Warner Bros that they will NOT be releasing Trick 'r Treat. So I guess it's back to square one as the film looks for distro... it was fun while it lasted, though, wasn't it? **

I don’t want anyone getting too excited until we get something 100% official from Warner Bros, but a source very close to Michael Dougherty’s Trick ‘r Treat just dropped us a line with a look at the brand-new poster for the film!

I know it doesn’t look much different than the one you’ve been seeing for over a year now, but it is. The original had a release date on it, a release we all know never happened, and didn’t feature a cool little poem on it like this one does.

Most importantly, it didn’t have a link to an official Trick ‘r Treat site (http://www.dreadcentral.com/www.trtmovie.com), which if you hit up, for now, will take you to Warner Bros. main page. So at least we know it’s definitely back in their hands! Now we just have to make sure they actually get it in theaters!

You’ll have more as soon as we do; for now, enjoy the new poster!

http://www.dreadcentral.com/story/confirmed-trick-r-treat-back-with-warner-bros

Interesting indeed...

[TheComicbookKid]

Good God, will someone just release this movie already for this year!!! You have all of September to get the advertisements and prints ready.

Call up RKO. Aren't they back in business. Release this instead of doing a remake of the awesome Cat People!!!:woot:

[smoothbody]

some one should EXECUTE dougherty & haris for what they did!!

[Showtime]

Yeah...that makes sense...

[Superark]

some one should EXECUTE dougherty & haris for what they did!!

????

[SatEL]

some one should EXECUTE dougherty & haris for what they did!!

Execute is a little to much but I do think they get of lightly compared to Singer, People tend to forget these two had a hand in Supermans demise as much as Singer.

[gimmen64]

I have a feeling that WB black balled Dougherty after SR didn't do what studios expected and had a fall out and that's why Trick R' Treat has been in limbo.

[I Am The Knight]

I have a feeling that WB black balled Dougherty after SR didn't do what studios expected and had a fall out and that's why Trick R' Treat has been in limbo.

Talk about having a grudge...And no Buffy involved in it.

[wellsy]

But haven't they already shot the film?

[Hugh'sMrs]

I have a feeling that WB black balled Dougherty after SR didn't do what studios expected and had a fall out and that's why Trick R' Treat has been in limbo.

Trick 'R Treat was filmed way after SR debuted, so I doubt the box office had anything to do with it. I think they're mad because Dougherty didn't sign for MOS and jerked around his directorial baby as punishment.

[smoothbody]

Execute is a little to much but I do think they get of lightly compared to Singer, People tend to forget these two had a hand in Supermans demise as much as Singer.

did anyone see those two "Dougherty & Harris" expression on their face when singer introduced Routh as supes? it was like they wanted no parts of the franchise!! that let me know they were not into it at all!!

check the 2nd disc of SR & you will see what im talking about!! DISGRACEFULL!!

[SatEL]

did anyone see those two "Dougherty & Harris" expression on their face when singer introduced Routh as supes? it was like they wanted no parts of the franchise!! that let me know they were not into it at all!!

check the 2nd disc of SR & you will see what im talking about!! DISGRACEFULL!!

Lol at you thinking I own the dvd, would you be able to upload it to youtube?

[smoothbody]

Lol at you thinking I own the dvd, would you be able to upload it to youtube?

lol,dude i seriously thought i missed something in the theater!plus i wanted to see the return to krypton but they mysteriously left that out of the dvd!

yeah i can do that.

[Mostpowerful]

did anyone see those two "Dougherty & Harris" expression on their face when singer introduced Routh as supes? it was like they wanted no parts of the franchise!! that let me know they were not into it at all!!

check the 2nd disc of SR & you will see what im talking about!! DISGRACEFULL!!

:huh: Wow, just wow. You are seriously reaching there. It was nothing like that.

You do live in your own little world.

[FlawlessVictory]

Lol at you thinking I own the dvd, would you be able to upload it to youtube?

Maybe he thought you own the DVD and were using it as a coaster for your drinks. :woot:

[SatEL]

lol,dude i seriously thought i missed something in the theater!plus i wanted to see the return to krypton but they mysteriously left that out of the dvd!

yeah i can do that.

Thanks, send me a link when you upload it.

[SatEL]

Maybe he thought you own the DVD and were using it as a coaster for your drinks. :woot:

LMAO thats all its good for anyway.:cwink:

[FilmNerdJamie]

The drama unfolds...yet again...

Update #2 : WB Sending Trick 'r Treat to DVD?
Source:Moviesnob
August 21, 2008

Update #1: First, Dougherty dropped us a line to say this is "Not quite the whole story. Stay tuned!" Secondly, an insider informs us the film has resurfaced on Warner's schedule for '09. So, what's going on now? A possible limited theatrical release? More festival runs this October? We'll have to wait and see.

Update #2: New Yorkers, learn how you can see the film this October right here (http://www.fangoria.com/news_article.php?id=7144)!

Since learning last week that there was an internal error at Warner Bros. that erroneously placed Michael Dougherty's "where the F is it?" horror anthology Trick 'r Treat (http://www.shocktillyoudrop.com/films.php?id=565) on theatrical publicity sheets issued to us press folk, the search for the truth concerning its whereabouts began yet again.

A WB rep could not confirm or deny if it was still at the studio. Then, we spoke to an insider who assured us that, yes, it's still at the studio and any reports that it was being pawned off was a bunch of bunk.

Now, a trusted biz source writing in anonymously as "Moviesnob" says, "Just got an email. Warner is keeping Trick 'r Treat (http://www.shocktillyoudrop.com/films.php?id=565), but it's going direct-to-DVD."

Looking at Warner's recent success with DVD fare such as the Raw Feed series and Lost Boys: The Tribe (http://www.shocktillyoudrop.com/films.php?id=806), it doesn't sound like the strangest business maneuver on their part. Just an unfortunate one.

http://www.shocktillyoudrop.com/news/topnews.php?id=7401

[Showtime]

So WB is involved, but it is going to DVD. That is shame.

You called it.

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Will they ever just release that damn movie?

[I Am The Knight]

DTV is better than nothing.

[I SEE SPIDEY]

^It's still going to be the same movie, you just have to watch it in the comfort of your own home.

[FilmNerdJamie]

If I had to guess...I'd say WB puts it out in mid/late August - a common place for horror releases (i.e. recently with Mirrors, Rob Zombie's Halloween remake this time last year, etc.)

Of course, that's if it gets a theatrical release.

[Gotham]

Just heard about the DVD release. It's rather sad, because the trailer looked very scary with some outstanding FX.

[RedIsNotBlue]

Have always had a slight interest in checking this movie out. Who cares if it is straight to DVD as long as it finally becomes available.

[SuperDaniel]

If it`s direct to video, then it probably SUCKS!

[Pickle-El]

If it`s direct to video, then it probably SUCKS!

You're comments are like a pretty bow on the top of every thread.

[SuperDaniel]

I have never seen a direct to video movie that is good, except animated ones like Superman: Doomsday, etc...

[RedIsNotBlue]

I have never seen a direct to video movie that is good, except animated ones like Superman: Doomsday, etc...

I have seen limited release movies which are practically DTV that were good.

[Double Down]

From Mike Dougherty's MySpace page:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3277/2785119122_1a37a63512.jpg (http://www.msplinks.com/MDFodHRwOi8vd3d3LmZsaWNrci5jb20vcGhvdG9zL21pbm9yZG Vtb25zLzI3ODUxMTkxMjIv)">

http://www.fangoria.com/news_article.php?id=7144 (http://www.msplinks.com/MDFodHRwOi8vd3d3LmZhbmdvcmlhLmNvbS9uZXdzX2FydGljbG UucGhwP2lkPTcxNDQ=)

FANGORIA will host a free screening of the anthology horror flick TRICK 'R TREAT at New York City's Two Boots Pioneer Theater on Monday, October 13 at 7 p.m., marking the film's East Coast premiere and a rare opportunity to see this eagerly awaited movie on the big screen. The film's writer/director, Michael (X-MEN 2) Doughtery, will introduce the film and take part in a Q&A. The film stars Anna (TRUE BLOOD) Paquin, Brian (MANHUNTER) Cox, Dylan (FIDO) Baker and Leslie (MIDNIGHT MEAT TRAIN) Bibb.

The Fango/Pioneer TRICK 'R TREAT screening will be a free show;to obtain tickets, send an e-mail to fangoscreening@starloggroup.com. You must list "TRICK 'R TREAT" as your subject line. Offer is good for you and one guest; plus, tell us your full name and whether you want to be added to the FANGORIA newsletter list so we can tell you about future Fango screenings and events. Names will be checked at the door. Offer is first come, first served, and we will confirm your RSVP. This advance preview is sponsored by Legendary Pictures.

TRICK 'R TREAT has been on horror fans' must-see list ever since it was originally announced as a 2007 Halloween debut (its current release status is undetermined). Advance reviews have been ecstatic. Fangoria.com's Matt Kiernan caught an advance preview late last year in Austin, TX and praised: "TRICK 'R TREAT is, first and foremost, an entertainment and nothing more—an unpretentious, light-hearted (but never cutesy) and blackly comic movie." See his full review here (http://www.msplinks.com/MDFodHRwOi8vd3d3LmZhbmdvcmlhLmNvbS9naGFzdGx5X3Jldm lldy5waHA/aWQ9NTY0OQ==), and read our interview with actress Paquin in FANGORIA 277, on sale next month.

So mark your calendar for Fango's free 35mm showing of TRICK 'R TREAT on October 13. Meanwhile, check out the TRICK 'R TREAT trailer here (http://www.msplinks.com/MDFodHRwOi8vbWlrZWRvdWdoZXJ0eS5jb20vdHJ0Lw==).

[Timstuff]

I almost have a hard time believing it's a horror movie with such a cute looking monster in it...

[Double Down]

I almost have a hard time believing it's a horror movie with such a cute looking monster in it...

http://www.sideshowtoy.com/mas_assets/large/4611.jpg (http://www.sideshowtoy.com/?page_id=4489&sku=4611#)

I know, right? I mean look at this guy. He's hilarious.

[Crook]

Walk into a room with no lights and watch the little silhouette staring right at you...then say that again. :o

[Double Down]

He stabs people with his lollipop.

[Dark Knight]

Since Singer, Harris and Dougherty are out now...I would think someone should be able to land the MOS script treatment that was turned down by WB's multiple times.

[hammy]

He stabs people with his lollipop.

That's what she said. :o

Seriously though, it is a cute little monster. Hard to imagine him being too scary.

[Double Down]

From Mike Dougherty's blog:

Why Won’t Warner Brothers Release the Most Crowd-Pleasing Halloween Movie in Recent Memory?

Why Won't Warner Brothers Release the Most Crowd-Pleasing Halloween Movie in Recent Memory?

By Peter Gutiérrez Published 10/19/2008

ORIGINAL ARTICLE HERE (http://www.msplinks.com/MDFodHRwOi8vZmlyZWZveC5vcmcvbmV3cy9hcnRpY2xlcy8yMT I2LzEvV2h5LVdvbnQtV2FybmVyLUJyb3RoZXJzLVJlbGVhc2Ut dGhlLU1vc3QtQ3Jvd2QtUGxlYXNpbmctSGFsbG93ZWVuLU1vdm llLWluLVJlY2VudC1NZW1vcnkvUGFnZTEuaHRtbA==)

Not a Movie in Search of an Audience, But Vice Versa

Suspenseful, clever, and ghoulishly funny, Michael Dougherty's film also boasts an X-MEN pedigree, with Bryan Singer producing and Anna Paquin, Brian Cox and James Marsden (in voice-over) making appearances…

So why have only about 600 people in the U.S. had the privilege of seeing TRICK 'R TREAT in theaters?

Like many in attendance at the film's East Coast premiere last week, I was aware that this movie was in fact ready for distribution last year. Organized by Fangoria at NYC's Pioneer Theater, with star Dylan Baker and writer-director Dougherty doing a Q&A (and with Marsden present as well), the evening had a bit of a festival feel... although one tinged with bittersweetness. That's because for most studio films that get the kind of overwhelmingly positive audience reaction that TRICK 'R TREAT received—and deserves—festivals are a stopping-off point to gather steam and buzz. Or if an independently produced film doesn't yet have a distributor, festivals provide a showcase for them to get picked up. But TRICK 'R TREAT, even with Time Warner behind it, sits in a kind of limbo, so that every round of applause it receives must act as both vindication and salt-to-the-wound for the talented group that made it.

Stranger still, because different units within the media giant don't, as Dougherty puts it, "really talk to each other," he was able to interest Warner's merchandising folks in TRICK 'R TREAT even in the absence of a release date. The result is that one can now buy T-shirts, latex masks, toys, posters and the like (many of which feature the demoniacal tyke, Sam) but not see the movie that they are based upon.

Still, simply having character designs that hold appeal for the consumer market doesn't make a movie good. Which means that those who haven't seen TRICK 'R TREAT are fully within their rights to remain skeptical about the film's quality. I myself was cautious in my expectations. Namely, would this turn out to be the kind of film that horror fans (and horror critics) typically swoon over without a clue as to the many reasons the rest of the moviegoing public might have to balk at it?

For example, despite the movie's high points, would there be a couple of embarrassing clunkers in the four tales presented? Would Dougherty, directing his first feature, demonstrate a command of the visuals but show little sense of how to tell a story? Or would the film somehow be at odds with the current social and/or political climate in ways that could not have been anticipated when it was greenlit?

All of these scenarios were possibilities, but as I sat there and watched the film unspool—all the while listening to the audience whoop with laughter and gasp in fright all around me—all such preconceptions went out the window. I consider myself a huge fan of anthology horror going back to 1947's DEAD OF NIGHT, Kobayashi's KWAIDAN, and the Amicus version of TALES FROM THE CRYPT, which made a huge impact on me as a child, so it's with complete confidence that I can say that no one can reasonably expect a better contemporary horror antho than this.

Indeed, it's hard to imagine a more pure and satisfying treatment of Halloween in general than what Dougherty, one of the scriptwriters for X2, has accomplished here. Actually, it's tempting to think that the holiday's main themes (e.g., the perils of childhood, societal acting-out, the dead walking the earth) have been played out long ago, but somehow TRICK 'R TREAT presents fresh and/or surprising takes on all of these ideas.

What's more, although Dougherty directs with an artist's eye, this is no style-for-style's-sake exercise in goth luxe; the storytelling is muscular and lean, bold and smart at nearly every turn. Neither highbrow nor lowbrow, TRICK 'R TREAT aims for the sweet spot best defined by old school horror comics and nails that bull's eye with a blazing arrow. In New York last week, Dougherty explained that through his quartet of four masterfully interwoven stories, he was attempting to show the "four seasons" of Halloween. Which means that he was highlighting how we experience Halloween during different stages in our lives, from childhood through old age. And while there's a narrative elegance to such a structure, it's hard not to notice that it also might serve demographic concerns, giving it a wider appeal than other horror fare.

So again, why won't Warner Brothers, which co-financed the flick with Legendary Pictures, open this film, if not wide then at least on limited basis? Personally, I'd go with wide as I feel this is the kind of film that will pack 'em in at malls across North America. There's really something for everyone here, a fact that would help drive word-of-mouth. Neither a sequel, a torture flick, a J-horror knock-off, or an idiosyncratic vision such as Rob Zombie's HALLOWEEN, TRICK 'R TREAT may be exactly the kind of meat-and-potatoes horror that general audiences are looking for these days.

Dougherty ventured that it's challenging to market anthology films since there are so few of them these days. He also suggested that WB could be having cold feet since 14 children perish in TRICK 'R TREAT, a fact that he mitigated tongue-in-cheek style by pointing out that "eight of them come back." Or is the absence of big stars or a single high concept, or competition from other fare such as the SAW series, the real factors at work here? Perhaps all of these reasons play a part, but remember, we're not talking about backing the production in the first place—we're talking about something that's already in the can and which audiences seem to love.

Rumor has it that the film will be released next spring, and doubtless there's some logic (perhaps only of the internal variety) behind that kind of decision. Warner has to take a look at its resources, the competitive landscape, and probably a host of other factors of which I'm unaware. But on the surface it certainly seems odd to release a Halloween movie at a point representing the farthest distance from October on the calendar… unless of course the idea is to have the DVD available by fall of '09.

So please, go ahead and join the growing online chorus (http://www.msplinks.com/MDFodHRwOi8vd3d3LmltZGIuY29tL3RpdGxlL3R0MDg2Mjg1Ni 9ib2FyZA==) that's demanding this film's release. Simply put: TRICK 'R TREAT deserves a wider audience than a few hundred people living on the left and right coasts, and frankly, you deserve to be part of that audience.

[JokerLedger]

I saw trick r treat last week and Michael Dougherty was there. Jolly good time :):):):)

[Double Down]

Critics Pick the Best and Worst Films of 2008
With 2008 coming to a close, Rotten Tomatoes polled a selection of Tomatometer critics to find out which of the hundreds of films they were paid to watch this year they loved the most -- and which films were the absolute worst. Read on to see if your favorites matched up with the critics, see who loved The Dark Knight and who hated Speed Racer, and find out which film of 2008 earned Roger Ebert's honor as the worst film of the year.

TRICK 'R TREAT
A vivid intersection of tradition, the supernatural, smart storytelling and amusing twists, Trick 'r Treat isn't just a love letter to those who love Halloween and horror, it's a full-blown carnival of devilish delights. Ringleader Michael Dougherty, here making one of the most impressive directorial debuts of his generation, rolls out the pumpkins, zombies, werewolves, vampires and even a deadly lollipop-wielding masked imp. He puts a fresh spin on this cavalcade of ghouls and reinvigorates the dying form of horror anthology storytelling.

-- Ryan Rotten, ShockTilYouDrop.com

[Nightwing1977]

I almost have a hard time believing it's a horror movie with such a cute looking monster in it...

You obviously haven't seen the movie to come to that conclusion. Plus, you're looking at a toy. Weak argument there. See the movie first & then give your unbiased opinion. Beside, I'm sure many think the same way of Chucky before the whole movie was out. :oldrazz:

[batman44]

So what's the deal with Trick r' Treat now, I would really like to see this movie.

[Double Down]

Universal Taps Dan Harris for Dante's Inferno (http://www.dreadcentral.com/news/30885/universal-taps-dan-harris-dantes-inferno)
It was late last year when we first learned that Universal had nabbed the rights to the upcoming Electronics Arts video game version of Dante's Inferno. And now word has come down via Variety that the person who will be writing the live-action film is Dan Harris (X2, Superman Returns).
According to the trade, Strike Entertainment's Mark Abraham and Eric Newman are producing in conjunction with EA Entertainment. EA veep Patrick O'Brien and game creator Jonathan Knight are also involved in the development of the film.
Harris is no stranger to the depths of hell he'll be visiting in the course of adapting Dante's Inferno. He's currently involved with a project called I, Lucifer as both director and co-writer, in which the devil gets one last chance at redemption in the body of a suicidal writer.

[Lighthouse]

I'm always interested in this jumping the gun strategy on film adaptations. There have been large amount of movies being developed for comics, books, and games that aren't even out yet. They did the same thing with Kane & Lynch, when surprise surprise, the game sucked. Shouldn't they at least wait to see if the game is a hit?

[Double Down]

Not to be trite, but "if you snooze you lose." If you wait to see if it's a hit, someone else will have bought it by then. Unfortunately, that's how the game is played in Hollywood.

[Octoberist]

it's kinda like how studios were looking to "Cowboys and Aliens" and "I, Frankenstein" recently. Based on comic books that haven't been released yet. If you read into it, these are titles that were designed to be greenlit into movies, not as a legit comic book series.

[Double Down]

From Mike Dougherty's MySpace page:

Keep Watching the Skies
Two announcements are coming. One in June, the other at Comic-Con in July. Fun stuff that makes me smile...and finally relax. Thanks for all of your messages and support.


Hmmm....

[Mostpowerful]

From Mike Dougherty's MySpace page:

Keep Watching the Skies
Two announcements are coming. One in June, the other at Comic-Con in July. Fun stuff that makes me smile...and finally relax. Thanks for all of your messages and support.


Hmmm....

Hmmm, indeed. :huh: Do you have a link, please? Could this be Superman related in some way? :(

[Double Down]

You sure do love links, don't you?

http://blogs.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendId=175591459&blogId=484535560

[Mostpowerful]

I need it as proof. Otherwise people might think that I'm just making it up. ;)

Oh, and thank you very much.

So, what could this mean? *sigh*

[Double Down]

I think one announcement has to do with his movie "Trick 'r Treat." In fact, both announcements might be related to that movie for all we know. However, it is the phrase "Keep Watching the Skies" that makes me wonder if one of the announcements might be Superman-related.

[Mostpowerful]

Yeah, me too...

[\S/JcDc\S/]

I've talked a fair bit with Mike (I now a few others on here have as well) and I can tell you, his hints are quite often just him being playful because he is ALWAYS aware of the Superman fans. He sits back and shakes his head sometimes at the 1000 messages he receives about the status of a sequel even now.

I remember Dan Harris also having the same problems. The last sequel script idea he had was more bold, removing Lex as an underground criminal, and turning him into the President. I also liked that both writers wanted Brainiac in some fashion.

[verisimilitude]

I've talked a fair bit with Mike . . . his hints are quite often just him being playful because he is ALWAYS aware of the Superman fans.


Well then, pardon my polish, but doesn't that make him ...

... well, a bit of a d**k head?

If a grown man, that's no longer working on any future superman production sits around in his bedroom making up blog titles just to mess around with the fans ... then he's extremely sad.

What a loser.

That is ofcourse, assuming your theory is correct. If it is in fact about superman, then no one will be more pleased than me believe me.

*V*

[DanSupKP37]

I think one announcement has to do with his movie "Trick 'r Treat." In fact, both announcements might be related to that movie for all we know. However, it is the phrase "Keep Watching the Skies" that makes me wonder if one of the announcements might be Superman-related.

"Keep Watching the Skies" only to tell us that Trick R Treat is coming to Blu-Ray or something, man the Superman fans will lynch him..

[KalMart]

"Keep Watching the Skies" only to tell us that Trick R Treat is coming to Blu-Ray or something, man the Superman fans will lynch him..

How's the lynching going?

[Lighthouse]

So....whatever happened to Dan Harris?

[Thread Manager]

This thread is now closed it has a continuation thread 348018