Reintroducing Superman: An Open Discussion

[I SEE SPIDEY]

LOL! You're terrible. But I'm white though. :D :woot:There are white Chris Brown's.:o

I'm done arguing about it but I'm sticking to my guns on wanting a new orgin story.

[hockeyboy89]

There are white Chris Brown's.:o

I'm done arguing about it but I'm sticking to my guns on wanting a new orgin story.


After reading Birthright over that past few days, I'd be ok with a reboot and origin story. I was a big fan of a sequel (and I still am) but I am open to other possibilities.

[Anita18]

Yeah but even Nolan would agree that when it comes to the best comic book film of all time, it's Superman: The Movie. :hehe:
Still doesn't make it The Godfather. :oldrazz:

A remake would need a similar plot to the original film. If Superman Returns were a remake of Superman the Movie, Superman would have to meet Lex Luthor and Lois Lane for the first time, he wouldn't have a kid, there would be no Richard White, Superman would turn the Earth backwards making everything go back in time, Krypton would be fleshed out, Pa Kent would die, etc.

But Superman Returns is a continuation of Donner's Superman movies. Lex Luthor is out of jail after Superman put him there in Superman the Movie and Superman pretty much ruined any proof of his crimes of hijacking nuclear weapons, attempting to destroy California and change the environment of Nevada, and treason against the planet Earth because of his manipulation of time. Superman got Lois pregnant from his night with her at the Fortress of Solitude, doesn't remember who he is because of the forgetfull kiss/turning the Earth backwards, and Lex mentions that he was in the Fortress of Solitude before in Superman II.
It's a sequel that's also a quasi-remake. How else do you explain the similar story beats?

[I SEE SPIDEY]

It's a sequel that's also a quasi-remake. How else do you explain the similar story beats?Thats what I really dislike about the flick. If it was going to be a sequel Singer should have just made a straight up sequel.

And yes Showtime, I know I am off topic.

[hippie_hunter]

It's a sequel that's also a quasi-remake. How else do you explain the similar story beats?

The "similar" story beats like Superman saving a plane and Superman flying with Lois are homages to Donner's Superman film. And things like Lex Luthor coming up with another real estate scheme are continuations of his character since well...Hackman's Lex was obsessed with real estate.

It isn't a remake. It isn't a quasi-remake. It's a requel, a revamped sequel like Batman Forever is to the Burton Batman films.

[Showtime]

Still doesn't make it The Godfather. :oldrazz:


I'm sure we'll see a Godfather remake or some other Godfather film soon. Not to mention a new version of Joker and a Batman origin in our lifetimes for sure.

Thats what I really dislike about the flick. If it was going to be a sequel Singer should have just made a straight up sequel.

And yes Showtime, I know I am off topic.

Yes, you are.

[FilmNerdJamie]

It isn't a remake. It isn't a quasi-remake. It's a requel, a revamped sequel like Batman Forever is to the Burton Batman films.

Indeed.

And this Unleashed follow-up might also be a requel.

[hippie_hunter]

Claiming that Superman Returns is a remake is one of the worst arguments against the film I have ever heard.

[Anita18]

The "similar" story beats like Superman saving a plane and Superman flying with Lois are homages to Donner's Superman film. And things like Lex Luthor coming up with another real estate scheme are continuations of his character since well...Hackman's Lex was obsessed with real estate.

It isn't a remake. It isn't a quasi-remake. It's a requel, a revamped sequel like Batman Forever is to the Burton Batman films.
Picking up multiple story beats like SR did I think puts it over the edge as quasi-remake even though it's a sequel too. :oldrazz: But that's neither here nor there.

I'm sure we'll see a Godfather remake or some other Godfather film soon. Not to mention a new version of Joker and a Batman origin in our lifetimes for sure.
Indeed. We'll see who dares to do the former. :hehe:

[I SEE SPIDEY]

I'd say the movie is 30% remake and 70% sequel. It copied the beats of the first movie too much for me to say that it wasn't in anyway a remake.

[hippie_hunter]

Picking up multiple story beats like SR did I think puts it over the edge as quasi-remake even though it's a sequel too. :oldrazz: But that's neither here nor there.

I'd say the movie is 30% remake and 70% sequel. It copied the beats of the first movie too much for me to say that it wasn't in anyway a remake.

http://i128.photobucket.com/albums/p186/hippie_hunter/Foamy-the-Squirrel-256x256.png

[I SEE SPIDEY]

^You are so cute when you're angry.

[FilmNerdJamie]

http://i688.photobucket.com/albums/vv243/FilmNerdJamie/Round.jpg

[Cool Monty]

I'll get the ref. :woot:

http://img100.imageshack.us/img100/7329/racyrefereecostume.jpg (http://img100.imageshack.us/my.php?image=racyrefereecostume.jpg)

[X Knight]

I'll get the popcorn!! :word:

[hippie_hunter]

http://i128.photobucket.com/albums/p186/hippie_hunter/drago.jpg

[Ita-KalEl]

Claiming that Superman Returns is a remake is one of the worst arguments against the film I have ever heard.

IMO it is a restart made by some one without ideas.

[Sam]

Fight? FIGHT?!

Where is the fight?

If we didnt get one in SR, we are getting few ones here lol

[hippie_hunter]

IMO it is a restart made by some one without ideas.

Ehhh....that's a better argument at least :o

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Fight? FIGHT?!

Where is the fight?

If we didnt get one in SR, we are getting few ones here lolZing!

[hippie_hunter]

Fight? FIGHT?!

Where is the fight?

If we didnt get one in SR, we are getting few ones here lol

:lmao:

[Vaibow]

Thanks to those that made constructive comments to my opinions, for those that want to bash it, that's fine... i won't lose sleep over it.

I still don't like the idea of forgetting Superman 3 & 4, i can accept it and understand, i just don't like it.

I do not like the idea a film 20 years later can be planted into an already established and aged franchise and retell/shape it how he sees fit, as if he has the right.

You cannot compare Returns to other franchises, such as Batman 88 and schumacher etc, you just can't. They were unique films/visions of a comic book character. The nolan universe is his take on the comic book character, not to improve/develop the already running franchise, they started fresh - you see where i am coming from - Singer/returns is his take on the donner superman character, not the comic book character - his vision was purely to improve/develope the donnerverse.

If he sat down and said right, we want to make a movie about superman, lets create something from the comics, i'd dig that, Returns just looks as though he used Superman 1 & 2 as inspiration.

So why do i feel it is a remake, there are so many elements you can compare to superman 1.

In supes one, we start in space, see a planet explode and a pod crash land on a farm
In returns, we start in space, see a planet explode and a pod crash land on a farm

In Supes 2, luthor goes to the fortress, 'speaks' to Jor El
In returns, Luthor goes to the fortress, 'speaks' to Jor El

In supes 1, he has to walk through a 'set of challenges' to get to Luthor's layer, fire, ice, bullets
In returns he flies through the fire filled sewers, and walks up to a gun pelting him with bullets - the comparisons are there.

In supes 1, luthor hurts him with kryptonite, stumbles into water, a girl jumps in, saves him, he tells her he will go save people, his hair is wet, hanging over his eyes, he kisses her, flies off
In returns, luthor hurts him with kryptonite, he stumbles into water, a girl jumps in, saves him, he tells her he will go save people, his hair is wet, hanging over his eyes, he all but kisses her, flies off, comparisons are there.

In supes 1, Supes lands on a boat/yacht, obviously picks it up and moves it to the city
In returns supes lands on a boat/yacht, obviously picks it up and then lets go.

In supes 1, he goes deep underground, summons the will to lift a large land mass, against the odds, he does it.
In returns, he goes underground, summons the will to lift a large land mass, against the odds, he does it - the comparisons are there.

In supes 1, Air force one is in danger in the sky, looks set to crash when supes comes out of the sky and rescues it.
In returns, air force one is in danger in the sky, looks set to crash when supes comes out of the sky and rescues it. The comparisons are there.

In supes 1, he saves lois, tells her statistically speaking blah blah he flies off, she faints
In returns, he saves lois, tells her statistically speaking blah blah he flies off, he faints.

In Supes 1, they meet on a roof top, he tells her 'you shouldn't really smoke miss lane' they go for a romantic flight around at night
In returns, they meet on a roof top, the tells her 'you shouldn't really smoke miss lane' they go for a romantic flight around at night

now, after all this, you tell me that superman returns isn't a slightly revisioned remake? It's as if singer saw all those elements and thought... this is how i would do it!!

This is why i think Returns is a remake and singers attempt to make his own version of superman, based on his boyhood love affair of the donner films, it shows a lack of imagination and respect to the source material.

This is why i am in favour of a total restart, taking the character of superman into a diferent franchise, like what Nolan did, new hulk movie.

I am not arguing with anyone, i am not bashing anyone, i repect your views and i expect some one will disagree with me.

I have not gone off topic, i am just confirming why i want a restart and why it would be the best thing to do.

I feel the way to go is to restart and to look at the many decades of source material, the hundreds of villians to chose from, hundreds of plots and also the diferent and many interpretations of the characters.

Let's see Clark actually doing some smart reporting with lois, let's see other heroes fleet in and out of metropolis, supes comes from a universe where there are other heroes - let's celebrate that. Let's see the chemistry between lois and clark, let us determine who the real man is, superman, clark or clark on farm.
With this in mind you have got the basis of an epic movie.
Let's restart.

[Nightwing1977]

There are white Chris Brown's.:o



Must be Tom Sizemore then. I'm not Italian, unless that what he is. :oldrazz: :woot:

If they're going to tell his origin again, then make it very short & brief. Like a flashback as we saw before in SR, but maybe a little more of the flashback.

[X Knight]

while SR is not a "remake" of Supes 1 and/or 2 in the literal sense, it DOES borrow very heavily from the Donnerverse and shares many similarities, especially to Supes 1, as Vaibow detailed above.

Plus, aside from the Kid ( which was absolutely wrong, IMO ), SR failed to introduce any real new elements from the comics, Animated Series, etc., that we have yet to see in a Superman movie. Namely, a new villain ( like Brainiac, Metallo, Bizarro, etc. ) for Supes to face.

Thus, for many, that's why SR felt like the "same old, same old."

So, while it wasn't exactly a "remake" of Supes 1, it did feel much like a "retread."

[hippie_hunter]

I still don't like the idea of forgetting Superman 3 & 4, i can accept it and understand, i just don't like it.
Why? Those films were horrible. Just downright horrible.

I do not like the idea a film 20 years later can be planted into an already established and aged franchise and retell/shape it how he sees fit, as if he has the right.
That I can understand.

You cannot compare Returns to other franchises, such as Batman 88 and schumacher etc, you just can't. They were unique films/visions of a comic book character. The nolan universe is his take on the comic book character, not to improve/develop the already running franchise, they started fresh - you see where i am coming from - Singer/returns is his take on the donner superman character, not the comic book character - his vision was purely to improve/develope the donnerverse.
But just like Singer's Superman, they alter the continuity of the franchises they represent.

If he sat down and said right, we want to make a movie about superman, lets create something from the comics, i'd dig that, Returns just looks as though he used Superman 1 & 2 as inspiration.
Ummmmm....that was the point. Superman Returns was a sequel to Superman the Movie and Superman II so those two films are going to be the entire basis of his inspiration.

So why do i feel it is a remake, there are so many elements you can compare to superman 1.

In supes one, we start in space, see a planet explode and a pod crash land on a farm
In returns, we start in space, see a planet explode and a pod crash land on a farm
Those were two completely different situations.

In Supes 2, luthor goes to the fortress, 'speaks' to Jor El
In returns, Luthor goes to the fortress, 'speaks' to Jor El
In Superman Returns, Luthor mentions that he's been to the Fortress before in Superman II because it happened before and speaks to Jor-El to find out about the crystals.

In supes 1, he has to walk through a 'set of challenges' to get to Luthor's layer, fire, ice, bullets
In returns he flies through the fire filled sewers, and walks up to a gun pelting him with bullets - the comparisons are there.
Things like that are going to happen in ANY Superman film.

In supes 1, luthor hurts him with kryptonite, stumbles into water, a girl jumps in, saves him, he tells her he will go save people, his hair is wet, hanging over his eyes, he kisses her, flies off
In returns, luthor hurts him with kryptonite, he stumbles into water, a girl jumps in, saves him, he tells her he will go save people, his hair is wet, hanging over his eyes, he all but kisses her, flies off, comparisons are there.
Homage

In supes 1, Supes lands on a boat/yacht, obviously picks it up and moves it to the city
In returns supes lands on a boat/yacht, obviously picks it up and then lets go.
Like your first situation, those were two completely different situations.

In supes 1, he goes deep underground, summons the will to lift a large land mass, against the odds, he does it.
In returns, he goes underground, summons the will to lift a large land mass, against the odds, he does it - the comparisons are there.
Again, completely different situations.

In supes 1, Air force one is in danger in the sky, looks set to crash when supes comes out of the sky and rescues it.
In returns, air force one is in danger in the sky, looks set to crash when supes comes out of the sky and rescues it. The comparisons are there.

In supes 1, he saves lois, tells her statistically speaking blah blah he flies off, she faints
In returns, he saves lois, tells her statistically speaking blah blah he flies off, he faints.

In Supes 1, they meet on a roof top, he tells her 'you shouldn't really smoke miss lane' they go for a romantic flight around at night
In returns, they meet on a roof top, the tells her 'you shouldn't really smoke miss lane' they go for a romantic flight around at night
Homages to the first Superman movie.

now, after all this, you tell me that superman returns isn't a slightly revisioned remake? It's as if singer saw all those elements and thought... this is how i would do it!!

This is why i think Returns is a remake and singers attempt to make his own version of superman, based on his boyhood love affair of the donner films, it shows a lack of imagination and respect to the source material.
You really don't know the definition of a remake. Yes, Superman Returns homages the Donner Superman films by mimicing a lot of what happened, but Superman Returns had its own...freaking...plot. That alone disqualifies it as a remake. The fact that it is also a continuation of the Donner Superman films and directly references them as happening also tears down the Superman Returns is a remake statement.

It is a requel. A revamped sequel to movies that happened 20 years ago.

This is why i am in favour of a total restart, taking the character of superman into a diferent franchise, like what Nolan did, new hulk movie.

I am not arguing with anyone, i am not bashing anyone, i repect your views and i expect some one will disagree with me.

I have not gone off topic, i am just confirming why i want a restart and why it would be the best thing to do.
We're not arguing about a reboot though. It would be the best way for the franchise to go. But your definition of a remake is completely off.

[Showtime]

Did you see the new Superman Flyby concept art?

[hippie_hunter]

Why would a Kryptonian need a Japanese mecha?

[hippie_hunter]

while SR is not a "remake" of Supes 1 and/or 2 in the literal sense, it DOES borrow very heavily from the Donnerverse and shares many similarities, especially to Supes 1, as Vaibow detailed above.

Plus, aside from the Kid ( which was absolutely wrong, IMO ), SR failed to introduce any real new elements from the comics, Animated Series, etc., that we have yet to see in a Superman movie. Namely, a new villain ( like Brainiac, Metallo, Bizarro, etc. ) for Supes to face.

Thus, for many, that's why SR felt like the "same old, same old."

So, while it wasn't exactly a "remake" of Supes 1, it did feel much like a "retread."

Granted that I loved Superman Returns but your argument is perfect.

[C. Lee]

Why? Those films were horrible. Just downright horrible.


SIII can be made better by multiple cuts (most of Pryor's role)....I'm still working on a better SIV cut though.

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Richard Pryor in a Superman movie had to be one of the worst ideas ever conceived. Annette o'toole did make a good Lana though.

[hippie_hunter]

Completely agreed.

[Mostpowerful]

This is why i am in favour of a total restart, taking the character of superman into a diferent franchise, like what Nolan did, new hulk movie.


I have not gone off topic, i am just confirming why i want a restart and why it would be the best thing to do.

With this in mind you have got the basis of an epic movie.
Let's restart.

yet SR made more $$ at the BO than both Hulk movies and BB and also got very good reviews. I don't see how rebooting Hulk helped, at all. It was pointless.

I think a restart/reboot is the coward thing to do. It really is not necessary, IMO. They can make a really action and epic movie with a sequel.



while SR is not a "remake" of Supes 1 and/or 2 in the literal sense, it DOES borrow very heavily from the Donnerverse and shares many similarities, especially to Supes 1, as Vaibow detailed above.

Plus, aside from the Kid ( which was absolutely wrong, IMO ), SR failed to introduce any real new elements from the comics, Animated Series, etc., that we have yet to see in a Superman movie. Namely, a new villain ( like Brainiac, Metallo, Bizarro, etc. ) for Supes to face.

Thus, for many, that's why SR felt like the "same old, same old."

So, while it wasn't exactly a "remake" of Supes 1, it did feel much like a "retread."

SR was only the beginning of the story, not everything Singer is capable of.

[Anita18]

SR was only the beginning of the story, not everything Singer is capable of.
Why bother doing a $200 million movie if you aren't gonna give it your all? :huh:

[I SEE SPIDEY]

why bother doing a $200 million movie if you aren't gonna give it your all? :huh:Thankyou!!

[dark_b]

wooow. i didnt know that you can spend 200 millions teasing people. i guess you can if you are WB.

[Superfreak]

SIII can be made better by multiple cuts (most of Pryor's role)....I'm still working on a better SIV cut though.

YOU FOOL. IT'S NOT PRYOR THAT IS THE PROBLEM WITH THE MOVIE... HIS ROLE RULES. if you list the things pryor did in the movie, they're not many, and they're not bad. 1)the ferrari, hilarious, 2)the booze case 3)the 2 person computer 4)falling off the ski roof(this could probably be cut out) 5)the donkey. 6)the general (this should have been cut too)

Pryor was the innocent villain. And he was good at the part.

It's the Villain, his ditzy girlfriend, and the ugly biatch sister you have to cut out of the movie.

[Brian Braddock]

I have a fondness for Gus and I think there was room for Pryor in the movie.

The problem is that they shoehorned too much damn slapstick in there, the most evident of this being in the opening sequence.

But, hey, Superman III gave me bad Superman and the junkyard battle so I'm not gonna rag on it too much.

[Sam]

SR was only the beginning of the story, not everything Singer is capable of.

I disagree with that. quite the opposite... SR is the END of the story, not the beginning.

SR works better as the END of a trilogy that started with Superman The Movie and continued with Superman II.

In fact, they failed in introduce new elements for the future of the franchise. All new elements they introduce, like a son for Superman (?!), makes a sequel harder to be done.

[El Payaso]

Why bother doing a $200 million movie if you aren't gonna give it your all? :huh:

Potential sequels.

It'd work the same if the movie were $100 million ir even $20.

[Showtime]

Why would a Kryptonian need a Japanese mecha?

Welcome to WB.

Why bother doing a $200 million movie if you aren't gonna give it your all? :huh:

A lot of these directors think they are automatically getting a sequel because these are big franchises, it is a mistake to think like that. It isn't about giving it your all but escalating from movie to movie. I would assume Nolan gave Batman Begins his all but look how much better Dark Knight did all the way around.

[Showtime]

I disagree with that. quite the opposite... SR is the END of the story, not the beginning.

SR works better as the END of a trilogy that started with Superman The Movie and continued with Superman II.

In fact, they failed in introduce new elements for the future of the franchise. All new elements they introduce, like a son for Superman (?!), makes a sequel harder to be done.

I honestly think Singer was trying to develop a fitting end to the Donner Universe while wiping out Superman 3 & 4. The problem is the Donner Universe didn't need to be wrapped up nor did anybody care about Superman 3 and 4 at this point. It was a big mis-step by WB and Singer in regards to trying to put themselves in the shoes of the fans and the general public.

[Alex Logan]

yet SR made more $$ at the BO than both Hulk movies and BB and also got very good reviews. I don't see how rebooting Hulk helped, at all. It was pointless.

I think a restart/reboot is the coward thing to do. It really is not necessary, IMO. They can make a really action and epic movie with a sequel.

SR was only the beginning of the story, not everything Singer is capable of.

I have to disagree here.

Chances are Marvel rebooted Hulk because no one wanted to continue that story and because they wanted give the character another shot.

Who can blame them? Hulk was just bad. It wasn't pointless to redo Hulk either, they made a good film this time around, even if it didn't make a crap load of money.

How is cowardly? Rebooted Batman gave us two of the best films ever made. The only way it's cowardly is if it's being done just to make money and the film ends up being garbage.

Superman Returns was definitely not the beginning of the story. If anything it's the middle. I'm also not sure if Singer is capable of more. Sure there could be more to the story there, but who really wants to see it NOW? I don't think Singer is capable if delivering a solid Superman film.

Don't get me wrong I really like SR, but it took me along time to get to that point. Now when I think about a sequel I wonder where the story goes and if I'll even be interested. I think it's best to start fresh. Give another GOOD director the project, leave the Donner years behind, and get a script that's closer to the comic.

[Alex Logan]

I disagree with that. quite the opposite... SR is the END of the story, not the beginning.

SR works better as the END of a trilogy that started with Superman The Movie and continued with Superman II.

In fact, they failed in introduce new elements for the future of the franchise. All new elements they introduce, like a son for Superman (?!), makes a sequel harder to be done.

Good point.

I honestly think Singer was trying to develop a fitting end to the Donner Universe while wiping out Superman 3 & 4. The problem is the Donner Universe didn't need to be wrapped up nor did anybody care about Superman 3 and 4 at this point. It was a big mis-step by WB and Singer in regards to trying to put themselves in the shoes of the fans and the general public.

Another good point.

[Alex Logan]

I have a fondness for Gus and I think there was room for Pryor in the movie.

The problem is that they shoehorned too much damn slapstick in there, the most evident of this being in the opening sequence.

But, hey, Superman III gave me bad Superman and the junkyard battle so I'm not gonna rag on it too much.

Yes! I couldn't agree more! :cwink:

[Showtime]

Superman 3 could have been so much more, and was close to being a really solid Superman film.

[Alex Logan]

Superman 3 could have been so much more, and was close to being a really solid Superman film.

Yes, very true. Had they picked a different director then it would have been better.

[X Knight]

well.....if you think about it.......the main villain of Superman 3 turned out to be some "super-computer" right? Well.....that could have been Brainiac.

Likewise.....the main villain of Superman 4 was Nuclear Man....basically an evil clone of Superman. Well......that could have been Bizarro.

[Showtime]

In Superman 3 they could have technically featured Bizzaro, Brainiac, and Metallo based on what they actually went with. Not to mention Webster could have easily just been Lex using another actor.

[Mostpowerful]

Why bother doing a $200 million movie if you aren't gonna give it your all? :huh:

Did Nolan give his all in BB? If he did, well he should have tried harder then. :cwink:


I disagree with that. quite the opposite... SR is the END of the story, not the beginning.

SR works better as the END of a trilogy that started with Superman The Movie and continued with Superman II.

In fact, they failed in introduce new elements for the future of the franchise. All new elements they introduce, like a son for Superman (?!), makes a sequel harder to be done.

And I disagree with you. I think SR was a bridge between both franchises. There is SO much potential in the SR universe, IMO. Singer made sure to plant some seeds to be developed in sequels. There is NOTHING wrong with the Donner/Singerverse. It is a classic, epic and mythic universe, my favorite kind. I thought SR was fine AS a reintroduction of the character to new audiences. It probably needed some more action, not for me, but for some people, I guess, but that can be "fixed" in sequels. I think is VERY shortsighted to just dump it. But this is WB... :whatever:


Potential sequels.

It'd work the same if the movie were $100 million ir even $20.

Thank you!! :cwink:





A lot of these directors think they are automatically getting a sequel because these are big franchises, it is a mistake to think like that. It isn't about giving it your all but escalating from movie to movie. I would assume Nolan gave Batman Begins his all but look how much better Dark Knight did all the way around.

:oldrazz: Exaaaactly!

[JAK®]

Rebooted Batman gave us two of the best films ever made.
Really?

[Mostpowerful]

Alex Logan said,
Chances are Marvel rebooted Hulk because no one wanted to continue that story and because they wanted give the character another shot.

Who can blame them? Hulk was just bad. It wasn't pointless to redo Hulk either, they made a good film this time around, even if it didn't make a crap load of money.
yet, a lot of the GP thought it was a sequel. What the internet fans think is not that important. They are a minority.


How is cowardly? Rebooted Batman gave us two of the best films ever made.
If you say so.. I still enjoy SR much more.


Superman Returns was definitely not the beginning of the story. If anything it's the middle.
Ok, it worked both as a middle and as a new beginning, new adventures, many possibilities, I think.

I'm also not sure if Singer is capable of more.
I think he is. The guy is very talented, IMO.


Sure there could be more to the story there, but who really wants to see it NOW?
I DO. And I know many people who feel this way.

Total Film published this article last December: http://i33.tinypic.com/5wjhjo.jpg

Also this: http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/REBOOTNOWAY


I don't think Singer is capable if delivering a solid Superman film.
He just did. SR. And it was only the beginning, like I said in another post.

[Alex Logan]

Really?

Yes, really.

[Anita18]

Potential sequels.

It'd work the same if the movie were $100 million ir even $20.
$200 million is A LOT of money riding on something that you didn't do your best on. Any artist worth his salt should bust his ass to prove that you're worthy to be given $200 million for your pet project.

A lot of these directors think they are automatically getting a sequel because these are big franchises, it is a mistake to think like that. It isn't about giving it your all but escalating from movie to movie. I would assume Nolan gave Batman Begins his all but look how much better Dark Knight did all the way around.
See, I actually give Nolan some slack for BB because that was his very first $50+ million budget, and his first action-oriented movie, let alone a comic book superhero film. Singer had some practice working on $50+ million budgets for X-men (two of them, in fact), and he even had practice working under pressure from Fox. If either of the two were to stumble on their big projects, it should have been Nolan, not Singer.

But I digress. The direction itself in SR was good. The casting was eh, but most of the problems stemmed from the writing. You could probably say the same for BB as well, at least compared to TDK. :cwink:

[Alex Logan]

yet, a lot of the GP thought it was a sequel. What the internet fans think is not that important. They are a minority.

I would have to disagree again. Many people who are not comic book fans loved the new Hulk. The reason it didn't make alot of money is same reason BB didin't make alot of money.

If you say so.. I still enjoy SR much more.

You liked Superman Returns better then BB and TDK? :wow:

Wow... all I can say is wow...

Ok, it worked both as a middle and as a new beginning, new adventures, many possibilities, I think.

Such as?

I think he is. The guy is very talented, IMO.

Yes, he is a very talented guy, but he doesn't know how to push envelope. He didn't even try in the X-Men films and then when did try he went TOO far.

I DO. And I know many people who feel this way.

Total Film published this article last December: http://i33.tinypic.com/5wjhjo.jpg

Also this: http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/REBOOTNOWAY

Maybe so, but I know many people who don't feel the same. And I only see 1011 signatures.

He just did. SR. And it was only the beginning, like I said in another post.

No, he really didn't.

[Alex Logan]

$200 million is A LOT of money riding on something that you didn't do your best on. Any artist worth his salt should bust his ass to prove that you're worthy to be given $200 million for your pet project.

See, I actually give Nolan some slack for BB because that was his very first $50+ million budget, and his first action-oriented movie, let alone a comic book superhero film. Singer had some practice working on $50+ million budgets for X-men (two of them, in fact), and he even had practice working under pressure from Fox. If either of the two were to stumble on their big projects, it should have been Nolan, not Singer.

But I digress. The direction itself in SR was good. The casting was eh, but most of the problems stemmed from the writing. You could probably say the same for BB as well, at least compared to TDK. :cwink:

Couldn't agree more.

The writing in Superman was the problem, but when did we start down grading BB?

[I Am The Knight]

I think BB has become underrated in light of TDK. Personally, I love BB, it gives me things TDK doesn't, and TDK gives me things BB does not.

[Superfreak]

I have a fondness for Gus and I think there was room for Pryor in the movie.

The problem is that they shoehorned too much damn slapstick in there, the most evident of this being in the opening sequence.

But, hey, Superman III gave me bad Superman and the junkyard battle so I'm not gonna rag on it too much.

also the fire rescue at the begining is very cool... and bad superman being bad is great too, I love the poor Leaning Tower of Pisa salesman and the blowing out of the olympic torch. That movie also had the best shirt rip of all 4 original movies. And the smallville stuff in that flick is underrated aswell. Even the ditzy girl, who was pretending to be ditzy was palatable

1)I think had Supes faught 'brainiac' at the end of that movie, instead of out smarting him with a bottle of scope that turned into ketchup, everybody would view SIII in a different way.

2)The real problem was the Billionaire and his sister, had they been a little more evil, and little less retarded, SIII would have fared better.

[Mostpowerful]

Alex Logan said,
I would have to disagree again. Many people who are not comic book fans loved the new Hulk. The reason it didn't make alot of money is same reason BB didin't make alot of money.
I think they didn't make a lot of money for different reasons. They weren't that exciting for the average movie goer for instance.



You liked Superman Returns better then BB and TDK? :wow:

Wow... all I can say is wow...
Hell YES. And don't come here with that condescending attitute, please. I'm hardly the only one who feels this way. Did you know that some top critics such as Time and Empire magazines gave SR a perfect score? Sheesh.

Besides, I'm not much of a Batman fan, and I don't think Nolan movies are perfect; they have its flaws as well. Plus, Bale's Batman was just ok, to me. His Wayne is much better. He was just going through the motions in TDK, IMO. The other actors overshadowed him.



Such as?
What you don't see ANY ideas/seeds for sequals planted in SR?? Then I guess you don't have much imagination.. :cwink:


Yes, he is a very talented guy, but he doesn't know how to push envelope. He didn't even try in the X-Men films and then when did try he went TOO far.
His XMen movies are great. And X3 could have been even better.



Maybe so, but I know many people who don't feel the same. And I only see 1011 signatures.
It's just a sample. But you said that noone could possibly be interested in a SR follow up, or in the story, as you said, no? So what is it? Make up your mind.

[Cain]

Whatever it is if it's a sequel to Superman Returns then I'm definitely skipping it and I'm one of the biggest Superman fans you'd ever meet.

[NeoRanger]

In Superman 3 they could have technically featured Bizzaro, Brainiac, and Metallo based on what they actually went with. Not to mention Webster could have easily just been Lex using another actor.

Ah, remember the original Superman III script that surfaced a while ago? The one written by Cary Bates? Good stuff, for Superman. Brainiac and even Superman's death, before it ever happened in the comics.

Did Nolan give his all in BB? If he did, well he should have tried harder then. :cwink:
!

"Superman Returns" fans get to say things like that? I mean, sure, you liked SR more, but considering how many things Singer held back, you actually get to say that Nolan didn't do enough with BB?

[Cain]

Singer had Superman crying outloud as he was being dragged through krypto land and occassionally being kicked by Kevin Spacey and Kumar.

Nolan had Batman in a vulnerable spot to but he actually tried to fight off the poison gas and managed to have a controlled enough will to contact Alfred for help.

I think it's safe to say Nolan put more effort in presenting the character to the best of his abilities even in situations where he's "losing". I'd say out of the 2 Nolan gave it his all because he made the effort to mine through the source material for further inspiration in how he portrayed his protagonist.

A huge compromise for the ego of any creative person but a neccessary one if you're adapting somebody else's creation. Singer did not regardless of any coincidences between Superman Lifts and any existing Superman comic books. He felt just going into it with nostalgic affection towards Donner's interpretation would be enough.

[RachelDawes]

Whatever it is if it's a sequel to Superman Returns then I'm definitely skipping it and I'm one of the biggest Superman fans you'd ever meet.

You say that, but if the next movie looks like it has awesome action I'll bet you'll be sitting front and center at the theater. :cwink:

[X Knight]

Singer had Superman crying outloud as he was being dragged through krypto land and occassionally being kicked by Kevin Spacey and Kumar.

Nolan had Batman in a vulnerable spot to but he actually tried to fight off the poison gas and managed to have a controlled enough will to contact Alfred for help.

I think it's safe to say Nolan put more effort in presenting the character to the best of his abilities even in situations where he's "losing". I'd say out of the 2 Nolan gave it his all because he made the effort to mine through the source material for further inspiration in how he portrayed his protagonist.

A huge compromise for the ego of any creative person but a neccessary one if you're adapting somebody else's creation. Singer did not regardless of any coincidences between Superman Lifts and any existing Superman comic books. He felt just going into it with nostalgic affection towards Donner's interpretation would be enough.

spot on!! :word:

[RachelDawes]

Singer had Superman crying outloud as he was being dragged through krypto land and occassionally being kicked by Kevin Spacey and Kumar.

Nolan had Batman in a vulnerable spot to but he actually tried to fight off the poison gas and managed to have a controlled enough will to contact Alfred for help.

I think it's safe to say Nolan put more effort in presenting the character to the best of his abilities even in situations where he's "losing". I'd say out of the 2 Nolan gave it his all because he made the effort to mine through the source material for further inspiration in how he portrayed his protagonist.

A huge compromise for the ego of any creative person but a neccessary one if you're adapting somebody else's creation. Singer did not regardless of any coincidences between Superman Lifts and any existing Superman comic books. He felt just going into it with nostalgic affection towards Donner's interpretation would be enough.

Yes, I wish Singer had mined the comics and cartoons for more inspiration instead of relying exclusively on the Donner films. I haven't seen SI and SII, but from what I've heard it sounds like Superman had some characterization issues in those movies, just like SR.

[X Knight]

You say that, but if the next movie looks like it has awesome action I'll bet you'll be sitting front and center at the theater. :cwink:

I know that I won't.......:o

The next Superman movie can have mind-blowing action up the wazoo, but as long as they continue the whole Kid plotline, I'll have no desire to watch it in the theater. I'd wait till it comes out on cable and maybe watch it then........y'know.....out of curiosity......:o :woot:

[Cain]

You say that, but if the next movie looks like it has awesome action I'll bet you'll be sitting front and center at the theater. :cwink:

It wouldn't be the first time a movie featuring one of my favorite character's gets completely skipped by me because I have no interest in it (I'm looking at you Pirates 3 & Indiana Jones 4). I have about as much interest in watching a Superman Returns sequel as I do in getting a wisdom tooth pulled without any anesthetic. The $12 I save on my ticket could be used on more worthwile things like comic books that actually feature Superman adventures that entertain me.

[bgshw44]

You say that, but if the next movie looks like it has awesome action I'll bet you'll be sitting front and center at the theater. :cwink:

honestly, every hater will as long as the previews look good

[Cain]

spot on!! :word:

Like a leopard. :hehe:

I haven't seen SI and SII, but from what I've heard it sounds like Superman had some characterization issues in those movies, just like SR.

In terms of characterization Superman was pretty spot on in comparison to his comic book counterpart during that era. He was a confident and secure hero who inspired you with his presence alone and never backed down from doing what's right. Now mind you liberties were indeed taken with details and characterizations in those movies a lot more than people love to admit but in terms of tone and presentation it was a lot more accurate to the spirit of the comics of the 70's & early 80's then SR ever was to any Superman comics of the past 25 years.

[Cain]

honestly, every hater will as long as the previews look good

Honestly this is dumb logic cause it acts like it's unrealistic for anybody to skip a movie they don't care for. I was a Transformers fan when I was a kid I saw the movie thought it was a piece of hot garbage I have never seen it again and will skip the upcoming sequel even though I thought the trailer had cool visuals but so did the trailers for the original film that **** is not enough to sway me from the fact that the principal players from the previous movie which I hated are back for the new one. Same rules apply to Superman hell I'd rather go another 20 years without a Superman movie if it means WB will finally make an effort to get it right.

[hippie_hunter]

Yes, I wish Singer had mined the comics and cartoons for more inspiration instead of relying exclusively on the Donner films. I haven't seen SI and SII, but from what I've heard it sounds like Superman had some characterization issues in those movies, just like SR.

Superman the Movie and The Dark Knight are perfect interpretations of those characters on film.

Superman II was flawed by the fact that Warner Bros. screwed Donner over.

[Brian Braddock]

I know that I won't.......:o

The next Superman movie can have mind-blowing action up the wazoo, but as long as they continue the whole Kid plotline, I'll have no desire to watch it in the theater. I'd wait till it comes out on cable and maybe watch it then........y'know.....out of curiosity......:o :woot:


Sorry, dude, but I have to wonder just how much of a Supes fan you are that you'd willingly boycott the next cinematic Superman installment just because there's an element of the storyline that you dont like.

Seriously, you'd honestly deprive yourself of seeing Superman on the big screen engaged engaged in some majorly 'mind-blowing action' for that reason?

I know I wouldnt. I, like many on here, practically ache to see these characters that we love translated onto the big screen.

I've never lost sight how long [before SR] it took to get another Superman movie in production let alone in theatres, or of the severe dissappointment caused by several aborted attempts which amounted to nothing - they make me realise how lucky we are to get what we get and not agreeing with an aspect of the story is not gonna keep me away, opening night. I mean, I didnt particularly like the kid either but it's not gonna deter me from seeing the movie. It's just simply not an option for me.

I wanna stress that I'm honestly not trying to have a go at you; it's just that I can simply cannot fathom your thinking and I wanna be able to understand....................

[bgshw44]

Honestly this is dumb logic cause it acts like it's unrealistic for anybody to skip a movie they don't care for. I was a Transformers fan when I was a kid I saw the movie thought it was a piece of hot garbage I have never seen it again and will skip the upcoming sequel even though I thought the trailer had cool visuals but so did the trailers for the original film that **** is not enough to sway me from the fact that the principal players from the previous movie which I hated are back for the new one. Same rules apply to Superman hell I'd rather go another 20 years without a Superman movie if it means WB will finally make an effort to get it right.


hmm most people thought transformers was pretty entertaining, including myself

[FlawlessVictory]

Sorry, dude, but I have to wonder just how much of a Supes fan you are that you'd willingly boycott the next cinematic Superman installment just because there's an element of the storyline that you dont like.

And we have people on here who love SR but refuse to see the next film if Routh is not Superman. Do you wonder how much of a Supes fan they are?

[X Knight]

Sorry, dude, but I have to wonder just how much of a Supes fan you are that you'd willingly boycott the next cinematic Superman installment just because there's an element of the storyline that you dont like.

Seriously, you'd honestly deprive yourself of seeing Superman on the big screen engaged engaged in some majorly 'mind-blowing action' for that reason?

I know I wouldnt. I, like many on here, practically ache to see these characters that we love translated onto the big screen.

I've never lost sight how long [before SR] it took to get another Superman movie in production let alone in theatres, or of the severe dissappointment caused by several aborted attempts which amounted to nothing - they make me realise how lucky we are to get what we get and not agreeing with an aspect of the story is not gonna keep me away, opening night. I mean, I didnt particularly like the kid either but it's not gonna deter me from seeing the movie. It's just simply not an option for me.

I wanna stress that I'm honestly not trying to have a go at you; it's just that I can simply cannot fathom your thinking and I wanna be able to understand....................

Yes.....I would boycott the next Superman film if it continued the same story as SR and included plot elements ( namely the Kid ) that I don't care for.........:o

It's simple.....I have principles......I have standards......for me, Superman has a special place in my heart......what he stands for MEANS something to me......

SR, put simply, VIOLATED those standards....those principles.....it undercut everything that Superman stands for to me. I found SR OFFENSIVE!!!

If the sequel will continue that......why would I waste my time and money ( as I did with SR ) to see it? :o

[C. Lee]

YOU FOOL. IT'S NOT PRYOR THAT IS THE PROBLEM WITH THE MOVIE... HIS ROLE RULES. if you list the things pryor did in the movie, they're not many, and they're not bad. 1)the ferrari, hilarious, 2)the booze case 3)the 2 person computer 4)falling off the ski roof(this could probably be cut out) 5)the donkey. 6)the general (this should have been cut too)

Pryor was the innocent villain. And he was good at the part.

It's the Villain, his ditzy girlfriend, and the ugly biatch sister you have to cut out of the movie.

First off....call me (or anyone else) a "fool" again for giving my opinion on something, and you will be given an infraction. There is no call for rude behavior like that.

Secondly....that post wasn't meant to be a play by play recounting of my personal fan edit of SIII....so I didn't go into the multiple cuts I made (that include most of Pryor AND Robert Vaughn, his sister, and mistress. I made it more of the Smallville story (by adding Smallville scenes from SIV) that happens to be interrupted by Websters plan of world domination.

As to "the things Pryor did in the movie"....here's some of them;

1)Pre credit scene in unemployment office - unfunny and unnecessary. So cut it.
2)At computer class - unfunny...also, it was supposed to set him up as a computer genius, but since he didn't have any idea what he was doing (and they showed him just hitting a few random buttons on the computer, an act that would have done nothing in reality) it didn't really work. If they had made some kind of showing that he had magical powers that controlled the computers, it would have made more sense. So cut it.
3)Working at Websco - unfunny, but had a neat idea about the half cent from all paychecks....but since this was just used to show how stupid he was (buying the Ferrari) and really went nowhere else (except to introduce him to Webster)....it can be cut without damaging the storyline. Cut it.
4)First meeting with Webster - cute, not overly funny....I started the scene where Webster calls him a genius (cuts out all mention of jail and the paycheck scheme)....now you have him started off being recognised as a computer genius (without anything showing he isn't) and being asked to do criminal work for Webster. Trim it.



I have done a lot more...but that gives an idea of what it's like.

[Cain]

hmm most people thought transformers was pretty entertaining, including myself

I don't see how this has anything at all to do with my point, but most people who eat quarter pounders enjoy them while I think they're disgusting. In other words in society there exists such a thing as a differing opinion & everybody won't respond to the same thing the same way.

[Brian Braddock]

Flawless, one would have to, quite honestly.

[Brian Braddock]

Yes.....I would boycott the next Superman film if it continued the same story as SR and included plot elements ( namely the Kid ) that I don't care for.........:o

It's simple.....I have principles......I have standards......for me, Superman has a special place in my heart......what he stands for MEANS something to me......

SR, put simply, VIOLATED those standards....those principles.....it undercut everything that Superman stands for to me. I found SR OFFENSIVE!!!

If the sequel will continue that......why would I waste my time and money ( as I did with SR ) to see it? :o

Fair enough; I respect you opinion.

I may not necessarilly agree with it, but I respect it.

[Alex Logan]

I think BB has become underrated in light of TDK. Personally, I love BB, it gives me things TDK doesn't, and TDK gives me things BB does not.

I couldn't have said it better myself.

[X Knight]

Fair enough; I respect you opinion.

I may not necessarilly agree with it, but I respect it.

cool........as I respect your opinion too. :yay:

[Brian Braddock]

I always knew there was SOMEONE out there that did.

:D

[NeoRanger]

Flawless, one would have to, quite honestly.

I do. Both sides. I can only see where those who'd stay away from a sequel (especially a Singer-directed on) come from, because they at least have precedent to claim. But even then, it's a stretch for me.

Character comes first. Everything else much, much further down in the list.

[Alex Logan]

I think they didn't make a lot of money for different reasons. They weren't that exciting for the average movie goer for instance.

Again, I'll have to disagree. They didn't make a lot of money because of what came before them. People were tired of Batman after B&R and it was too soon after the first Hulk.

Hell YES. And don't come here with that condescending attitute, please.

I'm hardly the only one who feels this way.

Did you know that some top critics such as Time and Empire magazines gave SR a perfect score? Sheesh

Besides, I'm not much of a Batman fan, and I don't think Nolan movies are perfect; they have its flaws as well. Plus, Bale's Batman was just ok, to me. His Wayne is much better. He was just going through the motions in TDK, IMO. The other actors overshadowed him.

I wasn't being condescending, I was just very surpized to hear you say that.

You're the first one I've found.

Many critics gave BB & TDK a perfect score too, what's your point?

What you don't see ANY ideas/seeds for sequals planted in SR?? Then I guess you don't have much imagination.. :cwink:

On the contrary, I have quite the imagination. I was asking you were YOU thought it could go.


His XMen movies are great. And X3 could have been even better.

What's so great about them?


It's just a sample. But you said that noone could possibly be interested in a SR follow up, or in the story, as you said, no? So what is it? Make up your mind.

When did I say that? The rest of that sentance makes no sense.

[Alex Logan]

Singer had Superman crying outloud as he was being dragged through krypto land and occassionally being kicked by Kevin Spacey and Kumar.

Nolan had Batman in a vulnerable spot to but he actually tried to fight off the poison gas and managed to have a controlled enough will to contact Alfred for help.

I think it's safe to say Nolan put more effort in presenting the character to the best of his abilities even in situations where he's "losing". I'd say out of the 2 Nolan gave it his all because he made the effort to mine through the source material for further inspiration in how he portrayed his protagonist.

A huge compromise for the ego of any creative person but a neccessary one if you're adapting somebody else's creation. Singer did not regardless of any coincidences between Superman Lifts and any existing Superman comic books. He felt just going into it with nostalgic affection towards Donner's interpretation would be enough.

Agreed.

[Showtime]

$200 million is A LOT of money riding on something that you didn't do your best on. Any artist worth his salt should bust his ass to prove that you're worthy to be given $200 million for your pet project.

Where are you getting that Singer didn't "bust his ass". It isn't a question of whether he worked hard, it is just the Superman film he gave us. It didn't jive with what many of us wanted.


See, I actually give Nolan some slack for BB because that was his very first $50+ million budget, and his first action-oriented movie, let alone a comic book superhero film. Singer had some practice working on $50+ million budgets for X-men (two of them, in fact), and he even had practice working under pressure from Fox. If either of the two were to stumble on their big projects, it should have been Nolan, not Singer.

Fair enough but part of it is because he is Nolan, just like MP gives Singer a pass because he is Singer. You both associate them with Batman and Superman. All directors including Nolan and Singer are professionals and towards the top of their craft. Neither of them should have excuses behind them.

But I digress. The direction itself in SR was good. The casting was eh, but most of the problems stemmed from the writing. You could probably say the same for BB as well, at least compared to TDK. :cwink:

It wasn't the writing per say, it was the story concocted by Singer.

[bgshw44]

showtime, just saw that flyby concept art. looks interesting...

[echostation]

The editing was a major problem too, hacking out crucial bits of story with a boring, "actionless" plot made this whole venture a frustratingly disappointing film...

[Crook]

showtime, just saw that flyby concept art. looks interesting...
Was it the old ones that have been floating around, or are they "new"?

[Brian Braddock]

showtime, just saw that flyby concept art. looks interesting...

Where's this art?

[FilmNerdJamie]

Was it the old ones that have been floating around, or are they "new"?

If you haven't seen them before, then it is in fact new to you.

[echostation]

yah where's this artwork bgshaw?? any art from that aborted project would be fantastic to see!

[Anita18]

Where are you getting that Singer didn't "bust his ass". It isn't a question of whether he worked hard, it is just the Superman film he gave us. It didn't jive with what many of us wanted.

Fair enough but part of it is because he is Nolan, just like MP gives Singer a pass because he is Singer. You both associate them with Batman and Superman. All directors including Nolan and Singer are professionals and towards the top of their craft. Neither of them should have excuses behind them.
I wasn't saying that Singer didn't care about SR, I was trying to refute Mostpowerful's point that SR didn't show everything that Singer was capable of. :cwink: Which is a weak argument when you're dealing with such expensive, intensive projects. I don't think any director does any of their films half-assed. They can be bad movies, sure, but being a director means you're always in the trenches. It's never a low-stress, casual job.

Yeah, we're all criticizing Singer now because SR wasn't the success it was expected to be. I mean, Titanic had budget and production problems up the wazoo but since it made a bazillion dollars, nobody cares. James Cameron is still free to wreak havoc on budgets everywhere. :cwink:

[echostation]

Titanic was meant what it set out to do however, even though I wasn't a big fan of the film, I did enjoy it relatively. It tried to aim to be this tragic love story with massive technical spectacle.

Superman Returns on the other hand, was an expensive costume soap opera with hardly any entertainment value, the jokes were recycled, the plot itself was stupid and old, much of it not true to the comics, and hardly any action.

Superman is Earth's greatest hero and warrior - make a film about HIM, not about how Lois sees him, or his son... this film was meant to be Superman Returns, not Superman viewed through the lens of another person and oh whoops let's just complicate things by adding you child to the mix, it completely takes away from him, any entertaining action scenes and a ludicrous stupid plotline as well AGAIN with the same recycled "land" motif.

The idea was genius, have Superman return with an established origin, but the rest of it was just a bunch of frustratingly disappointing filmstock, money and time wasted...

[bgshw44]

yah where's this artwork bgshaw?? any art from that aborted project would be fantastic to see!


showtime and jamies's site, thinkmcflythink

[X Knight]

ok....just looked at that Flyby concept art of that mech/robot thingy....

that's actually quite interesting.

Now...just imagine.....if in SR, instead of using the crystals to create NK ( and another uninteresting "real estate" themed plot ), Lex used the tech to build kick-a** Kryptonian "war-machines" like in that concept art ( although maybe not quite as large ).

And, since Lex infused the crystal with Kryptonite, the war-machines would shoot off green, Kryptonite-based energy beams ( like in that concept art ).

So...instead of Superman lifting a giant chunk of NK into space, he'd have to face off with these Kryptonian war machines shooting Kryptonite beams at him left and right. Imagine all the cool ariel maneuvers and offensive tactics Supes would have had to employ to fight these machines.....

Imagine all the creative uses of Heat Vision, Ice Breath, etc. that we could see......

Or...imagine if these mech war thingys were all part of Brainiac's arsenal.......

Imagine if we could get all of this...coupled with a story that is good, epic, and far reaching yet one that STAYS TRUE TO THE CHARACTERS AND SOURCE MATERIAL........

Imagine if we could get a Superman movie that fans, critics, and the GA can pretty much all love.....

Imagine if we could get a Superman movie that shows that Superman can be cool and relevant in today's world.......WITHOUT COMPROMISING the essence of the character and what he stands for......

just imagine folks.............just imagine......

now...take all those wonderful happy thoughts.....carefully remove them from your brain....and file them away in some cold, dark place......weeping at the fact that, with the way WB treats its Superman franchise......such a Superman movie with such wonderful, imaginative things probably will never come to bear..........:(

[bgshw44]

ok....just looked at that Flyby concept art of that mech/robot thingy....

that's actually quite interesting.

Now...just imagine.....if in SR, instead of using the crystals to create NK ( and another uninteresting "real estate" themed plot ), Lex used the tech to build kick-a** Kryptonian "war-machines" like in that concept art ( although maybe not quite as large ).

And, since Lex infused the crystal with Kryptonite, the war-machines would shoot off green, Kryptonite-based energy beams ( like in that concept art ).

So...instead of Superman lifting a giant chunk of NK into space, he'd have to face off with these Kryptonian war machines shooting Kryptonite beams at him left and right. Imagine all the cool ariel maneuvers and offensive tactics Supes would have had to employ to fight these machines.....

just imagine........

aww man great possibilities.

[FlawlessVictory]

ok....just looked at that Flyby concept art of that mech/robot thingy....

that's actually quite interesting.

Now...just imagine.....if in SR, instead of using the crystals to create NK ( and another uninteresting "real estate" themed plot ), Lex used the tech to build kick-a** Kryptonian "war-machines" like in that concept art ( although maybe not quite as large ).

And, since Lex infused the crystal with Kryptonite, the war-machines would shoot off green, Kryptonite-based energy beams ( like in that concept art ).

So...instead of Superman lifting a giant chunk of NK into space, he'd have to face off with these Kryptonian war machines shooting Kryptonite beams at him left and right. Imagine all the cool ariel maneuvers and offensive tactics Supes would have had to employ to fight these machines.....

Or...imagine if these mech war thingys were all part of Brainiac's arsenal.......

just imagine........

$250 mil BO domestic gross and WB would already be far into development on SR2.

[bgshw44]

$250 mil BO domestic gross and WB would already be far into development on SR2.

makes me sick that its 2009 and no closer to a superman movie then october 2006

[dark_b]

$250 mil BO domestic gross and WB would already be far into development on SR2.actually in 7 days you would get a final trailer or maybe the second teaaser trailer to the sequel :cwink:

yes this summer it will be 3 years :hehe:

[bgshw44]

actually in 7 days you would get a final trailer or maybe the second teaaser trailer to the sequel :cwink:

yes this summer it will be 3 years :hehe:

ahh the good old days. its been a large part of my life!

[BenReilly]

Ah, remember the original Superman III script that surfaced a while ago? The one written by Cary Bates? Good stuff, for Superman. Brainiac and even Superman's death, before it ever happened in the comics.

The Cary Bates/Mark Jones Superman Reborn script was actually for a fifth Superman film that Ilya Salkind was developing in the early 90's, before the film rights reverted back to WB.

[Showtime]

showtime, just saw that flyby concept art. looks interesting...

Yeah pretty cool. We will get bits and pieces of Superman concept art here and there from these production designers on a lot of these aborted projects. Keep your eyes peeled.

Was it the old ones that have been floating around, or are they "new"?

This one was new to me. Click the link in my sig.

Where's this art?

See above.

$250 mil BO domestic gross and WB would already be far into development on SR2.

No doubt.

[bgshw44]

i anot making excuses or defending SR, but if it didnt have POTC behind it, it would have hit $250 million anyway

[Showtime]

SR = Past
Superman = Past, Present, and Future

[FilmNerdJamie]

Well at the moment based on the news-items recently, we're looking at a Singer-less sequel. Uh, discuss? :huh:

[bgshw44]

Well at the moment based on the news-items recently, we're looking at a Singer-less sequel. Uh, discuss? :huh:

im very excited at that prospect! i wish we just had some more details since we have talked about the same thing since 2006!

hopefully we will hear official conformation of some sort, with writers and or a director

[FlawlessVictory]

Well at the moment based on the news-items recently, we're looking at a Singer-less sequel. Uh, discuss? :huh:

Hmmm, but didn't the PW listing cite Bryan Singer as the director of Superman Unleashed? And I remember you mentioning WB discussed a sequel with him in Nov 08.

I can't help but think if we get a sequel it would be with Singer. I'm not sure directors are jumping at the chance to direct a Superman reintroduction(when that opportunity was offered months ago), I can't imagine any directors not named Singer that would be so willing to direct a sequel to a film where, right off the bat, they are in a corner creatively.

[bgshw44]

i think there a few studio directors who would jump at the chance to help this further their careers

[FilmNerdJamie]

Hmmm, but didn't the PW listing cite Bryan Singer as the director of Superman Unleashed? And I remember you mentioning WB discussed a sequel with him in Nov 08.

I can't help but think if we get a sequel it would be with Singer. I'm not sure directors are jumping at the chance to direct a Superman reintroduction(when that opportunity was offered months ago), I can't imagine any directors not named Singer that would be so willing to direct a sequel to a film where, right off the bat, they are in a corner creatively.

I forgot about that actually! Good call.

But no, I'm still willing to bet Singer won't be back behind the camera as director. But as said awhile ago, he'll get some kind of "Producer" title and Bad Hat Harry Productions will be listed among the various production companies involved.

Again, it goes along with the info about Warner Brothers looking for a more controllable "studio" guy to direct. But it's possible that's changed and Singer will return. *Shrugs* :huh:

I just can't see it being Singer at this point given the restrictions he'll be given.

[Showtime]

I think it will be similar to the Martin Campbell news for Lantern. All of a sudden we'll here that so and so is talking to WB and a week later he'll be official.

[FlawlessVictory]

i think there a few studio directors who would jump at the chance to help this further their careers

God be with the director who takes on SR2 "to further their career". :hehe:

Seriously though, if the studio wants to continue Singer's story then just get him back. It seems silly to me to get somone else to finish what Singer started, especially when a deal is already in place. I'm sure if Singer is wined and dined a little bit he would come back.

[Showtime]

They did go to him, but by all accounts he wasn't intrigued by the possibility by that point and under the changed circumstances.

[FlawlessVictory]

I forgot about that actually! Good call.

But no, I'm still willing to bet Singer won't be back behind the camera as director. But as said awhile ago, he'll get some kind of "Producer" title and Bad Hat Harry Productions will be listed among the various production companies involved.

Again, it goes along with the info about Warner Brothers looking for a more controllable "studio" guy to direct. But it's possible that's changed and Singer will return. *Shrugs* :huh:

I just can't see it being Singer at this point given the restrictions he'll be given.

That Nov 08 meeting really goes a long way for me. I think Singer is still in the picture but then again, we have the whole restrictions issue.

I think it will be similar to the Martin Campbell news for Lantern. All of a sudden we'll here that so and so is talking to WB and a week later he'll be official.

You think Campbell was first offered Superman? I wouldn't be surprised.

[FilmNerdJamie]

Some have speculated that the "going back to something more sci-fi oriented" remarks from Singer might be the sequel.

Sure...that's possible. But again, I don't buy it.

/film was saying that the title change for the sequel from The Man of Steel to Unleashed could be a subtle way of saying, "Bryan's not doing it!" :huh:

[FlawlessVictory]

Some have speculated that the "going back to something more sci-fi oriented" remarks from Singer might be the sequel.

Sure...that's possible. But again, I don't buy it.

/film was saying that the title change for the sequel from The Man of Steel to Unleashed could be a subtle way of saying, "Bryan's not doing it!" :huh:

They did go to him, but by all accounts he wasn't intrigued by the possibility by that point and under the changed circumstances.

Ah, ok, this makes sense. No wonder FNJ mentioned Singer-less sequel.

[bgshw44]

regardless, its news and i hope we get more of it soon!

[FilmNerdJamie]

Given the surprise financial and critical success of Valkyrie, one could assume that Singer would be in a better position to be able to come back to the sequel and say, "I want my writer(s) on board!"

The fact that Warner Brothers and Legendary Pictures are meeting with other screenwriters suggest that's not the case.

[X Knight]

wait....I'm confused now.......:huh:

so.....Superman Unleashed will probably be a sequel to SR.....but without Singer directing it??

what about the story then? will it be a continuation of SR? or something totally new?

is this going to be like X3, where a new director came in and made a sequel to Singer's X1 and X2?

we all know how THAT turned out......

[bgshw44]

Given the surprise financial and critical success of Valkyrie, one could assume that Singer would be in a better position to be able to come back to the sequel and say, "I want my writer(s) on board!"

The fact that Warner Brothers and Legendary Pictures are meeting with other screenwriters suggest that's not the case.

hmm wasnt there a december interview with singer saying that he wasnt involved with negotiations?

[Showtime]

That Nov 08 meeting really goes a long way for me. I think Singer is still in the picture but then again, we have the whole restrictions issue.

Singer always wanted a sequel under his terms, plus I think the closest thing to a sequel this next installment would get is Routh as Superman. I don't really know what this whole Unleashed thing is about, but it being a direct sequel is a little sketchy.

You think Campbell was first offered Superman? I wouldn't be surprised.

Not sure.

[Alex Logan]

ok....just looked at that Flyby concept art of that mech/robot thingy....

that's actually quite interesting.

Now...just imagine.....if in SR, instead of using the crystals to create NK ( and another uninteresting "real estate" themed plot ), Lex used the tech to build kick-a** Kryptonian "war-machines" like in that concept art ( although maybe not quite as large ).

And, since Lex infused the crystal with Kryptonite, the war-machines would shoot off green, Kryptonite-based energy beams ( like in that concept art ).

So...instead of Superman lifting a giant chunk of NK into space, he'd have to face off with these Kryptonian war machines shooting Kryptonite beams at him left and right. Imagine all the cool ariel maneuvers and offensive tactics Supes would have had to employ to fight these machines.....

Imagine all the creative uses of Heat Vision, Ice Breath, etc. that we could see......

Or...imagine if these mech war thingys were all part of Brainiac's arsenal.......

Imagine if we could get all of this...coupled with a story that is good, epic, and far reaching yet one that STAYS TRUE TO THE CHARACTERS AND SOURCE MATERIAL........

Imagine if we could get a Superman movie that fans, critics, and the GA can pretty much all love.....

Imagine if we could get a Superman movie that shows that Superman can be cool and relevant in today's world.......WITHOUT COMPROMISING the essence of the character and what he stands for......

just imagine folks.............just imagine......

now...take all those wonderful happy thoughts.....carefully remove them from your brain....and file them away in some cold, dark place......weeping at the fact that, with the way WB treats its Superman franchise......such a Superman movie with such wonderful, imaginative things probably will never come to bear..........:(


That's a pretty good idea. :cwink:

[Showtime]

wait....I'm confused now.......:huh:

so.....Superman Unleashed will probably be a sequel to SR.....but without Singer directing it??

what about the story then? will it be a continuation of SR? or something totally new?

is this going to be like X3, where a new director came in and made a sequel to Singer's X1 and X2?

we all know how THAT turned out......

Just wait until WB actually says something concrete. This sequel stuff seems out of whack.

[X Knight]

soooo....it's likely not a direct sequel....more of a reboot/Routhboot ( with Routh still attached )???

We've been waiting for WB to say something concrete or official for almost 3 years now.....lol

[Double Down]

If I had to bet money, I would put it on a "requel" with Routh (aka Routhboot). That still seems like the way to make the most people possible happy.

[FilmNerdJamie]

At the moment, it's going to be a sequel to Superman Returns. More likely than none, it'll probably be a Batman Forever situation where the style and tone are different and the cast is a mix of some coming back (i.e. Routh) and others being replaced (i.e. Bosworth).

Plus, I don't see how one makes a reboot and called it Superman Unleashed? :huh:

As for X-Men: The Last Stand, it was rushed into production basically as "**** you!" to Singer for jumping ship. It could have been good had it been given proper time to develop instead of fast-tracking it like mad into production.

Blame Fox and not Ratner for X3.

[bgshw44]

UGO (http://movieblog.ugo.com/index.php/movieblog/more/bryan_singer_is_not_not_doing_superman_man_of_stee l/) has posted an interview with Superman Returns (http://www.comingsoon.net/films.php?id=4666) director Bryan Singer, who goes a bit back and forth whether he's involved with the follow-up or not. Here's a clip:

JH: But there is talk of a new film, though. Are you officially involved in this talk of the new film?

BS: I am not officially involved in the talk, no.

JH: But when talk happens they’ll call you.

BS: Well it’s, you know, I have relationships with Warner Brothers and with the character and, and, and, and it’s just the way things work out.

JH: But you are not divorced from Superman at this point.

BS: No.

JH: All right.[/FONT]



This was dated December 4

[X Knight]

well...Batman Forever wasn't really a direct "sequel" to the Burton flicks. I don't recall BF ever referencing the prior 2 films did it ( other than having the same Alfred and Gordon actors )?

BF was more of a "stand-alone" film......

will Superman Unleashed be like that? meaning no KID??!!

I know it's prob way too early to tell......

I guess I just won't get my hopes up until WB officially announces something....whenever THAT may be.........lol

[batman44]

well...Batman Forever wasn't really a direct "sequel" to the Burton flicks. I don't recall BF ever referencing the prior 2 films did it ( other than having the same Alfred and Gordon actors )?

BF was more of a "stand-alone" film......

will Superman Unleashed be like that? meaning no KID??!!

I know it's prob way too early to tell......

I guess I just won't get my hopes up until WB officially announces something....whenever THAT may be.........lol

There were some vague references to the Burton films. For example, a reference to Joker being the killer of Bruce's parents.

Dick Grayson: Your parents weren't killed by a maniac.
Bruce Wayne: Yes, they were.

[Showtime]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superman_Unleashed

Ha Ha. 15 Million? :hehe:

[FilmNerdJamie]

I seem to recall a Catwoman reference too.

[X Knight]

There were some vague references to the Burton films. For example, a reference to Joker being the killer of Bruce's parents.

Dick Grayson: Your parents weren't killed by a maniac.
Bruce Wayne: Yes, they were.

ahh....thanks......don't remember that.....

[bgshw44]

i dont see how you can NOT reference the kid or richard

[X Knight]

i dont see how you can NOT reference the kid or richard

if you do a sequel, you HAVE to reference both......

if you do a reboot, you can wipe the slate clean..........:hehe:

[Showtime]

Honestly what they should do is come out with a fresh start and call it Superman Begins or Superman Starts so there is less confusion, yes I am aware some people will still think it is a prequel.

[FilmNerdJamie]

Jimmy: Hey Lois. Don't you have a little kid?
Lois: Nope.
Jimmy: Uh, there were like tons of pictures of one with you and some other guy.
Clark: Jimmy, the woman said, "No!" So shut the Hell up!

[X Knight]

Honestly what they should do is come out with a fresh start and call it Superman Begins or Superman Starts so there is less confusion, yes I am aware some people will still think it is a prequel.

well...they should have done that with SR......:o

maybe...just maybe....they wouldn't be in the mess they are in now.....

Jimmy: Hey Lois. Don't you have a little kid?

Lois: Nope.

Jimmy: Uh, there were like tons of pictures of one with you and some other guy.

Clark: Jimmy, the woman said, "No!" So shut the Hell up!

:hehe:

[bgshw44]

i just wish a writer could be creative or something without having to start over!

[FilmNerdJamie]

i just wish a writer could be creative or something without having to start over!

Looks like that's what is happening at the moment.

[X Knight]

but what writer/director/creative team would want to tackle what Singer started?

if you're going to continue Singer's story....why not just let Singer and his creative team do it?

[Showtime]

They aren't continuing Singer's story either way. Singer's intention for a sequel was revealed in his pitch for Superman Returns and a couple other pitches after he signed his deal for a sequel. WB wanted to go in their direction.

[X Knight]

They aren't continuing Singer's story either way. Singer's intention for a sequel was revealed in his pitch for Superman Returns and a couple other pitches after he signed his deal for a sequel. WB wanted to go in their direction.

so......no KID then??? :hehe:

if they're not continuing Singer's story....then that would make it a reboot or Routhboot ( if Routh stays on )......

please let this be true.....please let this be true.....

[bgshw44]

Looks like that's what is happening at the moment.

yes indeed. since the beggining i wanted a SR sequel minus singer and his writers. official news lets get going!!

[Showtime]

so......no KID then??? :hehe:

if they're not continuing Singer's story....then that would make it a reboot or Routhboot ( if Routh stays on )......

Maybe they will. Maybe they'll put Routh in a dress. Maybe they'll make Ma Kent a wrestler. I don't know.

[X Knight]

Maybe they will. Maybe they'll put Routh in a dress. Maybe they'll make Ma Kent a wrestler. I don't know.

shhhh....don't give them any ideas.......:grin:

[bgshw44]

if she played a gay wrestler she would get her 3rd oscar hands down!

[FilmNerdJamie]

if she played a gay wrestler she would get her 3rd oscar hands down!

A retarded physically disabled gay wrestler would have been the safer bet.

[X Knight]

Showtime, FNJ, when do you think WB will start making official comments on this whole Superman Unleashed deal?

Ever since this piece of "news" hit, there does seem to be an uptick of activity.

it feels as if something is rumbling behind the scenes.....what exactly it is......we don't really know yet.....

[Nightwing1977]

You say that, but if the next movie looks like it has awesome action I'll bet you'll be sitting front and center at the theater. :cwink:

That probably true. The thing is with trailer is to interest & entertain them. :)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superman_Unleashed

Ha Ha. 15 Million? :hehe:

Not to mention it said SR was mega successful. While SR didn't do too bad at the box office & is far from being a bomb like some say, it surely wasn't mega successful. Far from it.

[RachelDawes]

ok....just looked at that Flyby concept art of that mech/robot thingy....

that's actually quite interesting.

Now...just imagine.....if in SR, instead of using the crystals to create NK ( and another uninteresting "real estate" themed plot ), Lex used the tech to build kick-a** Kryptonian "war-machines" like in that concept art ( although maybe not quite as large ).

And, since Lex infused the crystal with Kryptonite, the war-machines would shoot off green, Kryptonite-based energy beams ( like in that concept art ).

So...instead of Superman lifting a giant chunk of NK into space, he'd have to face off with these Kryptonian war machines shooting Kryptonite beams at him left and right. Imagine all the cool ariel maneuvers and offensive tactics Supes would have had to employ to fight these machines.....

Imagine all the creative uses of Heat Vision, Ice Breath, etc. that we could see......

Or...imagine if these mech war thingys were all part of Brainiac's arsenal.......

Imagine if we could get all of this...coupled with a story that is good, epic, and far reaching yet one that STAYS TRUE TO THE CHARACTERS AND SOURCE MATERIAL........

Imagine if we could get a Superman movie that fans, critics, and the GA can pretty much all love.....

Imagine if we could get a Superman movie that shows that Superman can be cool and relevant in today's world.......WITHOUT COMPROMISING the essence of the character and what he stands for......

just imagine folks.............just imagine......

now...take all those wonderful happy thoughts.....carefully remove them from your brain....and file them away in some cold, dark place......weeping at the fact that, with the way WB treats its Superman franchise......such a Superman movie with such wonderful, imaginative things probably will never come to bear..........:(

You have a great idea. Replace Lex Luthor with a mad scientist and that would be like a Max Fleischer cartoon. :up:

[RachelDawes]

Well at the moment based on the news-items recently, we're looking at a Singer-less sequel. Uh, discuss? :huh:

A Routhboot would be my ideal next movie, but like Jamie said Superman Unleashed sounds like a sequel's name, not a reboot. I suppose I can handle a Singerless sequel.

[Anita18]

Again, it goes along with the info about Warner Brothers looking for a more controllable "studio" guy to direct. But it's possible that's changed and Singer will return. *Shrugs* :huh:
I actually haven't read much about WB mandating certain guidelines. WB gave Nolan and Snyder free rein, although 3 hours for Watchmen was asking a little too much. :funny: I don't think they'll pressure any director to the same extent Fox does, although I bet they're certainly looking for someone with a concrete vision of what they plan to do with Supes.

Having working experience with WB couldn't hurt either. Nolan and Snyder both directed one movie at WB before embarking on their big projects. So I guess all we have to do is start going down the list of any director who's done a movie with them? :oldrazz:

[FlawlessVictory]

^Francis Lawrence has been suggested. Makes the most sense.

[Double Down]

I agree.

[Superark]

The way I look at it is this...

WB doesn't want to do a direct sequel to SR because they don't want to deal with some of Singer's creative decisions in that movie.

But WB doesn't want to do an reboot with another origin either because we've been there and done that, plus you would have to spend a good solid hour or so on Clark Kent and how he became Superman. Basically that means less action and the less supervillian.

So, IMO, this is why we might see WB make a requel/Routhboot.

[solidsnake86]

There's been an influx of GL news so I'd imagine if they were serious about getting another superman film together, which they are, we'll start hearing things during the year. If they do film that Kent cameo in GL with Routh I think they'll definately come up with something.

As for this whole kid problem, honestly they just have to say its a prequel or this story takes place before the events of SR and they'll never have to connect the stories. It's not that complicated. I just can't see this being a sequel with singer gone and frankly I don't want to see it.

[dark_b]

with WB there is still a chance that Routh will be in the cameo but then they will change their minds and maybe do a reboot.

[Superark]

True, hope not though

[dark_b]

or if they will not be 100% sure they will delete the cameo or just not show clarks face.

[Superark]

Well if does indeed film the cameo, I will happy.

I mean if the next Superman film is coming out in 2011 or 2012, we'll know if Routh is going to remain before GL comes out anyways since that film would already have to start production before Decemeber 2010

[Vaibow]

Well if does indeed film the cameo, I will happy.

I mean if the next Superman film is coming out in 2011 or 2012, we'll know if Routh is going to remain before GL comes out anyways since that film would already have to start production before Decemeber 2010


It be class to see Routh in GL, you reckon they'd go with the style of Returns, or will the new footage of Clarks style look and be in clothes that would represent the GL universe?

[Dark Knight]

ok....just looked at that Flyby concept art of that mech/robot thingy....

that's actually quite interesting.

Now...just imagine.....if in SR, instead of using the crystals to create NK ( and another uninteresting "real estate" themed plot ), Lex used the tech to build kick-a** Kryptonian "war-machines" like in that concept art ( although maybe not quite as large ).

And, since Lex infused the crystal with Kryptonite, the war-machines would shoot off green, Kryptonite-based energy beams ( like in that concept art ).

So...instead of Superman lifting a giant chunk of NK into space, he'd have to face off with these Kryptonian war machines shooting Kryptonite beams at him left and right. Imagine all the cool ariel maneuvers and offensive tactics Supes would have had to employ to fight these machines.....

Imagine all the creative uses of Heat Vision, Ice Breath, etc. that we could see......

Or...imagine if these mech war thingys were all part of Brainiac's arsenal.......

Imagine if we could get all of this...coupled with a story that is good, epic, and far reaching yet one that STAYS TRUE TO THE CHARACTERS AND SOURCE MATERIAL........

Imagine if we could get a Superman movie that fans, critics, and the GA can pretty much all love.....

Imagine if we could get a Superman movie that shows that Superman can be cool and relevant in today's world.......WITHOUT COMPROMISING the essence of the character and what he stands for......

just imagine folks.............just imagine......

now...take all those wonderful happy thoughts.....carefully remove them from your brain....and file them away in some cold, dark place......weeping at the fact that, with the way WB treats its Superman franchise......such a Superman movie with such wonderful, imaginative things probably will never come to bear..........:(




^^Great possibilities indeed.....

[Nightwing1977]

I hope they stick with Clark cameo in the Green Lantern, 'cause it would be a nice setup to start the Justice League film someday soon in the future along with other JL members cameo in the Flash film when it get pick up. Pretty much like how Marvel is doing with setting up the Avengers. :)

[Ita-KalEl]

I hope that the cameo is something concrete like the Tony Stark cameo in The Incredible Hulk. I don't want only a guy with the glasses that says "A question from the Daily Planet" in a press conference...

[FlawlessVictory]

Just saw the new Terminator: Salvation trailer :wow:

http://thinkmcflythink.squarespace.com/movie-news/2009/3/3/new-terminator-salvation-trailer-hits.html


Get McG to direct the next Superman movie! :o

[RachelDawes]

Just saw the new Terminator: Salvation trailer :wow:

http://thinkmcflythink.squarespace.com/movie-news/2009/3/3/new-terminator-salvation-trailer-hits.html


Get McG to direct the next Superman movie! :o

Sometimes I think getting a good writer or writers is more important than getting a great director. I would be perfectly comfortable with McG if solid writers who understood Superman were brought on board.

[FlawlessVictory]

Sometimes I think getting a good writer or writers is more important than getting a great director. I would be perfectly comfortable with McG if solid writers who understood Superman were brought on board.

Getting good writers who understand the mythos is essential. If/when Terminator:Salvation is a hit, WB should seriously consider giving this man a shot for a Routhboot.

[hippie_hunter]

Getting good writers who understand the mythos is essential. If/when Terminator:Salvation is a hit, WB should seriously consider giving this man a shot for a Routhboot.

I doubt it since Warner Bros. is planning to have another Terminator movie in 2011.

[hippie_hunter]

Sometimes I think getting a good writer or writers is more important than getting a great director. I would be perfectly comfortable with McG if solid writers who understood Superman were brought on board.

I agree, even when McG was on Superman: Flyby I never saw him as the problem. The problem was the horrid script and Jon Peters.

But in the hands of a great script and producers who care about the material the movie is based on, McG is the type of director who is competent to handle the type of movie as we're seeing in Terminator: Salvation.

[FlawlessVictory]

I doubt it since Warner Bros. is planning to have another Terminator movie in 2011.

Yea, but we have no idea when WB is even considering releasing the next Superman film.

[hippie_hunter]

Yea, but we have no idea when WB is even considering releasing the next Superman film.

It sounds like they want it to be 2011 since Nolan decided to make Inception before Batman 3.

[FlawlessVictory]

It sounds like they want it to be 2011 since Nolan decided to make Inception before Batman 3.

Yea, that makes sense. I swear, too many guessing games with this next Superman film, it's ridiculous. We are not even sure of year of release. Can we at least get that WB?! Throw us a frickin bone here.

[what_19]

Maybe they will. Maybe they'll put Routh in a dress. Maybe they'll make Ma Kent a wrestler. I don't know.

maybe superman will fight rourke, as the wrestler...i guess he aint doing iron man now :oldrazz:

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Trailers can make anything look good, I'm going to wait to see the actual movie before I declare MCG a good director.

I thought that the first Charlies Angels was better than Superman Returns and the first X-Men for that matter. He isn't even my tenth choice but I'd perfer him for the type of movie Superman should be over Singer any day of the week.

[what_19]

I hope they stick with Clark cameo in the Green Lantern, 'cause it would be a nice setup to start the Justice League film someday soon in the future along with other JL members cameo in the Flash film when it get pick up. Pretty much like how Marvel is doing with setting up the Avengers. :)

i'd love to see a clark cameo in the GL movie...the only issue i sort of have with this is that why isn't superman HELPING GL? know what i mean? i like the idea of the justice league..avengers and what not...but then when you have a situation like in TDK where he freakin national guard gets called in...and there is a superman flying around..where the hell is he?

same thing with GL...so clark is there asking questions as a reporter...but when the inevitable climax comes where GL has to save the world...superman is unavailable?

maybe i am being dumb..but this is the kind of problem i have with the super hero team ups and such....

someone please educate me:oldrazz:

[Showtime]

maybe superman will fight rourke, as the wrestler...i guess he aint doing iron man now :oldrazz:

Randy "The Ram" Robinson vs Clark "Superman" Kent

[FaT_tONle]

So now McG is best suited for Supes??? There is no way he is directing Supes unless he leaves the Terminator franchise.

And here is why I would worry as a Superman fan... what if GL flops in its Holiday release? Not saying it will but if it does bad... or less than specatcular... you guys honestly think they'd release Superman Holidays 2011??? That is something to be considered... so we may not get another Superman movie until summer 2013. I think GL will do well and if so... I expect mid-December 2011 for the Superman reboot... just makes you wonder if you know what I mean.

i'd love to see a clark cameo in the GL movie...the only issue i sort of have with this is that why isn't superman HELPING GL? know what i mean? i like the idea of the justice league..avengers and what not...but then when you have a situation like in TDK where he freakin national guard gets called in...and there is a superman flying around..where the hell is he?

same thing with GL...so clark is there asking questions as a reporter...but when the inevitable climax comes where GL has to save the world...superman is unavailable?

maybe i am being dumb..but this is the kind of problem i have with the super hero team ups and such....

someone please educate me

The movies do not take place in the same universe. The cameo might just be a throw away that only fanboys notice for all we know.

[Vaibow]

i'd love to see a clark cameo in the GL movie...the only issue i sort of have with this is that why isn't superman HELPING GL? know what i mean? i like the idea of the justice league..avengers and what not...but then when you have a situation like in TDK where he freakin national guard gets called in...and there is a superman flying around..where the hell is he?

same thing with GL...so clark is there asking questions as a reporter...but when the inevitable climax comes where GL has to save the world...superman is unavailable?

maybe i am being dumb..but this is the kind of problem i have with the super hero team ups and such....

someone please educate me:oldrazz:

Good post, i copy you exactly - we are supposed to have this great D.C universe and all we have got is stupid name drops, like the word 'gotham' thrown in to Superman Returns.
Metropolis is without a hero for 5 years and not one mention of another hero coming over to help out, or any incident that happens to warrant a Superman or help.
Supes is in hospital, believed to be in a coma and Batman doesn't even make a statement? meh!!!

[dark_b]

So now McG is best suited for Supes??? There is no way he is directing Supes unless he leaves the Terminator franchise.

And here is why I would worry as a Superman fan... what if GL flops in its Holiday release? Not saying it will but if it does bad... or less than specatcular... you guys honestly think they'd release Superman Holidays 2011??? That is something to be considered... so we may not get another Superman movie until summer 2013. I think GL will do well and if so... I expect mid-December 2011 for the Superman reboot... just makes you wonder if you know what I mean.



The movies do not take place in the same universe. The cameo might just be a throw away that only fanboys notice for all we know.it will flop if the budget will be to high. it will flop if the script is nto good. and it will flop if there will be strange aliens that people dont want to watch.
after all this years there is a formula to make a good movie with good profit. if WB will again want to experiment it will be again their fault.
who are we kidding. they will try something new and it will fail. so superman will be delayed. :woot:

[wellsy]

i just wish a writer could be creative or something without having to start over!

Though it may be a fan script (and a bit of shameless self-promotion), ask, and ye shall recieve (http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?t=264034).

[FaT_tONle]

it will flop if the budget will be to high. it will flop if the script is nto good. and it will flop if there will be strange aliens that people dont want to watch.
after all this years there is a formula to make a good movie with good profit. if WB will again want to experiment it will be again their fault.
who are we kidding. they will try something new and it will fail. so superman will be delayed. :woot:

Eventually you'd figure the luck will finally be on WB's side... but GL... much like SR... if it fails... then Holiday releases will never happen again in the near future... at least for DC films... and it basically assures WB will not go through with a big budget superhero film not involving Batman. Even then... Justice League would be a long shot. GL HAS to do well... or the Supes reboot won't happen IMO. Although you'd figure they already start filming Supes before GL is even released if they want to make 2011. I just think it doesn't help at all if GL flops. But assuming WB is doing Superman/Green Lantern a year apart from each other... it really shows they are committed to getting all these properties off the ground at the same time to serve as a launching pad for the rest of the DC universe... so I'll give them credit there.

[afan]

i'd love to see a clark cameo in the GL movie...the only issue i sort of have with this is that why isn't superman HELPING GL? know what i mean? i like the idea of the justice league..avengers and what not...but then when you have a situation like in TDK where he freakin national guard gets called in...and there is a superman flying around..where the hell is he?

same thing with GL...so clark is there asking questions as a reporter...but when the inevitable climax comes where GL has to save the world...superman is unavailable?

maybe i am being dumb..but this is the kind of problem i have with the super hero team ups and such....

someone please educate me:oldrazz:

Your point is well taken, but doesn't it hinge on the power levels of your heroes.

A ludicrous power level for Superman negates the need for any other superheros like GL, however power Superman down to the point that he is geographically(Metropolis and surrounding areas) limited for a timely response, and multiple heroes become a need, and the use of teamwork to avert a mega-catastrophic event essential.

[dark_b]

Eventually you'd figure the luck will finally be on WB's side... but GL... much like SR... if it fails... then Holiday releases will never happen again in the near future... at least for DC films... and it basically assures WB will not go through with a big budget superhero film not involving Batman. Even then... Justice League would be a long shot. GL HAS to do well... or the Supes reboot won't happen IMO. Although you'd figure they already start filming Supes before GL is even released if they want to make 2011. I just think it doesn't help at all if GL flops. But assuming WB is doing Superman/Green Lantern a year apart from each other... it really shows they are committed to getting all these properties off the ground at the same time to serve as a launching pad for the rest of the DC universe... so I'll give them credit there.yeah if WB wants superman in 2011 then they will already film the movie when GL is realesed.

[Superark]

Johnathan Nolan's story is what will make or break T4 IMO.

If the story turns out to be really good then wouldn't mind giving him a shot at writing Superman since he helped write TDK also.

[FilmNerdJamie]

There were quiet a few writers involved on T4 in one form or another. So if it succeeds, one can't just give all the credit to Jonah.

[Superark]

Who all is writing on the movie? I'm sure McG has done some considering he is the director, but who else? I haven't really been keeping up much with this movie and I only remember hearing Nolan doing it.

Regardless, if the story is good, I'd like to see what Jon Nolan can write for Superman.

[FilmNerdJamie]

Regardless, if the story is good, I'd like to see what Jon Nolan can write for Superman.

I have no doubt he was considered at one point or another.

There are apparently seven credited writers for Salvation. The only reason McG keeps bringing up Jonah so much is because he wants the fan-base to nerdgasm into believeing that T4 will be just like Batman Begins and The Dark Knight.

[bgshw44]

I have no doubt he was considered at one point or another.

There are apparently seven credited writers for Salvation. The only reason McG keeps bringing up Jonah so much is because he wants the fan-base to nerdgasm into believeing that T4 will be just like Batman Begins and The Dark Knight.

smart move on his part

[terry78]

Well, they already know they can do Metallo after seeing what they did with the Terminators in the trailers. Though hopefully if they use him they make him a little more interesting looking than just a T-800 knockoff.

[bgshw44]

Well, they already know they can do Metallo after seeing what they did with the Terminators in the trailers. Though hopefully if they use him they make him a little more interesting looking than just a T-800 knockoff.

i wouldnt want to see metallo now, it wouldnt be seen as different. i say you have to do darkseid or braniac(but call him the eradicator)

[Superark]

I have no doubt he was considered at one point or another.

There are apparently seven credited writers for Salvation. The only reason McG keeps bringing up Jonah so much is because he wants the fan-base to nerdgasm into believeing that T4 will be just like Batman Begins and The Dark Knight.

smart move on his part

Dang that's a lot of writers!

And indeed it is a smart move bgshw44.

I'm holding out judgment on T4 untill I see it, but so far it looks promising. But it I sure as heck don't expect it to be on TDK level.

[Superark]

Yea I much rather see Nolan handle Darkseid or Brainiac instead of Metallo. I'd like to see what he could do with Lex as well. It would be especially cool with Geoff Johns contributing to the story

[FilmNerdJamie]

smart move on his part

Openly inviting the comparison from the always hard to please fanboys?

No, it's actually stupid for McG to have done that...

[X Knight]

wasn't McG the guy who was supposed to direct Superman....but backed out because he was afraid of flying.....and then Singer took over?

or was that Ratner?

Wasn't he supposed to do Superman too?

I'm so confused now......lol.

[RachelDawes]

I have no doubt he was considered at one point or another.

There are apparently seven credited writers for Salvation. The only reason McG keeps bringing up Jonah so much is because he wants the fan-base to nerdgasm into believeing that T4 will be just like Batman Begins and The Dark Knight.

I think Jonah is the most important writer of the script, though. I heard that Bale didn't like the original TS script and wouldn't join until Nolan had rewritten it to his satisfaction, or something like that.

[X Knight]

I think Jonah is the most important writer of the script, though. I heard that Bale didn't like the original TS script and wouldn't join until Nolan had rewritten it to his satisfaction, or something like that.

yah.....I read that last night. Bale was McG's first choice, but Bale initially turned down the role, saying he'd only accept under one condition. And that was the script would have to be rewritten to make the story interesting even without all the special effects.....or something to that effect....

That's when McG hired Nolan.........

[dark_b]

I think Jonah is the most important writer of the script, though. I heard that Bale didn't like the original TS script and wouldn't join until Nolan had rewritten it to his satisfaction, or something like that.but he only put a layer on top. its not hes original idea for a 4th movie.its not like this is Nolans story and that Bale is directing.

fact is that there are a lot of writers on this movie. and from every writter there is something in the movie.

it will be incredible after the movie is out when someone will say :
-''hey remember the scene xx. ohhhhh my good it was amazing. Nolan is amazing to wrotte this.''
-actually this is not from Nolan.
-f... you. Nolan brothers are the best.

[Anita18]

There are apparently seven credited writers for Salvation. The only reason McG keeps bringing up Jonah so much is because he wants the fan-base to nerdgasm into believeing that T4 will be just like Batman Begins and The Dark Knight.
Also because apparently Jonah Nolan's involvement got Bale on board. Which is a fairly important result of getting one guy onto a script already touched by 6 people. :funny:

Unless any of the drafts leak, or the writers and/or McG talk, we'd have no idea which writer contributed what story point or piece of dialogue. Although if there's a cool flashback segueway, we can probably attribute that to Nolan. :funny:

I did read somewhere about Maddy Gaiman figuring out which parts of Coraline were her dad Neil's contributions - if it's bad, Neil didn't write it. We could go about it like that too. :oldrazz:

[RachelDawes]

but he only put a layer on top. its not hes original idea for a 4th movie.its not like this is Nolans story and that Bale is directing.

fact is that there are a lot of writers on this movie. and from every writter there is something in the movie.

Some of the ideas may not have been his but the fact remains that Bale didn't think the script was good until Jonah reworked it. How much Nolan had to change we don't know.

[dark_b]

Some of the ideas may not have been his but the fact remains that Bale didn't think the script was good until Jonah reworked it. How much Nolan had to change we don't know.hmmmm how does this sound?
what does it matter what bale thinks? is he now like an terminators story expert?

[Anita18]

hmmmm how does this sound?
what does it matter what bale thinks? is he now like an terminators story expert?
This actually happens pretty often, when a director is fixated on getting a particular actor on board their movie. It isn't like Bale is out of his league for suggesting such a thing. :oldrazz:

[Double Down]

Brandon Routh at the Watchmen premiere last night:

http://i52.photobucket.com/albums/g39/doubledown44/BR.jpg

[FlawlessVictory]

^Showing up at WB premieres like this, is there any doubt he will be Superman in the next film?

[bunk]

Has Routh ever mentioned reading Watchmen or anything? I would be curious to hear his thoughts on it.

[FilmNerdJamie]

Also because apparently Jonah Nolan's involvement got Bale on board.

Nolan wasn't brought in until after Bale signed up. A big-ass paycheck got Bale on board, my friend.

[Double Down]

^Showing up at WB premieres like this, is there any doubt he will be Superman in the next film?

It's funny. Jamie said something similar and I didn't think much of it at the time. Routh is a big fan of this kind of stuff and it wouldn't be much of a surprise for him to go to a premiere for this kind of movie.
However, I thought about it a little longer and he left the set of Dead of Night in Louisiana to fly up and attend a Warner Bros. comic book premiere that he had no connection to. You guys could be on to something.

[BenReilly]

Unless any of the drafts leak, or the writers and/or McG talk, we'd have no idea which writer contributed what story point or piece of dialogue. Although if there's a cool flashback segueway, we can probably attribute that to Nolan. :funny:

One of the users on this forum read the original script written by John Brancato and Michael Ferris and reviewed it. These were the guys that wrote T3 and were working on this film back in 2004/05, when Jonathan Mostow was still attached to it.

This was the draft that was available when McG came aboard and when Bale was approached. It's very different than what appears in the final film. The biggest difference being Sam Worthington's character (Marcus Wright) is the only lead and John Connor only has an extended cameo.

[FaT_tONle]

^Showing up at WB premieres like this, is there any doubt he will be Superman in the next film?

Don't get cocky...

[Double Down]

Don't get cocky...

He isn't saying it in that way.

[BATZARRO WWD]

If they use the term salvation and it's variants ten times, then that's the Nolan Effect(TM)

No, I joke, I joke...

[Alex Logan]

Nolan wasn't brought in until after Bale signed up. A big-ass paycheck got Bale on board, my friend.

Not true.

[FilmNerdJamie]

The WGA Strike was going on when Bale was hired back in November/December '07. Up to that point, McG & Co. were working from the previous drafts where Marcus Wright was the lead and Connor had a smaller part.

[DavidTyler]

Brandon Routh at the Watchmen premiere last night:

http://i52.photobucket.com/albums/g39/doubledown44/BR.jpg

If Routh is going to return as Superman, they need to let him wear his hair more like this and then tame it back down as Clark.

That slicked back look is absolutely comic booky and just outdated.

If we want a more relatable Superman, we need to start with making him look less like a cartoon and more like a real person...

[RachelDawes]

If they use the term salvation and it's variants ten times, then that's the Nolan Effect(TM)

No, I joke, I joke...

I think that's more the Goyer effect.

[Superark]

If Routh is going to return as Superman, they need to let him wear his hair more like this and then tame it back down as Clark.

That slicked back look is absolutely comic booky and just outdated.

If we want a more relatable Superman, we need to start with making him look less like a cartoon and more like a real person...


Yeah because whether or not Superman has spit curl really makes me relate to him more :whatever:

[Nixon]

I think that's more the Goyer effect.

The Nolan Effect is characters stopping from time to time to give near silliloques so they can articulate in uncertain terms their worldview and explain their symbolic and thematic significance to the story.

[bgshw44]

Yeah because whether or not Superman has spit curl really makes me relate to him more :whatever:

you have to have the curl, but his hair in SR did look ridiculous. i think they actually sold plastic head pieces at the toy store as official SR merchendise

[Superark]

you have to have the curl, but his hair in SR did look ridiculous. i think they actually sold plastic head pieces at the toy store as official SR merchendise


Whether his hair was ridiculous or not makes no difference in how I relate to Superman.

And I bought one of those plastic Superman wigs :oldrazz:

[Tojo]

I'm glad they're re-booting it, because this inevitably means no Singer, and hopefully means no Routh, Spacey, Bosworth and most importantly of all, NO CHILD.

So hopefully this means we won't be getting a bland-production, Reeve imitations or cliched pantomime acting, a complete lack of chemistry between Lois/Clark/Superman and a bizarre impulse to give Superman a son.

Personally i would have Braniac manipulating Luthor into creating something that will take Superman down-Doomsday!! Cue massive CGI brawl. yay :whatever:

[manofsteel4life]

:huh: did you hear something we didnt?

[Brian Braddock]

Probably not.

[C. Lee]

If we want a more relatable Superman, we need to start with making him look less like a cartoon and more like a real person...

Ah, the days of Superman with a mullett.

[X Knight]

I'm glad they're re-booting it, because this inevitably means no Singer, and hopefully means no Routh, Spacey, Bosworth and most importantly of all, NO CHILD.

So hopefully this means we won't be getting a bland-production, Reeve imitations or cliched pantomime acting, a complete lack of chemistry between Lois/Clark/Superman and a bizarre impulse to give Superman a son.

Personally i would have Braniac manipulating Luthor into creating something that will take Superman down-Doomsday!! Cue massive CGI brawl. yay :whatever:

well, I wouldn't get your hopes up just yet.......

[Superark]

Ah, the days of Superman with a mullett.

:lmao:

I gotta admit, there was something I really enjoyed about the mullet on Superman when came back after his death.

Maybe it's the southern in me :yay:

[Double Down]

I'm glad they're re-booting it, because this inevitably means no Singer, and hopefully means no Routh, Spacey, Bosworth and most importantly of all, NO CHILD.

So hopefully this means we won't be getting a bland-production, Reeve imitations or cliched pantomime acting, a complete lack of chemistry between Lois/Clark/Superman and a bizarre impulse to give Superman a son.

Personally i would have Braniac manipulating Luthor into creating something that will take Superman down-Doomsday!! Cue massive CGI brawl. yay :whatever:

Superman Returns had "cliched pantomime (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pantomime)"? :huh:

[Nightwing1977]

Superman Returns had "cliched pantomime (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pantomime)"? :huh:

Pretty funny some are using the wrong words to describe something they hate. I don't remeber Superman Returns was a musical comedy.

And there is still no word on reboot of sequel yet, Tojo. Nothing has been confirmed yet. Not to mention no word on if Routh will return or not either, though it likely he will be back. Singer or no Singer.

[BATZARRO WWD]

Pretty funny some are using the wrong words to describe something they hate. I don't remeber Superman Returns was a musical comedy.

And there is still no word on reboot of sequel yet, Tojo. Nothing has been confirmed yet. Not to mention no word on if Routh will return or not either, though it likely he will be back. Singer or no Singer.


Yeah, I seem to recall saying we should not read too much into the statement that names this thread. It's not an official announcement. It's not a script outline. IT'S JUST TALKING! And perfectly ambiguosly to boot.

Mind, you, I do have a prefference in the "Reboot v. Sequel" debate. But there isn't anything that concretely suggests any side is getting what they want.

[Webhead2006]

its to bad we still dont have officially plans set with wb. It would be so great if they finally got themselfs situated and we have our answer 100% is the next film a singer/singerless direct sequel or if its a reboot with new everything. Sucks its still all up in the air and we are likely going to be like this for another long haul.

[Vaibow]

Whether his hair was ridiculous or not makes no difference in how I relate to Superman.

And I bought one of those plastic Superman wigs :oldrazz:


How can anyone relate to Superman?? Clark on the farm or city boy, maybe.. but supes, come on..

'Jerry, i feel like, although i have a son i've never met, i wear my pants outside my tights, i feel like i know Superman's problems'


I think Supes just needs to have a better constructed hair style, it is way too plain and long, makes his head look top heavy and because it is so gelled and greased up, makes him look even more wooden.
If i gelled my hair, put head out the car window for 5 mins, it look more like side show bob than anything.

He needs to appeal to us, not just relate but i can see where you are coming from superark, i'm not bashing you in any way.

[DavidTyler]

Whether his hair was ridiculous or not makes no difference in how I relate to Superman.

And I bought one of those plastic Superman wigs :oldrazz:

Wow.... and I thought you could actually understand I was talking about his overall appearance and how making him look unreal will hurt how audiences will react to him.


He's already wearing a costume that makes him a bit cartoony - he doesn't need to look like a plastic nerd at the same time.

the more the producers can do to make him look natural, the more the GA will accept him in the costume.

[Superark]

How can anyone relate to Superman?? Clark on the farm or city boy, maybe.. but supes, come on..

'Jerry, i feel like, although i have a son i've never met, i wear my pants outside my tights, i feel like i know Superman's problems'


I think Supes just needs to have a better constructed hair style, it is way too plain and long, makes his head look top heavy and because it is so gelled and greased up, makes him look even more wooden.
If i gelled my hair, put head out the car window for 5 mins, it look more like side show bob than anything.

He needs to appeal to us, not just relate but i can see where you are coming from superark, i'm not bashing you in any way.

I see what you're saying about people relating to Clark compared to Superman. But they are the same person with the same feelings. Kal-El just puts on a different act b/w Clark and Supes. But I think many people relate to what Superman stands for and his character.

And the hair and spit curl is classic Superman so it appeals to me :cwink:

Wow.... and I thought you could actually understand I was talking about his overall appearance and how making him look unreal will hurt how audiences will react to him.


He's already wearing a costume that makes him a bit cartoony - he doesn't need to look like a plastic nerd at the same time.

the more the producers can do to make him look natural, the more the GA will accept him in the costume.


I understand your point, but I just don't agree with it. I don't think changing the hair style is going to make that many people relate to him any different or overlook the outfit. That's just my opinion on the matter.

Of course you hated the hair in SR while I didn't so naturally we are going to disagree.

[dark_b]

another movie that has more action and more money shots then superman IMO. and its bright.
http://www.apple.com/trailers/paramount/startrek/startrek_trailer3_medium.html
i think people are ready for a superman movie with an alien villain.

[Superfreak]

Wow.... and I thought you could actually understand I was talking about his overall appearance and how making him look unreal will hurt how audiences will react to him.


He's already wearing a costume that makes him a bit cartoony - he doesn't need to look like a plastic nerd at the same time.

the more the producers can do to make him look natural, the more the GA will accept him in the costume.

this is not even worth debating

the GA has accepted that image for the last 70 years. There is no need to change it.

running out of stuff to debate here it seems.

[TheComicbookKid]

another movie that has more action and more money shots then superman IMO. and its bright.
http://www.apple.com/trailers/paramount/startrek/startrek_trailer3_medium.html
i think people are ready for a superman movie with an alien villain.

I can't wait until we get a director. I'm so tired of people coming in proclaiming this is how Superman should have been!

Last summer it was Hancock but that didn't stop the movie from sucking huge balls!

[dark_b]

what do you mean? people were talking about flying in hancock. you got a lot of clouse ups of flying in hancock with the actor. in daytime. you didnt get this with superman. and he is a bright hero.

[bunk]

Wow.... and I thought you could actually understand I was talking about his overall appearance and how making him look unreal will hurt how audiences will react to him.


He's already wearing a costume that makes him a bit cartoony - he doesn't need to look like a plastic nerd at the same time.

the more the producers can do to make him look natural, the more the GA will accept him in the costume.

I can definitely see how adjusting his appearance can help the audience relate. I'm not saying I want to see a George Reeves Superman back on the screen, but at least he seems like a real person that's approachable. I get what Singer was trying to do, but I want to see a Superman who's a man of the people that is basically everyone's best friend. I'm not as interested in a more "alien" version of Superman who's awkward around humans. There is certainly room for that angle in an origin story, though I would expect to see him grow into a more George Reeves Superman by the end.

[bgshw44]

i hate all this you cant relate to superman nonsense. for me its simple, everyone is an ordinary guy (like clark) who believes inside they can do extraordinary things (like superman)

its not rocket science. i think you guys overthink superman wayyy to much, as well as WB.

[afan]

i hate all this you cant relate to superman nonsense. for me its simple, everyone is an ordinary guy (like clark) who believes inside they can do extraordinary things (like superman)

its not rocket science. i think you guys overthink superman wayyy to much, as well as WB.


Amen!

[bgshw44]

Amen!

right on!

i cant wait for concrete news! i definately feel things are moving though

[Cain]

You could relate to Superman but he's no ordinary guy. When "Clark" is in Smallville or around Lois he still uses his powers. I'm sorry but I don't have x-ray visison. It's not like he ever turns his powers off there is nothing ordinary there dude is a god amongst us. What makes him relatable is how both his upbringing and heritage shaped the man that he became like what happens to millions of us everyday. The fact that he's an immigrant and orphan, also relatable.

[NeoRanger]

Superman has several points of "relatability" (apologies for the word), most of which are concentrated in Clark. It's a little funny when you hear the average Joe complain that nobody can relate to Superman, but it's easy to relate to Batman.

I guess there are countless traumatized kids out there who dress up like a bat and hit the streets seeking justice for the rest of their lives.

[Mulanzo]

I don't see the big deal about being able to relate to the guy. The point of these stories is to take you out of the real world and into their world. To tell a creative spin on common sense. To be an escape from reality. These guys are Superheros, not Super average Joes. Superman is supposed to be larger than life. When he steps into his suit, if we can relate to him then they have failed to make Superman super. As Clark, the son of Jonathan and Martha...fine. As Kal-El, son of Jor-El and as a guy who's lost everything about his culture... fine. As Superman? Give me a break. I don't get all the complaining when people say they can't relate to Superman... he's too much of a god or whatever else people complain about. Can you really honest to god relate to a multibillionaire who dresses as a bat, sleeps during the day, and jumps from 50 storey buildings with nothing else except a grappling hook? Can you relate to having an underground cave with a butler who can dress your wounds and stitch bulletproof suits for you in his spare time? Give me a break. Just enjoy the ride and shut up. Rant over. :)

[bgshw44]

I don't see the big deal about being able to relate to the guy. The point of these stories is to take you out of the real world and into their world. To tell a creative spin on common sense. To be an escape from reality. These guys are Superheros, not Super average Joes. Superman is supposed to be larger than life. When he steps into his suit, if we can relate to him then they have failed to make Superman super. As Clark, the son of Jonathan and Martha...fine. As Kal-El, son of Jor-El and as a guy who's lost everything about his culture... fine. As Superman? Give me a break. I don't get all the complaining when people say they can't relate to Superman... he's too much of a god or whatever else people complain about. Can you really honest to god relate to a multibillionaire who dresses as a bat, sleeps during the day, and jumps from 50 storey buildings with nothing else except a grappling hook? Can you relate to having an underground cave with a butler who can dress your wounds and stitch bulletproof suits for you in his spare time? Give me a break. Just enjoy the ride and shut up. Rant over. :)

another good point!

[Mostpowerful]

I see what you're saying about people relating to Clark compared to Superman. But they are the same person with the same feelings. Kal-El just puts on a different act b/w Clark and Supes. But I think many people relate to what Superman stands for and his character.

And the hair and spit curl is classic Superman so it appeals to me :cwink:




I understand your point, but I just don't agree with it. I don't think changing the hair style is going to make that many people relate to him any different or overlook the outfit. That's just my opinion on the matter.

Of course you hated the hair in SR while I didn't so naturally we are going to disagree.

I AGREE with this. Classic Superman hair also appeals to me,

http://www.dccomics.com/media/desktop_patterns/All_Star_Superman_1024x768.jpg

http://img6.imageshack.us/img6/5615/pdvd004ve2largedf8.jpg

http://www.ifanboy.com/comics/dc_comics/all_star_superman/10/cover-large.jpg

[Mulanzo]

Love the spit curl. Definitely an essential aspect. It hasn't always been used, but when it is used, it makes Superman THAT much better.

[Double Down]

Quitely draws it as a flat-out "S." It's kind of cool.

[bgshw44]

his hair was just terrible, it didnt look right, the curl didnt look right at all and i am a huge fan and it is definately a must have.

[bunk]

i hate all this you cant relate to superman nonsense. for me its simple, everyone is an ordinary guy (like clark) who believes inside they can do extraordinary things (like superman)

its not rocket science. i think you guys overthink superman wayyy to much, as well as WB.


WB wasn't over thinking anything with Superman. They were just thinking wrong.

[Webhead2006]

Yea i said this before with the curl i like it how it was on reeve. i didnt like how it was the other side of head on routh it just didnt look that great.

[BATZARRO WWD]

If we could only relate to characters that where like us, James Bond, and Annie (http://www.dvduruguay.com/dvd/placas/448zz.jpg) and Hip Hop would be nowhere. It's not always relatability, in a "(s)he's just like me way. It can be relatability in a "I know that's tough. Stories of characters deprived of basic nessecities, we don't always relate directly. Sure, I'm sure we're not all rich, but when the story is of a character comepletely deprived of something we're not, the dialogue between the audience character changes to "if it where me?". But in action/adventure/scifi it's far more common the "I wish I where that guy" characters who have extreme phisical, social or moral abilities, they elicit the role of wishfullfillment.

Or somptin lol

[DavidTyler]

Here's the problem with the 'spit curl'......

When Siegel originally drew supes... it was a stubborn forelock that fell down.... it wasn't an affectation that Superman adopts when changing into costume.

The evolution of the 'S' shaped spit curl forelock is very much akin to how Batman's costume came to having blue instead of black as it's theme. Fortunately the film makers have returned his colours back to the originally intended black. It's such a small thing for the next film maker to understand little things like correcting that affectation will add up to a better larger picture.

I'm not a fan of the obvious 'S' spit curl or the heavily gelled look. I'm very much in favour, however, of Superman's hair looking a bit disheveled after being in action. It make him more believable.

After all, does Superman style his hair before leaping into action?