Reintroducing Superman: An Open Discussion

[Closerframe]

I suggest they don't reveal the entire cast or plot to use instead we have to figure it out through a host of elaborate games.

[GreenKToo]

I suggest they don't reveal the entire cast or plot to use instead we have to figure it out through a host of elaborate games.
HA Ha oh man. That would drive folks mad, but the payout would be awesome.

[Showtime]

"Assuming", then. It may as well be the land of make believe for the details we have. A rumor from webmasters and people at WB that the script may not be up to par? Without any real sense of detail as to why? Well, that and a nickel...

I wonder how all those webmasters get exclusive articles from studios? They must spend plenty of time in fantasy land I guess? Just because you don't know all the details doesn't mean it isn't.

Am I really to believe that JLA fell apart because of some script rumors, none of which featured any level of detail? I'm sorry. I don't buy that for a second.

Small piece of the pie, the film had many issues, if you believe it to be only the tax problem then that is fine with me. Believe what you want.

Can't say for certain, but I'm pretty sure it was the tax thing that killed this project. WB wanted a tentpole, and wanted it soon, but they didn't want to pay through the nose for one. JLA was/is going to be an expensive movie, and WB was banking on the Australian tax break. This has flat out been stated in some detail, and it just seems awfully, awfully convenient that the project, which had preproduction underway on some level, crew hired, casting almost solidified, etc, conveniently ground to a halt right about that time.

Again, wasn't only the tax break, that was certainly part of it.

[Showtime]

they waited for him to make the prestige, so its not that strange

First, they didn't wait for him. It was "all part of the plan." Second, even if they did wait, it was for Nolan to direct a sequel to Batman, they weren't putting their whole DC film universe on hold waiting for him. So again, very strange.

[The Guard]

I wonder how all those webmasters get exclusive articles from studios? They must spend plenty of time in fantasy land I guess? Just because you don't know all the details doesn't mean it isn't.

Exclusive articles on what, exactly?

That JLA's script may or may not be up to par?

Wow. Groundbreaking, intriguing stuff.

I like to deal in facts. If a site has an exclusive with nothing resembling fact or any level of detail, while it's something to talk about for a while, I don't particularly care about said scoop. Very few of the JLA scoops were anything but "I heard from so and so that such and such, but I'm not at liberty to divulge what such and such is".

Small piece of the pie, the film had many issues, if you believe it to be only the tax problem then that is fine with me. Believe what you want.

Fair enough. That may be the case, but I feel that the tax situation is the only thing we have any concrete information about. I tend to believe WB wouldn't have gone THAT far into production without at least a serviceable script and some sense of capable actors. I just don't buy they'd risk a $200 million plus project without some planning involved. I have heard nothing concrete about the quality of the casting beyond that they were unknowns and nothing about the script beyond the basics.

Well, that's not true. I've heard plenty about the script and the screentests. But I'm not going to release any of this information, because then I wouldn't have an exclusive.

[Dark Knight]

Well, that's not true. I've heard plenty about the script and the screentests. But I'm not going to release any of this information, because then I wouldn't have an exclusive.




Thaaaats it! :word:

[Antonello Blueberry]

Reagrding the JLA script and the webmasters, the only one who reported something credibel about it was Patrick Sauriol (like here http://movieblog.ugo.com/movies/more-exclusive-story-info-about-the-justice-league-of-america-movie) and he never commented on the quality of it.
Most of the other stuff that popped online was fake stuff.

[Showtime]

Exclusive articles on what, exactly?

That JLA's script may or may not be up to par?

Wow. Groundbreaking, intriguing stuff.

I like to deal in facts. If a site has an exclusive with nothing resembling fact or any level of detail, while it's something to talk about for a while, I don't particularly care about said scoop. Very few of the JLA scoops were anything but "I heard from so and so that such and such, but I'm not at liberty to divulge what such and such is".

I was referring to webmasters in general, they know a lot more than the general public, most of them anyway. Most of the details they can't divulge publicly. That's how it works.

If you think the script was perfect by the end, then again, that is fine with me. The script came in better then it went out. If you want to take what a studio rep says at face value, by all means. Do so.

Fair enough. That may be the case, but I feel that the tax situation is the only thing we have any concrete information about. I tend to believe WB wouldn't have gone THAT far into production without at least a serviceable script and some sense of capable actors. I just don't buy they'd risk a $200 million plus project without some planning involved. I have heard nothing concrete about the quality of the casting beyond that they were unknowns and nothing about the script beyond the basics.

Aren't you a screenwriter? So then you know there are always rewrites on scripts whatever the stage of production might be. In this case, some of the needed rewrites couldn't be completed by the writers because of the strike. Again, just because you haven't heard it, doesn't mean it isn't.

Well, that's not true. I've heard plenty about the script and the screentests. But I'm not going to release any of this information, because then I wouldn't have an exclusive.

Come again?

[Showtime]

Reagrding the JLA script and the webmasters, the only one who reported something credibel about it was Patrick Sauriol (like here http://movieblog.ugo.com/movies/more-exclusive-story-info-about-the-justice-league-of-america-movie) and he never commented on the quality of it. Most of the other stuff that popped online was fake stuff.

Who said it was anything that was reported? You're in the film industry Antonello, why do you insist on taking whatever is fed to you by studio execs at face value...

[Antonello Blueberry]

I know that sometimes webmasters write about things they know close to nothing of and what they write is 50% bs.
Strange that none of these guys could get their hands on the latests draft of the script to review it.
And back to the BS, I hope that the kKte Beckinsale case will teach the printed news people not to trust and publish everything they read online. Tomorrow I'll be laughing my ass out reading the Justin Timberlake as Green Lantern news on the papers.

[Showtime]

I know that sometimes webmasters write about things they know close to nothing of and what they write is 50% bs.

I see you all over a lot of these sites getting credit for linking stories, I hope you're not setting them up with B.S.

What about the other 50%?


Strange that none of these guys could get their hands on the latests draft of the script to review it.

Why is that strange?

And back to the BS, I hope that the kKte Beckinsale case will teach the printed news people not to trust and publish everything they read online. Tomorrow I'll be laughing my ass out reading the Justin Timberlake as Green Lantern news on the papers.

What if that turned out to be true, would your face turn green?

[dark_b]

what was the Beckinsale news?

[Showtime]

I think that she had an arm load of comic books.

[FilmNerdJamie]

I think that she had an arm load of comic books.

That was Eva Longoria, I believe (http://www.iesb.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=5468&Itemid=99).

[RachelDawes]

Lex doesn't need to be in it. Much less a main character.

The GA might be Luthored out so he can probably be excluded from the next movie, assuming it's not a sequel. He can still be a presence in Metropolis, with ads for his company everywhere, news headlines featuring him, and people talking about him.

Is he really the most familiar these days? His appearance is, but not his story. I guarantee the general audience know Superman and that he's from a different planet that got blown up, but honestly that's not enough. They should see his real parents and what his father tried to do so they can generally sympathize with the character like they now can with Batman. When I meant viral marketing I was suggesting a Daily Planet website with news updates and a Brainiac version that has hacked files and mini games and such.

Just thinking of a TDK-style viral campaign is getting me so excited! :grin: I love your suggestion.

I suggest they don't reveal the entire cast or plot to use instead we have to figure it out through a host of elaborate games.

Too risky. WB can't take chances marketing the next Superman movie.

what was the Beckinsale news?

I heard she sued some magazine that said her career was in freefall and she lost a part to another actress or something like that.

[Superark]

I think that she had an arm load of comic books.

maybe she was buying them for her hubby :oldrazz:

[Dark Knight]

I think that she had an arm load of comic books.




???

Please elaborate more on this Show.....

[Showtime]

That was Eva Longoria, I believe (http://www.iesb.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=5468&Itemid=99).

I know. I was joking.

Antonello is referring to the Barbarella situation.

[Closerframe]

Too risky. WB can't take chances marketing the next Superman movie.




Not when it comes to revealing who the potential villain may or may not be. They can announce who's playing Superman and Lois, but don't give away what the villain looks like or if possible who it is. That's what made people so excited for The Dark Knight when they revealed the first picture for the Joker people went nuts.

[FilmNerdJamie]

I know. I was joking.

Antonello is referring to the Barbarella situation.

Oh................................................ ...........

[Superark]

I gotta say, its actually great to be discussing something newsworthy about Superman again

[Antonello Blueberry]

I see you all over a lot of these sites getting credit for linking stories, I hope you're not setting them up with B.S.

What about the other 50%?
I've had this discussion with a friend of mine who runs a rumor site here in Italy. (badtaste.it)
My position is that you shouldn't report rumors as if they are facts and when possible do a check on them. Not doing it is bad journalism.
Most of the times those rumors turn out to be BS. How many actors sure to be Green Lantern we read of?


Why is that strange?

Strange that people who apparently seem to know so much about what happened to the project, couldn't get their facts straight about the script or getting it like instead they've done with other projects.


What if that turned out to be true, would your face turn green?
No, unless I eat some rotten pepper.

[RachelDawes]

Not when it comes to revealing who the potential villain may or may not be. They can announce who's playing Superman and Lois, but don't give away what the villain looks like or if possible who it is. That's what made people so excited for The Dark Knight when they revealed the first picture for the Joker people went nuts.

I agree that hiding the villain's appearance for a while could be cool, but I don't think they can hide who the villain is or who plays him. I don't think they even should hide who the villain is because the villain is often the best part of the movie and brings in the most excitement.

[The Guard]

I was referring to webmasters in general, they know a lot more than the general public, most of them anyway. Most of the details they can't divulge publicly. That's how it works.

And it doesn't help that they don't divulge anything. Nor, if they don't divulge anything, and are incredibly vague, do I tend to care about any information they may or may not have. That makes me think any knowledge they are willing to share is vague and uninteresting.

If you think the script was perfect by the end, then again, that is fine with me. The script came in better then it went out. If you want to take what a studio rep says at face value, by all means. Do so.

Where did I say "The script was perfect by the end"? There's no such thing.

The script came in better than it went out? Based on what? Give me some details.

I don't even know what studio reps say. I take things studio reps say with about a truckload of salt, but I don't automatically assume they're lying, either.

Aren't you a screenwriter? So then you know there are always rewrites on scripts whatever the stage of production might be. In this case, some of the needed rewrites couldn't be completed by the writers because of the strike. Again, just because you haven't heard it, doesn't mean it isn't.

I'm an amateur screenwriter, I guess. Sure, there are rewrites that need to be done. I mean, I can buy that the script needed some rewrites, or that the writer's strike prevented them. That's fairly logical.

Ok, so then which rewrites couldn't be completed because of the strike?Specific ones, mind you, or this vague detail simply means nothing to me.

This is my point. Everything we've heard is vague, vague, vague.

Come again?

It was a joke. I got out of the rumor mill years ago.

Strange that people who apparently seem to know so much about what happened to the project, couldn't get their facts straight about the script or getting it like instead they've done with other projects.

Exactly.

[Closerframe]

I agree that hiding the villain's appearance for a while could be cool, but I don't think they can hide who the villain is or who plays him. I don't think they even should hide who the villain is because the villain is often the best part of the movie and brings in the most excitement.

It would interesting to go to the film's website and have the Brainiac symbol appear on the screen blinking. This automatically gives the viewer an indication of who the villain is. I'm pretty sure the villain would be leaked before this even happens through a interview or something and set pictures will probably be taken of his costume, but it'll be cool to see the official photo of the villain.

[biolumen]

The script came in better then it went out.

According to who? Steve at Save Superman makes the same claim, yet he also admits to never having read any version of the script. Have you?

See, this is where I have a problem. People stating opinions as fact, based on either personal biases or on comments made by 'insider sources' who almost certainly have their own biases, and given the general animosity towards the project from the start, it wasn't hard to find someone who'd say just about anything negative, true or not, in the hopes of generating as much bad buzz as possible.

[FilmNerdJamie]

According to who? Steve at Save Superman makes the same claim, yet he also admits to never having read any version of the script. Have you?

I wouldn't compare Showtime to King Jackass in any way, shape or form. One talks out of his ass constantly claiming to be "99% right about everything" when he's literally making stuff up always with a pro-Smallville bent and hating on Bryan Singer for being gay (most likely reason is he's struggling against his very own inner-homosexual) and Brandon Routh for being Superman...and the other is Showtime.

[Showtime]

According to who? Steve at Save Superman makes the same claim, yet he also admits to never having read any version of the script. Have you?

Steve at Save Superman also sent monkeys to Warner Bros, what's your point? Have you read the script, you were in denial for months that this film was happening and that the script was the best thing since sliced bread. I hate to break it to you, but positive buzz can also be bias.

See, this is where I have a problem. People stating opinions as fact, based on either personal biases or on comments made by 'insider sources' who almost certainly have their own biases, and given the general animosity towards the project from the start, it wasn't hard to find someone who'd say just about anything negative, true or not, in the hopes of generating as much bad buzz as possible.

As opposed to somebody who wants something so bad they will only believe or champion positive info on a project and still cling on desperately to the hope it might still happen.

I told you from the beginning the film wasn't happening. Still isn't. Nothing to do with bias, just reality.

[Antonello Blueberry]

Ok, do you have the latest draft of the script?

[Showtime]

Ok, do you have the latest draft of the script?

Nope. So you must be right. The script was awesome.

If you put blinders on, everything was perfect with the JLM production. Casting, Script, Budget, Tax Break. It all worked out.

This is why the film is happening. Will you go see it with me?

[Antonello Blueberry]

Nope. So you must be right. The script was awesome.

If you put blinders on, everything was perfect with the JLM production. Casting, Script, Budget, Tax Break. It all worked out.

This is why the film is happening. Will you go see it with me?
I think you're a bit too far from the theatres I usually go to.
As neither of us read the script, while Noveck did, I'd dare say his opinion is a bit more substantiated.
And regarding the rest of the production values of the movie, let me see:
Cinematography: Dean Semler - Won Oscar. Another 11 wins & 8 nominations
Production design by Owen Paterson - Nominated for 2 BAFTA Film Awards. Another 2 wins & 6 nominations
Costumes by WETA.
Well, I was pretty confident in the quality of the movie.
The Tax break thing didn't work out and the cast was done without regard to the fanboys audience and their internet connections.

[JAK®]

The only thing that sounded bad to me about Justice League: Mortal was the casting.

[Showtime]

I think you're a bit too far from the theatres I usually go to.

We don't have Cinema Paradiso chains around here.


As neither of us read the script, while Noveck did, I'd dare say his opinion is a bit more substantiated.And regarding the rest of the production values of the movie, let me see:

You realize that George Miller and Noveck actually contributed to later drafts. So it is your contention that their drafts were better than the Mulroney's whose draft was featured on the "Black List".

Cinematography: Dean Semler - Won Oscar. Another 11 wins & 8 nominations Production design by Owen Paterson - Nominated for 2 BAFTA Film Awards. Another 2 wins & 6 nominations
Costumes by WETA.Well, I was pretty confident in the quality of the movie.

I don't remember mentioning the quality of the movie, but if you're into deflection, then you're spot on approach wise.

The Tax break thing didn't work out and the cast was done without regard to the fanboys audience and their internet connections.

It is my opinion that people like D.J. Cotrona, Arnie Hammer, Elizabeth Gale dont' really stack up next to the Robert Downey Jrs and Christian Bales of the world. That being said, that was only part of it. This project was troubled from the start.

It is what it is.

[FilmNerdJamie]

And regarding the rest of the production values of the movie, let me see:
Cinematography: Dean Semler - Won Oscar. Another 11 wins & 8 nominations
Production design by Owen Paterson - Nominated for 2 BAFTA Film Awards. Another 2 wins & 6 nominations
Costumes by WETA.
Well, I was pretty confident in the quality of the movie.

Just because a film looks great (i.e. cinematography, art-direction, visual effects, etc.) doesn't automatically mean it will in fact be great in terms of direction, writing, performances, etc.

[The Guard]

Showtime...I don't know what your sources are, but it's apparent that either they didn't have many details (like anyone), or that they didn't share them, or that you won't share them. So you'll understand if people question how much they/you know about the JLA project beyond the obvious: It isn't happening for some reason.

No one here has said that everything was perfect about JLA. And obviously the film isn't happening. I have no idea why you are implying that people have said otherwise.

I'm sure there were issues, there were always going to be issues with a project of that scale. Let's look at this logically, though.

WB, quite possiblity the most paranoid and pickiest studio in the world when it comes to superhero movies and massive tentpoles, put JLA: MORTAL (or whatever it was actually called) into production. Out of all the projects they could have worked on, they chose the script and the concept of JLA.

Why?

Because they had some half-decent script they thought they could make work if the project was rushed? I kind of doubt it.

Were they just stupid, and didn't realize this would be a huge budget? Doubt it.

I'm sure there were logistics involved. I'm sure budget, casting, and a number of other things were an issue. They were bound to be on some level.

It is my opinion that people like D.J. Cotrona, Arnie Hammer, Elizabeth Gale dont' really stack up next to the Robert Downey Jrs and Christian Bales of the world. That being said, that was only part of it. This project was troubled from the start.

Troubled in what sense?

Do you have any details about what needed work in the script, etc?

[Showtime]

Showtime...come on.

I don't know what your sources are, but it's obvious that either they didn't have many details (like anyone), or that they didn't share them, or that you won't share them. So you'll understand if people question how much they/you know about the JLA project beyond the obvious: It isn't happening for some reason.

I shared everything I knew about JLA during the entire fiasco on these boards and elsewhere. So I don't mind if people question me at this point.

No one here has said that everything was perfect about JLA. And obviously the film isn't happening. I'm sure there were issues, there were always going to be issues with a project of that scale.

Let's look at this logically, though.

There were obviously more issues with this project then a project that actually happens.

WB, quite possiblity the most paranoid and pickiest studio in the world when it comes to superhero movies and massive tentpoles, put JLA into production. Out of all the projects they could have worked on, they chose the script and the concept of JLA.

Why?

Because they had some half-decent script? I kind of doubt it.

Right, the greenlit the script that the Mulroney's wrote which was featured on the "Black List". I don't remember mentioning there was anything wrong with the first draft?

I'm sure there were logistics involved. I'm sure budget, casting, and a number of other things were an issue. They were bound to be on some level.


They were on such a level that the movie was canned.

Troubled in what sense?

I guess it doesn't matter because if you didn't hear it it couldn't be true.

[GreenKToo]

I think Nolan and singer had just as much to do with its downfall as anything and everything else did. That, along with the tax break problems and the bad pr about the cast, put a bullet in it imo.

[Showtime]

For sure. That is another piece of the pie.

It wasn't just the script, it wasn't just the tax break, wasn't just the bad buzz from the cast, wasn't just the budget, wasn't just Nolan and Singer, it was all of the above.

I'm not sure why that is so outrageous.

[GreenKToo]

For sure. That is another piece of the pie.

It wasn't just the script, it wasn't just the tax break, wasn't just the bad buzz from the cast, wasn't just the budget, wasn't just Nolan and Singer, it was all of the above.

I'm not sure why that is so outrageous.
This is strictly just how I felt, but when the casting rumors came out, I had a bad feeling about it happening then, an I wanted a J.L. film as much as anyone, and still do.

And you know what, I have my doubts about G.L. happening as well. when delays and bad pr with rumors of casting start making its rounds, it doesnt bode well.
Its usually means its either in a hella mess or it aint happening.

[bunk]

I am curious what the final nail in the coffin was though, if there was one.

[GreenKToo]

Methinks nolan. just my opinion tho.

[The Guard]

For sure. That is another piece of the pie.

It wasn't just the script, it wasn't just the tax break, wasn't just the bad buzz from the cast, wasn't just the budget, wasn't just Nolan and Singer, it was all of the above.

I'm not sure why that is so outrageous.

It's not outrageous. It's just vague.

It's akin to saying "The project fell through because the project fell through" to me.

[Showtime]

I've had this discussion with a friend of mine who runs a rumor site here in Italy. (badtaste.it)

Good site. Been there. Is that a Peter Jackson reference?

My position is that you shouldn't report rumors as if they are facts and when possible do a check on them. Not doing it is bad journalism.Most of the times those rumors turn out to be BS. How many actors sure to be Green Lantern we read of?

Isn't all casting info a rumor until somebody is actually cast though?

Strange that people who apparently seem to know so much about what happened to the project, couldn't get their facts straight about the script or getting it like instead they've done with other projects.

I would imagine the script was perfect, that is why.

[Showtime]

And it doesn't help that they don't divulge anything. Nor, if they don't divulge anything, and are incredibly vague, do I tend to care about any information they may or may not have. That makes me think any knowledge they are willing to share is vague and uninteresting.

I guess you don't surf many film websites then.

Where did I say "The script was perfect by the end"? There's no such thing. The script came in better than it went out? Based on what? Give me some details.

I've already given details over and over again on The Hype and elsewhere.

I don't even know what studio reps say. I take things studio reps say with about a truckload of salt, but I don't automatically assume they're lying, either.

Good.

I'm an amateur screenwriter, I guess. Sure, there are rewrites that need to be done. I mean, I can buy that the script needed some rewrites, or that the writer's strike prevented them. That's fairly logical.

I'm glad we agree on something.

Ok, so then which rewrites couldn't be completed because of the strike?Specific ones, mind you, or this vague detail simply means nothing to me.

Then I guess we have hit an impasse.

This is my point. Everything we've heard is vague, vague, vague.

Probably shouldn't pay attention to forums, websites, or studios then you're never going to get all the details.

[Showtime]

It's not outrageous. It's just vague.

It's akin to saying "The project fell through because the project fell through" to me.

You already said you don't buy for a second it had anything to do with the script. So it is what it is. I'm not sure what there is left to discuss frankly?

[bunk]

Isn't all casting info a rumor until somebody is actually cast though?


Aren't screen tests confirmed some of the time? Or if an actor says they auditioned for something, or read a script. To me that's more substantial than what I would consider a rumor.

[Showtime]

Aren't screen tests confirmed some of the time? Or if an actor says they auditioned for something, or read a script. To me that's more substantial than what I would consider a rumor.

I guess like anything else it depends who is confirming it.

[The Guard]

I guess you don't surf many film websites then.
Why, did I miss something major? Was there some level of detail about anything other than the cast rumors, special effects and costumes, and the basic story of JLA and the tax issues that went beyond the incredibly vague?

I've already given details over and over again on The Hype and elsewhere.

I don't remember too many concrete story details. But let's say you did give some. I don't read everything here, and may have missed something. Can you elaborate on the issues with the script?

You already said you don't buy for a second it had anything to do with the script. So it is what it is. I'm not sure what there is left to discuss frankly?

Where did I say that?

I said this:

"I mean, I can buy that the script needed some rewrites, or that the writer's strike prevented them. That's fairly logical."

I did say this:

"Am I really to believe that JLA fell apart because of some script rumors, none of which featured any level of detail? I'm sorry. I don't buy that for a second."

Which was in response to Ant saying this:

"I think the project was killed more by the bad word of mouth he earned for the cast (and a couple of fake script reviews and rumors).:

I think I deleted his quote or something. But I don't recall saying I didn't buy that it had anything to do with the script. Just that I thought it had more to do with tax breaks.

[Showtime]

Why, did I miss something major? Was there some level of detail about anything other than the cast rumors, special effects and costumes, and the basic story of JLA and the tax issues that went beyond the incredibly vague?

Not what I meant...

And it doesn't help that they don't divulge anything. Nor, if they don't divulge anything, and are incredibly vague, do I tend to care about any information they may or may not have. That makes me think any knowledge they are willing to share is vague and uninteresting.

My point being, if you feel that way about film websites, you must not frequent them all that much.


I don't remember too many concrete story details. But let's say you did give some. I don't read everything here, and may have missed something. Can you elaborate on the issues with the script?


I rather be vague at this point.


Where did I say that?

I said this:

"I mean, I can buy that the script needed some rewrites, or that the writer's strike prevented them. That's fairly logical."

But I don't recall saying I didn't buy that it had anything to do with the script.

In that case, what are you debating with me about?

[GreenKToo]

It doesnt matter now anyway. THAT version is dead. If we ever see JL, it will be totally different from that one.

[Fresh Prince]

It doesnt matter now anyway. THAT version is dead. If we ever see JL, it will be totally different from that one.

We do not need a Justice League Superman film.

[biolumen]

I wouldn't compare Showtime to King Jackass in any way, shape or form.It wasn't meant to be a comparison of character. Steve is a liar and a buffoon. Showtime isn't.
Have you read the script?I'm not the one making claims to the quality of the script, be it pre or post rewrite. Not having read any version of said script, I in fact do not know which version is more appealing.you were in denial for months that this film was happening and that the script was the best thing since sliced breadI admit to hoping for the movie to happen despite the odds against it. Your defensive comment that I thought the script was 'the best thing since sliced bread', however, is beneath even you. At no time did I ever claim to know how good the script was. Not having ever read it, how could I? Please keep in mind that hoping for something to be true and claiming that same thing to be The Truth are two different things.
As opposed to somebody who wants something so bad they will only believe or champion positive info on a project and still cling on desperately to the hope it might still happen.I didn't believe just the positives, but I do admit to championing them, if only to counter the masses who championed the negatives. David vs. Goliath if you will. Point taken, though.You realize that George Miller and Noveck actually contributed to later drafts. So it is your contention that their drafts were better than the Mulroney's whose draft was featured on the "Black List".It's you're contention that they aren't. What the Mulroneys submitted sounds like a first draft. Don't scripts usually go through several drafts up to, and at times, through filming? Sometimes this works against a script. Other times, it works to its betterment. Thing is, we don't know what's the case here. Except you, apparently.It doesnt matter now anyway. THAT version is dead. If we ever see JL, it will be totally different from that one. It's dead, that's for sure, and given WB's superhero film schedule, I'm not optimistic we'll ever see one.

[Antonello Blueberry]

Good site. Been there. Is that a Peter Jackson reference?
Yes, it is. Sometimes they sell things as they're fact.
"Barndon Routh won't be Superman ever more" is not written in stone for example.


Isn't all casting info a rumor until somebody is actually cast though?

Yes, and you have to report it as a rumor. You have to make a difference between being in a list, considered, tested, signed.
I have a list of directors for my movie that goes from Terry Gilliam to Uwe Boll, but I only approached Gilliam once (and I'm going to do it again before moving to my second choice). It will be a long time before someone really commits on working on it with me. Hoping to be still living by that time.


I would imagine the script was perfect, that is why.
Again, I would like to read the various drafts to judge myself or at least read a motivated script review. Possibly not by El Mayimbe.

[Antonello Blueberry]

For sure. That is another piece of the pie.

It wasn't just the script, it wasn't just the tax break, wasn't just the bad buzz from the cast, wasn't just the budget, wasn't just Nolan and Singer, it was all of the above.

I'm not sure why that is so outrageous.
On that I can agree.

[Showtime]

It wasn't meant to be a comparison of character. Steve is a liar and a buffoon. Showtime isn't.

I'll take solace in that.

I'm not the one making claims to the quality of the script, be it pre or post rewrite. Not having read any version of said script, I in fact do not know which version is more appealing.

I don't know what you want to hear. If you don't agree with me, or don't think the script was worse at the end than it was at the beginning. That is perfectly fine with me. I can't tell you what to think.

I admit to hoping for the movie to happen despite the odds against it. Your defensive comment that I thought the script was 'the best thing since sliced bread', however, is beneath even you. At no time did I ever claim to know how good the script was. Not having ever read it, how could I? Please keep in mind that hoping for something to be true and claiming that same thing to be The Truth are two different things.

It's you're contention that they aren't. What the Mulroneys submitted sounds like a first draft. Don't scripts usually go through several drafts up to, and at times, through filming? Sometimes this works against a script. Other times, it works to its betterment. Thing is, we don't know what's the case here. Except you, apparently.

Listen, I stated that later drafts of the script ended up being worse than it was at the beginning. The Mulroney's handed it a solid draft and because of subsequent rewrites, it went downhill. You don't want to believe it. Don't. I'm not here to try and convince you, if you don't think it is true. Perfectly fine.

Instead of debating me on it, why don't you do some homework and ask around. Ask the people that count. Why don't you do what I do and have been doing for years, get your hands dirty. Don't sit in front of the computer saying "That's not true!" Send out an email, make a phone call, find out for yourself.

You want to make comments like "Except you apparently" ask around. Find out what happened. You'll find that it isn't just me, that others have the same info. You can't honestly say that I have some kind of bias towards the project, I'm just telling you like it is.

My comments are all still on The Hype, on my old blog, and on my website in articles I've written. I don't erase them or edit them. When I had legit info that JLM was happening I reported, when I had info saying the contrary I reported it. I stand behind what I say, I don't hide.

[Showtime]

Yes, it is.

Nice

Sometimes they sell things as they're fact."Barndon Routh won't be Superman ever more" is not written in stone for example.

It depends how it is worded. "We are hearing some rumblings that Brandon Routh will not be Superman again." "We are hearing from our sources that Brandon Routh's contract has expired."

Brandon can obviously sign a new contract and still take on the role, but the odds of that happening went down when the contract expired. Then we hear about the ruling and WB needs a Superman movie, might it be easier to just bring Routh back because of the timing.

Things change. So do stories.

Yes, and you have to report it as a rumor. You have to make a difference between being in a list, considered, tested, signed.I have a list of directors for my movie that goes from Terry Gilliam to Uwe Boll, but I only approached Gilliam once (and I'm going to do it again before moving to my second choice). It will be a long time before someone really commits on working on it with me. Hoping to be still living by that time.

I can't argue that, as above it is in how you word it. I like the Terry Gilliam idea.

Again, I would like to read the various drafts to judge myself or at least read a motivated script review. Possibly not by El Mayimbe.

...and that is fine. I respect that. I can't tell you how to think or what to think.

However, I just don't make things up. I do my homework.

[Superman Prime]

What compelled them to do rewrites?

[Fresh Prince]

A Peter Jackson Supes film might be good.

[DavidTyler]

We have films like Terminator, Star Trek, Transformers, The Dark Knight, Iron Man, and they're all doing good (sometimes great) box office.

Why can't the studio take a tip from those successes and translate it to Superman?

Superman is and always was a Science Fiction character with a lot of action and some romance. It's only the campy years where he bacame Captain Superhero.

Superman needs to go back to what he was originally - a tuned up human with special abilities who was based in a semi-realistic world. Metropolis needs to be as real as Law and Order SVU. Superman himself needs to be a well thought out science fiction character. He needs to face adversaries with that same bent. Luthor is great as a corrupt Corporate genious with his fingers in everything. He should always be a scientific genious but also a master manipulator.

No more campy Clark, Lois, Jimmy, Lex, or Perry. Make me believe they're real people without changing them from the characters I know from their long histories on the printed page.

Accept the fact the Clark is a real person. You can't continue to have him played like a nerd and have an audience accept him as a real person. Conversely, Superman has to be more real world saavy. He can't have experienced all the things he's been through and not be aware of the subtleties of the human condition. No more naive Superman.

Clark can and should be a quiet, considerate guy willing to blend into the background so as to not draw a lot attention to himself. This does NOT mean he needs to create a nebbishy personality to hide the fact that he's got another identity. Let's keep in mind that most of the people in his world don't think that Superman HAS another identity.

And, as Superman, Clark should be fast to act and aggressive. He should always strive to do the right thing but it would be fine if he showed anger from time to time. Let's remember that Seigel and Shuster created him as a wish fullfillment to deal with bullys from their childhood. With that said .. he should never act as if he's in charge of the police or any other kind of authority but it's OK for him to act a little impulsively when angered. It doesn't make him less of a hero but it certainly keeps him from being a saint and being a saint (or erszats messiah) has been at the root of why the GP thinks of the character as a cartoon.

I've got more but I'll stop here.

[Fresh Prince]

We have films like Terminator, Star Trek, Transformers, The Dark Knight, Iron Man, and they're all doing good (sometimes great) box office.

Why can't the studio take a tip from those successes and translate it to Superman?

Superman is and always was a Science Fiction character with a lot of action and some romance. It's only the campy years where he bacame Captain Superhero.

Superman needs to go back to what he was originally - a tuned up human with special abilities who was based in a semi-realistic world. Metropolis needs to be as real as Law and Order SVU. Superman himself needs to be a well thought out science fiction character. He needs to face adversaries with that same bent. Luthor is great as a corrupt Corporate genious with his fingers in everything. He should always be a scientific genious but also a master manipulator.

No more campy Clark, Lois, Jimmy, Lex, or Perry. Make me believe they're real people without changing them from the characters I know from their long histories on the printed page.

Accept the fact the Clark is a real person. You can't continue to have him played like a nerd and have an audience accept him as a real person. Conversely, Superman has to be more real world saavy. He can't have experienced all the things he's been through and not be aware of the subtleties of the human condition. No more naive Superman.

Clark can and should be a quiet, considerate guy willing to blend into the background so as to not draw a lot attention to himself. This does NOT mean he needs to create a nebbishy personality to hide the fact that he's got another identity. Let's keep in mind that most of the people in his world don't think that Superman HAS another identity.

And, as Superman, Clark should be fast to act and aggressive. He should always strive to do the right thing but it would be fine if he showed anger from time to time. Let's remember that Seigel and Shuster created him as a wish fullfillment to deal with bullys from their childhood. With that said .. he should never act as if he's in charge of the police or any other kind of authority but it's OK for him to act a little impulsively when angered. It doesn't make him less of a hero but it certainly keeps him from being a saint and being a saint (or erszats messiah) has been at the root of why the GP thinks of the character as a cartoon.

I've got more but I'll stop here.

Agreed. I love Clark Kent from STAS to be like that in the film also have a mixute of corporate Lex and scientists. Also you want the city of Metropolis to be like NY in Law & Order SVU? That be cool.

Also have a villian Superman fights with. I love Eradicator.

[BATZARRO WWD]

Well, Showtime, the thing is, making a qualitative statement is directly related to what one has experienced. If you say, "Hey, my sources tell Miley Cyrus grew a third eye and a tail", it's easilly verifiable. One quick interview and a check of the forehead can tell you if that rumor is true or false.

But to say script became worse is a qualitative judgement. It's kind of the equivalent of saying "my sources say the soup tastes terrible!". "Hey, did you taste the soup? What, is it bitter or overly salty?" "Aww it's just bad in an ambiguous way that I will not elaborate on".

I'm just saying, if you can't say anything concrete then why even bring it up at all? If you did read it, and it's riddled with bad dialogues, and ideas, that I can understand. But you COULD say "Hey, I read it, it's bad". If your saying "my cousin read it(and the rewrites...somehow) and says it sucks, then that's beyond secondhand information: it's seconhand opinions and secondhand critique.

But that's a moot point, now, isn't it? That ship has sailed.

[Showtime]

Well, Showtime, the thing is, making a qualitative statement is directly related to what one has experienced. If you say, "Hey, my sources tell Miley Cyrus grew a third eye and a tail", it's easilly verifiable. One quick interview and a check of the forehead can tell you if that rumor is true or false.

But to say script became worse is a qualitative judgement. It's kind of the equivalent of saying "my sources say the soup tastes terrible!". "Hey, did you taste the soup? What, is it bitter or overly salty?" "Aww it's just bad in an ambiguous way that I will not elaborate on".

I'm just saying, if you can't say anything concrete then why even bring it up at all? If you did read it, and it's riddled with bad dialogues, and ideas, that I can understand. But you COULD say "Hey, I read it, it's bad". If your saying "my cousin read it(and the rewrites...somehow) and says it sucks, then that's beyond secondhand information: it's seconhand opinions and secondhand critique.

But that's a moot point, now, isn't it? That ship has sailed.

You're right about one thing, it is pointless to bring it up at all. A waste of my time if you will.

[Fresh Prince]

Can we get back to Supes film discussions?

[Ita-KalEl]

Can we get back to Supes film discussions?

Of course, at WB they have no plans to develop a new Superman film. End of discussion...

[Sam]

We have films like Terminator, Star Trek, Transformers, The Dark Knight, Iron Man, and they're all doing good (sometimes great) box office.

actually, termiator BO sucked.

Superman Returns had a much better BO, and was against the smash success Pirates 2.

All other movies were pretty good at BO.

[Ita-KalEl]

actually, termiator BO sucked.

Superman Returns had a much better BO, and was agains the smash success Pirates 2.

All other movies were pretty good at BO.

I know that for someone is simply impossible but Superman Returns had a far better box office than Star Trek ($377,160,171 ww).
SR made $391,081,192 ww (more than $400m adjusted for inflation).

[Sam]

I know that for someone is simply impossible but Superman Returns had a far better box office than Star Trek ($377,160,171 ww).
SR made $391,081,192 ww (more than $400m adjusted for inflation).

Yeah, thats true.

Star Trek had a small international BO, but a very good USA BO. Overall, its less than SR.

[GL's Light]

Well, $391 million is a bit more than $377 million, but saying it's "far better" is overstating the matter significantly. Plus Star Trek had a much better return on its budget than Superman Returns. Hence why there'll be a fast-tracked sequel to Star Trek.

[Antonello Blueberry]

Still, SR made more money than Star Trek and Wolverine, and Terminator Salvation in theaters and more than $60 million in merchandising revenues.

[dark_b]

I know that for someone is simply impossible but Superman Returns had a far better box office than Star Trek ($377,160,171 ww).
SR made $391,081,192 ww (more than $400m adjusted for inflation).thats true.

but on the other had werent people saying that star trek was no popular to the masses? that it was only for hardcore fans? and werent they saying that superman will make obvious a lot of money because its ''superman''
?

[Antonello Blueberry]

We do not need a Justice League Superman film.
Superman and the Justice League.
In theatres Summer 2012.
Sounds better than Justice League: Mortal

[dark_b]

Well, $391 million is a bit more than $377 million, but saying it's "far better" is overstating the matter significantly. Plus Star Trek had a much better return on its budget than Superman Returns. Hence why there'll be a fast-tracked sequel to Star Trek.some are saying that star trek was around 200 millions.

the word of mouth for ST was a lot better then for SR IMO

[JAK®]

Superman Returns 'bombed' at 391 Million because it was expected to be a mega-hit. It was also one of the first 200 Million plus movies, so any kind of loss in BO was going to be exacerbated.

[dark_b]

Superman Returns 'bombed' at 391 Million because it was expected to be a mega-hit. It was also one of the first 200 Million plus movies, so any kind of loss in BO was going to be exacerbated.spiderman 2
titanic

[JAK®]

spiderman 2
titanic
Like I said, one of the first. Titanic was infamous before its release for its gigantic budget, and Spider-Man 2 was the sequel to an incredibly successful movie, so it wasn't as much of a risk. When SR was being made, it was still unusual for a movie to cost over 200 Million.

[FilmNerdJamie]

One of the first? Uh, no.

[JAK®]

Is this going to be a battle of semantics?

[dark_b]

Like I said, one of the first. Titanic was infamous before its release for its gigantic budget, and Spider-Man 2 was the sequel to an incredibly successful movie, so it wasn't as much of a risk. When SR was being made, it was still unusual for a movie to cost over 200 Million.all fair .
i just gave examples that it was not one of the first.

[BenReilly]

spiderman 2
titanic

Also, Terminator 3 and King Kong.

[dark_b]

Also, Terminator 3 and King Kong.really?
:wow:

[spider-neil]

imho superman fails because there is no real threat. when are script writers going to stop bringing superman down to the level of crooks (power wise) and start raising the crooks to the level of superman.

when (WHEN!!) is superman going to face down a character that is more powerful than he is? SR bored me to frigging tears as singer tried to do spider-man's 'everyman' to a character that just doesn't fit that style of story writing, then he has the AUDACITY to say 'I'm going to go all wrath of kane with the sequal.' here's an idea singer, why didn't you go 'wrath of kane' with the movie superman fans had been waiting TEN FRIGGING YEARS for.

you want to make superman bring in batman/spider-man numbers at the box office? give him someone to hit, it's not rocket science.

[Ultimate_Superman]

To be honest Superman Returns box office is pretty impressive if you take into account it came out during during a summer for of action movies (POTC: DMC, X3) and with little to no action came away with the box office it did faster reaching 200 million faster then the great Batman Begins at that which had action in it. I do see where the WB is coming from in their stand point that it should have made more money but IMO for the type of movie it was (a superhero movie with no super villain and no action) I think it did pretty good. Had Singer thrown in a villain for him to fight I think it would have made 250 easy.

[spider-neil]

To be honest Superman Returns box office is pretty impressive if you take into account it came out during during a summer for of action movies (POTC: DMC, X3) and with little to no action came away with the box office it did faster reaching 200 million faster then the great Batman Begins at that which had action in it. I do see where the WB is coming from in their stand point that it should have made more money but IMO for the type of movie it was (a superhero movie with no super villain and no action) I think it did pretty good. Had Singer thrown in a villain for him to fight I think it would have made 250 easy.

superman is argubly the most iconic hero in the world (yes even more so than spidey and I'm a spidey fan) no movie starring superman that makes less than 500m worldwide can be considered a success, he should be able to that in his sleep, he's superman for pete's sake.

[Ultimate_Superman]

superman is argubly the most iconic hero in the world (yes even more so than spidey and I'm a spidey fan) no movie starring superman that makes less than 500m worldwide can be considered a success, he should be able to that in his sleep, he's superman for pete's sake.
you are confusing iconic with popularity. Yes Superman is iconic but he isn't as popular as he once was. Look at his comic sells during and before the time of Superman Returns and even after Superman Returns. Spider-Man, Iron Man, Batman, X-Men are the popular heroes now. People may respect Superman for what he has done for the comics and superhero movie genre but he is far from the status in popular votes he once was. That's what people need to understand about him.

[GL's Light]

Comic sales don't always correlate to box office, though. Putting aside the issue of return on investment, Superman Returns sold a decent number of tickets by the standards of the superhero film genre, especially given the design of the film, but a Superman film could make substantially more at the box office if it delivered on every front - especially in terms of action - what most moviegoers are looking for from blockbusters.

[Ultimate_Superman]

Comic sales don't always correlate to box office, though. Putting aside the issue of return on investment, Superman Returns sold a decent number of tickets by the standards of the superhero film genre, especially given the design of the film, but a Superman film could make substantially more at the box office if it delivered on every front - especially in terms of action - what most moviegoers are looking for from blockbusters.
And I agree but what I am saying is for a movie with no action the box office it did make was pretty good. Now if it had more action I think it would have made 250 easy.

[spider-neil]

Comic sales don't always correlate to box office, though. Putting aside the issue of return on investment, Superman Returns sold a decent number of tickets by the standards of the superhero film genre, especially given the design of the film, but a Superman film could make substantially more at the box office if it delivered on every front - especially in terms of action - what most moviegoers are looking for from blockbusters.


exactly. if the movie had kickarse action more people would have gone to see it. transformers 2 is an absolute pile of **** but has kick arse action and has done more then 700m worldwide at the box office.
if singer had delivered more action more people would have gone to watch it, simple as that.

before someone brings up hulk 2 having more action than hulk 1 but making less money at the box office, the audience had been burnt with the first one. once bitten twice shy.

[FilmNerdJamie]

Now if it had more action I think it would have made 250 easy.

I'm not even sure about that, frankly.

Superman Returns was "all story with some but not much action," but still managed its $200 million box-office. Terminator: Salvation was "all action with some but not much story," but only managed to nab $122 million. And that was with a more visible property (to the general public), bigger name actors involved and a better release date.

[GL's Light]

Looking to future Superman films, I don't think more action alone is the key to higher grosses - although it's an important element. I also think you need a characterization of Superman/Clark Kent and Lois Lane that audiences are more comfortable with.

[JAK®]

I'm not even sure about that, frankly.

Superman Returns was "all story with some but not much action," but still managed its $200 million box-office. Terminator: Salvation was "all action with some but not much story," but only managed to nab $122 million. And that was with a more visible property (to the general public), bigger name actors involved and a better release date.
But Transformers was all action and no story and it's earned 700 Million.

I believe the formula is:

- Big Action
- Great Effects
- Popular Actors
- Humour
- Likeable characters. This is the key. People liked Optimus Prime and Bumblebee in Transformers. This is why it got away with such a terrible story, people just enjoyed seeing these characters.

[FilmNerdJamie]

Transformers had a better ad campaign with "giant robots that beat each other up" and made it a point to flash Steven Spielberg's name all over the place. That helped too.

[Antonello Blueberry]

imho superman fails because there is no real threat. when are script writers going to stop bringing superman down to the level of crooks (power wise) and start raising the crooks to the level of superman.

when (WHEN!!) is superman going to face down a character that is more powerful than he is?
Superman II? Like 30 years ago?

[GL's Light]

Superman II? Like 30 years ago?
And, er, Nuclear Man in '87. :dry:

[spider-neil]

Superman II? Like 30 years ago?

yes superman 2 had it and made a fortune.

[Antonello Blueberry]

Superman The movie made more money with a non superpowered villain with a real estate criminal plan.

[Showtime]

Can we get back to Supes film discussions?

This is an "open discussion" this is the one thread that CAN go off topic.

Is this going to be a battle of semantics?

No. Facts. :csad:

yes superman 2 had it and made a fortune.

Superman II: $262,419,544 (Adjusted For Inflation)
Superman Returns: $219,368,185 (Adjusted For Inflation)

[Antonello Blueberry]

Superman: The movie $411,831,400 (Adjusted For Inflation)

[GL's Light]

Superman: The Movie was a great film and a great success, but Superman movies are still better off having more action in today's marketplace, which is a very different marketplace for superhero films compared to 1978 when S:TM was the first really big superhero film ever made.

[Ursa]

But Transformers was all action and no story and it's earned 700 Million.

I believe the formula is:

- Big Action
- Great Effects
- Popular Actors
- Humour
- Likeable characters. This is the key. People liked Optimus Prime and Bumblebee in Transformers. This is why it got away with such a terrible story, people just enjoyed seeing these characters.


Please, no! Superman can't become a "Tran****"! Transformers just did good because the first one was "watchable", the marketing campaign was successful, an because of teenagers boys who don't pay attention on the script, they only care about action sequences and Megan Fox's body, it's that generation who don't pay attention in anything for more than 5 minutes, that's why they go watch the movie several times, they forget the story after a couple of hours later.

Superman needs a good script, with smart dialogues and great sequences, a talented director and talented actors. It must be well done like was Spiderman, Iron Man, Batman and Star Trek, but with his own identity.

A summer blockbuster can be intelligent and fun in the same time.

[Fresh Prince]

you are confusing iconic with popularity. Yes Superman is iconic but he isn't as popular as he once was. Look at his comic sells during and before the time of Superman Returns and even after Superman Returns. Spider-Man, Iron Man, Batman, X-Men are the popular heroes now. People may respect Superman for what he has done for the comics and superhero movie genre but he is far from the status in popular votes he once was. That's what people need to understand about him.

Well Superman boring now all he does is kiss ass and not show no aggression or kickass when fighting villians. Also he the perfect person. So come on.

[Fresh Prince]

Please, no! Superman can't become a "Tran****"! Transformers just did good because the first one was "watchable", the marketing campaign was successful, an because of teenagers boys who don't pay attention on the script, they only care about action sequences and Megan Fox's body, it's that generation who don't pay attention in anything for more than 5 minutes, that's why they go watch the movie several times, they forget the story after a couple of hours later.

Superman needs a good script, with smart dialogues and great sequences, a talented director and talented actors. It must be well done like was Spiderman, Iron Man, Batman and Star Trek, but with his own identity.

A summer blockbuster can be intelligent and fun in the same time.

I did not watch Transformers for action and Meagon Fox body. First one was pretty good but second one was trash.

[Ita-KalEl]

Well, $391 million is a bit more than $377 million, but saying it's "far better" is overstating the matter significantly. Plus Star Trek had a much better return on its budget than Superman Returns. Hence why there'll be a fast-tracked sequel to Star Trek.

Far better considering the merchandise.
The point is that despite the hate of a part of the fans. SR can be considered a decent reintroduction (391m ww at the b.o.; a good amount of merchandise sold; 78% of good reviews at rottentomatoes.com), but at WB they have decided that it was a failure, so it needs to be reintroduced again....and we have to wait other 10-20 years.
When I supported the sequel, I was sure that no sequel would have meant no superman for a lot of time. Steve and the other "geniuses" of SaveSuperman.com are happy that "Singerman is death", but where is their reboot? The answer is that there isn't any reboot and at WB they have no plan to make one.

[dark_b]

This is an "open discussion" this is the one thread that CAN go off topic.



No. Facts. :csad:



Superman II: $262,419,544 (Adjusted For Inflation)
Superman Returns: $219,368,185 (Adjusted For Inflation)ohhhh no you didnt post the ''inflation'' numbers.

oh no you didnt. :hehe:

[dark_b]

Please, no! Superman can't become a "Tran****"! Transformers just did good because the first one was "watchable", the marketing campaign was successful, an because of teenagers boys who don't pay attention on the script, they only care about action sequences and Megan Fox's body, it's that generation who don't pay attention in anything for more than 5 minutes, that's why they go watch the movie several times, they forget the story after a couple of hours later.

Superman needs a good script, with smart dialogues and great sequences, a talented director and talented actors. It must be well done like was Spiderman, Iron Man, Batman and Star Trek, but with his own identity.

A summer blockbuster can be intelligent and fun in the same time.there are not enogh horny 13 year old boys on this world for a TF movie to make 600 millions.

superman needs? no its we who want it to be smart and good. but it doesnt have to be like this. i just pray its on the level of IM and star trek. nothing else. i dont care if its super smart. just make a fun popcorn movie. i didnt say brainless blockbuster. i said fun popcorn movie. like ST and IM.

[FilmNerdJamie]

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

[dark_b]

dude i am so desperate today for a superman movie that i rather have a Burton superman movie then no superman movie.


ok now i crossed the line :facepalm

[FilmNerdJamie]

ok now i crossed the line

....I wouldn't.

[dark_b]

what makes me really angry is that i really like flying. thats the power that i would like to have. and i think its the only power that almost everyone says. its what defines superman. and every year a movie is realesed with a hero flying.

it makes me angry that i dont get superman.

[JAK®]

Please, no! Superman can't become a "Tran****"! Transformers just did good because the first one was "watchable", the marketing campaign was successful, an because of teenagers boys who don't pay attention on the script, they only care about action sequences and Megan Fox's body, it's that generation who don't pay attention in anything for more than 5 minutes, that's why they go watch the movie several times, they forget the story after a couple of hours later.

Superman needs a good script, with smart dialogues and great sequences, a talented director and talented actors. It must be well done like was Spiderman, Iron Man, Batman and Star Trek, but with his own identity.

A summer blockbuster can be intelligent and fun in the same time.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not suggesting that a Superman reboot should be anything like Transformers. I'm just saying that movies with stupid plots can be successful.

[Excel]

I'm just saying that movies with stupid plots can be successful.

Define "stupid plots". Because I personally would say that plots like "a made up machine that converts posioned water into steam which poisions people when they breathe in the posion" or "A guy plans to blow up half of California" or "Someone attempts to create their own continent" to be just as anything I saw in their first Transformers film.

The plots that work the most often, imo, aren't the ones where the baddie has some grand plan; rather tha ones where dueling characters fights come to ahead at the end (see TDK, IM, SPIDEY 1, SUPERMAN 2).

[JAK®]

Define "stupid plots". Because I personally would say that plots like "a made up machine that converts posioned water into steam which poisions people when they breathe in the posion" or "A guy plans to blow up half of California" or "Someone attempts to create their own continent" to be just as anything I saw in their first Transformers film.

The plots that work the most often, imo, aren't the ones where the baddie has some grand plan; rather tha ones where dueling characters fights come to ahead at the end (see TDK, IM, SPIDEY 1, SUPERMAN 2).
1. I'm talking about Transformers 2, not the first one. The most recent movie has the most nonsensical plot I have ever seen. Even though I enjoyed the movie.

2. I don't remember claiming that the existing Superman movies were any better, plot-wise. In fact I'm not sure what point you are trying to make here. Do you think that I'm badmouthing other franchises to defend Superman? Because I can assure you I'm not.

[GreenKToo]

I have NO doubt a superman film with the right director, cast, and story would be a huge hit. Just look at I.M. for example. He was no where near as known or popular as Superman, and look at what happened, a huge hit with a sequel now being filmed.

W.B. needs to stop being so timid with their CB properties and hire somebody to be over them that actually knows what the characters are all about.

[dark_b]

WB needs to relax a little with their heroes. GL looks like a fun movie with action. f.... yeah. its summer and i will laugh and watch fights.

[GreenKToo]

edit

[RachelDawes]

Superman: The movie $411,831,400 (Adjusted For Inflation)

Superman II: $262,419,544 (Adjusted For Inflation)
Superman Returns: $219,368,185 (Adjusted For Inflation)

If S1 was so beloved, why did its sequel make so much less?

[GL's Light]

If S1 was so beloved, why did its sequel make so much less?
Sequels making 30-50% less than the preceding film was typical in the 1980s, even when the preceding film was a well-liked smash hit. It wasn't like now where franchises often see the box office for sequels go up.

[FilmNerdJamie]

If S1 was so beloved, why did its sequel make so much less?

Sequels making 30-50% less than the preceding film was typical in the 1980s, even when the preceding film was a well-liked smash hit. It wasn't like now where franchises often see the box office for sequels go up.

What he said. Also Raiders of the Lost Ark ate a lot of its business that summer.

[RachelDawes]

Sequels making 30-50% less than the preceding film was typical in the 1980s, even when the preceding film was a well-liked smash hit. It wasn't like now where franchises often see the box office for sequels go up.

Hmm interesting. Do you know why that was the case?

[Fresh Prince]

WB needs to grow balls and put out more DC heroes movies like Marvel.

[GL's Light]

WB needs to grow balls and put out more DC heroes movies like Marvel.
They have been picking up their pace of production of DC films, as well as diversifying the characters they're bringing to the screen.

Hmm interesting. Do you know why that was the case?
Films had much longer theatrical runs than they do now and repeat business as the months went on was a big factor in driving grosses up. I guess moviegoers were generally less inclined to give sequels the kind of repeat business that they gave hit originals.

[Fresh Prince]

I want A GL, Flash, MM and WW film.

[GL's Light]

I want A GL, Flash, MM and WW film.
We're getting Green Lantern. My guess is that The Flash will be made within the next few years. Wonder Woman should happen eventually, but I'm not sure when. Martian Manhunter will likely never be featured in a solo film.

[Christmas]

Any idea if some rumblings/hearsay might come about during comic-con?

[\S/JcDc\S/]

Any idea if some rumblings/hearsay might come about during comic-con?

Nothing on the given schedule. We should send requests to interviewers that will be there, to ask questions about a Superman reboot.

[Showtime]

I'm sure it will come up at the panel Routh is moderating.

[\S/JcDc\S/]

You know me, I want reporters to press more than just Routh on the issue :o

[Kal-El Fan]

I missed that news. Which panel is he moderating?

[\S/JcDc\S/]

The "Masters of the Web" panel has been a hot item at Comic-Con the last couple years, let's hope the third time is a charm as our favorite website keyboard jockeys get together again for some "good natured" debate. Moderating the panel will be director Kevin Munroe and Brandon Routh who will both be pimping "Dead of Night" by debuting some fresh new footage.
Panel Attendees:
Mike Sampson - Jo Blo
Robert Sanchez - IESB
Jeremy Smith - AICN
Drew McWeeny - HitFix
Brad Miska - Bloody-Disgusting
George "El Guapo" Roush - Latino Review
Ryan Rotten - Shock Till You Drop
Paul Christensen - MovieWeb
Devin Faraci - CHUD
Vic Holtreman - ScreenRant
Wilson Morales - BlackFilm

[Sub-Zero]

i'm sure it's been said already but since people saw tdk as an allegory for the bush administration, why can't superman do something similar with the obama administration? obama is looked at by the entire world as a beacon of hope, much like superman. a movie about superman bringing hope to the helpless people of metropolis while they're being attacked by a superpowered threat, that isn't zod, would be pretty cool. it may be hard to get as much depth as tdk, but it's still a possibility.

[Antonello Blueberry]

Gregory Noveck will be in one of the panels. I hope someone will beat him on the head (figuratively speaking) until he reveals a detailed plan of the movies based on DC comics.

[GL's Light]

I'm sure it will come up at the panel Routh is moderating.
Yeah, but most likely he'll just reiterate what he's already said: he doesn't know anything about the status of the Superman films at the moment, he thinks there should be a sequel to SR, and that he'd like to play Superman again.

[Fresh Prince]

Brad Pitt as Clark Kent/Superman lol.

[GreenKToo]

I dunno about supes but I know who I would like to see play Lex, Johnny Depp.

[Superman Prime]

Yeah, but most likely he'll just reiterate what he's already said: he doesn't know anything about the status of the Superman films at the moment, he thinks there should be a sequel to SR, and that he'd like to play Superman again.

Yeah, I'm willing to bet that he knows about as much as we do.

[Superman Prime]

Brad Pitt as Clark Kent/Superman lol.

Heh. Now there's a way to get the women squirting and buying tickets.

[GreenKToo]

Gregory Noveck will be in one of the panels. I hope someone will beat him on the head (figuratively speaking) until he reveals a detailed plan of the movies based on DC comics.
lol, I wish. It would be funny if like a 100 superman fans showed up and kept bombarding him with the same question over and over.

Fan # 1. Mr. Noveck, can you give us a time frame on when the next superman film will be made?

Noveck. We have all intentions of making another Superman film soon. Untill then please enjoy G.L. and jonah hex. next question.

fan # 2. We were told that WB and DC had a sort of a summit. I'm wondering if anything about a new Superman film was discussed there.

Noveck. Again, we have all intentions of bringing back the man of steel one day. these things take time..... ok, yes, you in the back there.

fan # 3. Any idea if Brandon Routh will be back in the reboot?

Noveck. (Grrrr) :cmad::bh:

[Fresh Prince]

Heh. Now there's a way to get the women squirting and buying tickets.

Yeah so you think it be a great idea?

[Fresh Prince]

I dunno about supes but I know who I would like to see play Lex, Johnny Depp.

****ing A!:up::up::up:

[GL's Light]

Well, most likely Noveck can't say anymore than that because there's nothing more to say at this point. It's doubtful that any firm decisions have been made yet as to the future of the Superman films. They're likely still in the early stages of looking at various pitches as to which direction to go in.

[Superman Prime]

Yeah so you think it be a great idea?

He's an okay actor. I think he could function in the role. I doubt it would ever happen, though.

Someone needs to do a Pitt-Superman manip. :oldrazz:

[\S/JcDc\S/]

He's an okay actor. I think he could function in the role. I doubt it would ever happen, though.

Someone needs to do a Pitt-Superman manip. :oldrazz:

I did one a while back, don't have it saved to the computer so will have to do a search. It was a quickie so gotta warn ya lol.

[\S/JcDc\S/]

Bah I'll look again later. The Pitt manip is somewhere in the casting thread. Could be back in Feb/March so not sure of the location. I wish the search took you to the actual page instead of just thread.

[MAN O STEEL]

Just a quick pitt manip i did at the request of Superman prime. nothign special, still missing the curl, but you get the idea. :oldrazz::woot:

http://img396.imageshack.us/img396/2002/cwstmdesertportrait12v2.jpg (http://img396.imageshack.us/i/cwstmdesertportrait12v2.jpg/)





Steve

[GreenKToo]

Well, he definitely gets away from the chris reeve mold....
(waits for all the he11 no's to him)

[GL's Light]

If they were willing and able to cast an A-list star as Superman, I can see Johnny Depp in the part more than Brad Pitt.

[Superman Prime]

Johnny Depp? He is of rather small stature, physically. I guess they could do a Rambo/Rocky on the guy and give the illusion of him being larger, but that's pushing it.

[Antonello Blueberry]

Johnny Depp? He is of rather small stature, physically. I guess they could do a Rambo/Rocky on the guy and give the illusion of him being larger, but that's pushing it.
Depp was actually contacted by Burton to star in his movie before Nicholas Cage.

[GL's Light]

Depp is only about an inch shorter than Pitt and he could get into good enough shape to play the part. I don't think Superman has to be all that musclebound anyway.

[Double Down]

Sequels making 30-50% less than the preceding film was typical in the 1980s, even when the preceding film was a well-liked smash hit. It wasn't like now where franchises often see the box office for sequels go up.

Hmm interesting. Do you know why that was the case?

DVDs and home video are a big reason for the change.

[Superman Prime]

Depp is only about an inch shorter than Pitt and he could get into good enough shape to play the part. I don't think Superman has to be all that musclebound anyway.

He needs to have some bulk. I'm not expecting an actor to look like the comics Superman as it pertains to physique.

[GreenKToo]

Pitt as Superman,
Day Lewis as Luthor,
Roberts as Lois,
and Depp as Brainiac.
price tag......:wow:

[Fresh Prince]

He needs to have some bulk. I'm not expecting an actor to look like the comics Superman as it pertains to physique.

I do i want a steriod Superman. :hehe:

[RachelDawes]

If they were willing and able to cast an A-list star as Superman, I can see Johnny Depp in the part more than Brad Pitt.

By the time the next Superman movie is made, Depp'll be about 50. If he even wanted to be Supes, the best time to have done it would have been when Burton was director.

[GL's Light]

By the time the next Superman movie is made, Depp'll be about 50. If he even wanted to be Supes, the best time to have done it would have been when Burton was director.
I agree, but I was making a comparison between him and Pitt (who's the same age as Depp).

[RachelDawes]

I agree, but I was making a comparison between him and Pitt (who's the same age as Depp).

Yes, and Pitt's out of the running too. I can't even think of any young A-listers right off-hand that could play Superman.

[GL's Light]

Yes, and Pitt's out of the running too. I can't even think of any young A-listers right off-hand that could play Superman.
I can't really think of that many younger actors who are genuinely A-listers at all for that matter.

[Kal-El Fan]

The "Masters of the Web" panel has been a hot item at Comic-Con the last couple years, let's hope the third time is a charm as our favorite website keyboard jockeys get together again for some "good natured" debate. Moderating the panel will be director Kevin Munroe and Brandon Routh who will both be pimping "Dead of Night" by debuting some fresh new footage.
Panel Attendees:
Mike Sampson - Jo Blo
Robert Sanchez - IESB
Jeremy Smith - AICN
Drew McWeeny - HitFix
Brad Miska - Bloody-Disgusting
George "El Guapo" Roush - Latino Review
Ryan Rotten - Shock Till You Drop
Paul Christensen - MovieWeb
Devin Faraci - CHUD
Vic Holtreman - ScreenRant
Wilson Morales - BlackFilm


Ah, I missed that in the schedule list. Thanks for posting it.

[Fresh Prince]

Yes, and Pitt's out of the running too. I can't even think of any young A-listers right off-hand that could play Superman.

Why?

[RachelDawes]

Why?

Because Pitt's as old as Depp, and both are too old for the role.

[NEXUS 6]

Dear lord keep actors like Pitt and Depp away from this film. Supes needs to be an everyman (albeit a good looking everyman with the physique of a Greek statue and the powers of a god) and a newcomer. I want to see Superman, not Brad Pitt in a cape.

[NEXUS 6]

Daniel Day Lewis, though would be an excellent Luthor. I was thinking about this though... another (older) option for the character that I think would be awesome would be Ed Harris.

[JAK®]

I can't really think of that many younger actors who are genuinely A-listers at all for that matter.
Shia LeBeouf?

[Superman Prime]

He'd make a good Jimmy Olsen.

[GL's Light]

Shia LeBeouf?
Perhaps, but I think he still needs to prove that he's a consistent major draw outside of the Transformers films.

[Antonello Blueberry]

He'd make a good Jimmy Olsen.
He was going to be Jimmy Olsen in Mcg's Superman with Scarlett as Lois, Depp as Luthor and probably Cavill as Superman.

[dark_b]

old buy hey :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=roM1VyAaRZY

[dark_b]

old buy hey :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=roM1VyAaRZY

[Fresh Prince]

He was going to be Jimmy Olsen in Mcg's Superman with Scarlett as Lois, Depp as Luthor and probably Cavill as Superman.

That would of been a good movie.

[Fresh Prince]

Perhaps, but I think he still needs to prove that he's a consistent major draw outside of the Transformers films.

No Shia does not look like Superman. He would have to gain alot of weight. Have the body atleast of Brandon Routh or Christian Bale before being Superman.

[Superman Prime]

Even Shia turned into Shia "LaBuff", he wouldn't have the commanding presence required for the part.

He was going to be Jimmy Olsen in Mcg's Superman with Scarlett as Lois, Depp as Luthor and probably Cavill as Superman.

Hm, interesting.

[GL's Light]

No Shia does not look like Superman. He would have to gain alot of weight. Have the body atleast of Brandon Routh or Christian Bale before being Superman.
No one has suggested he should play Superman. I had said I couldn't think of many young actors who are genuinely A-list stars and someone suggested Shia as falling into that category.

[NEXUS 6]

Here is Ed Harris as Luthor. His head looks a lot bigger than I remember. (Made this awhile ago, before I had a Hype! or Photobucket.)

http://i784.photobucket.com/albums/yy122/roy_battys_pics/Lex.jpg

EDIT: Wow, his face needs a lot of work. It looked better on my other CPU...

[GreenKToo]

Daniel Day Lewis, though would be an excellent Luthor. I was thinking about this though... another (older) option for the character that I think would be awesome would be Ed Harris.
I've always said Harris would make a great Perry White.

[GL's Light]

Ed Harris has a natural salt of the earth quality that makes him well-suited to play Perry White. He might pull off playing Luthor, but it's not a role he's naturally suited to.

[Fresh Prince]

No one has suggested he should play Superman. I had said I couldn't think of many young actors who are genuinely A-list stars and someone suggested Shia as falling into that category.

Okay sorry.

[Fresh Prince]

Even Shia turned into Shia "LaBuff", he wouldn't have the commanding presence required for the part.



Hm, interesting.

Agreed.

[The Democrat]

To be honest I feel like WB is kind of stuck with the Return's timeline. I think it's fairly clear however that they aren't going with it, they let Routh's contract expire and we haven't heard anything from Singer that I know of. I've been gone for a while though.

If it were me and that is of course a blatantly pathetic fan boy wish I'd just reboot and do a sort of eulogy for Superman. The problem I see is that by the time they get around to finally making a Superman movie that looks beyond the legacy of Reeve's characterization most of the other major DC characters will either be in production, weakly established (by which I mean, not the quality of the picture but how embedded their story lines are in the public mind) or in the case of Batman firmly established on their own. I believe the best way around this, to commit Superman to his actual place in the world of these heroes, is to commit him to the grave. Do the Death Of Superman storyline. It would be Passion of the Christ for Superman. Retell his origin story ala Birthright through a flashback as he's confronting Doomsday. Periodically coming back to the present to see him battling back and telling further aspects of his story, conflict with Lex, flirtations with Lois. Really get into the core of what he means to people. Essentially musing on his life through his ultimate death. In the end have the battle become an epic, emotional struggle that finally takes everything he's got. Show the funeral and the erection of the memorial. Have Lois standing with Martha staring up at this giant golden statue of Superman. Both of them stare agape at this glorious tribute to Earths mightiest hero. "This is how we saw him?" Lois says to Martha. She responds "How else do you think a haircut and some glasses kept his secret all these years." Credits roll. after that the two women find his tomb empty setting up his return.

[Fresh Prince]

So you want the next Superman movie to be based off the comic book Birthright? That could be greatness.

[Crook]

So the mystery has finally been unraveled:

Which “Big Director” Was Interested In Directing Mark Millar’s Superman? (http://www.slashfilm.com/2009/07/19/which-big-director-was-interested-in-directing-mark-millars-superman/)

Posted on Sunday, July 19th, 2009 by Peter Sciretta (http://www.slashfilm.com/author/admin/)
http://www.slashfilm.com/wp/wp-content/images/zz317e36d5-550x412.jpg

You might remember that comic book writer Mark Millar had been talking about (http://www.slashfilm.com/2009/07/2008/10/29/mark-millar-pitches-his-8-hour-epic-trilogy-of-superman-films/) his pitch for an 8-hour Lord of the Rings-style epic trilogy of Superman films. He even claimed (http://www.slashfilm.com/2009/07/2008/09/02/mark-millar-plans-for-new-superman-trilogy-70-million-budget-for-kick-ass/) that he was working with an unnamed big director on a pitch for the studio. But a couple months ago, Millar gave up (http://www.slashfilm.com/2009/07/2009/03/25/mark-millar-gives-up-on-superman-for-now/) on the pursuit, at least for the moment. Mark is always one to tell big stories and make big claims, sometimes larger than reality. And I’ve always wondered if there really was a big name director working with him on the Superman pitch, and who it could have been. And now we know…

Millar finally reveals the name to the TimesOnline (http://timesonline.typepad.com/blockbuster_buzz/2009/07/superman-no-more-movies-no-more-comics.html), and its a lot more obvious then you would think — Matthew Vaughn, director of Layer Cake, Stardust and the big screen adaptation of Millar’s Kick-Ass comic book. The comic book writer tells the Times, “They spoke to me and Matthew last year and we were obviously very interested as the love is there and the potential is enormous. But we’re not involved in Superman at this stage.” The plan was “to do a Superman movie unlike anything you’ve ever seen before. Matthew wanted to cast someone who looked nothing like Christopher Reeve and create a new Superman for this generation. But Superman is still in stasis at the moment because the last one lost so much money and [Warners] are scared to do anything with the character right now. I’m not holding my breath.”

Millar had originally revealed his idea to Empire Magazine (http://www.empireonline.com/news/feed.asp?NID=23521), stating that his pitch is for an 8-hour saga told over the course of three films, each which he hopes would be released one year apart.It’s gonna be like Michael Corleone in the Godfather films, the entire story from beginning to end, you see where he starts, how he becomes who he becomes, and where that takes him. The Dark Knight showed you can take a comic book property and make a serious film, and I think the studios are ready to listen to bigger ideas now. But Millar’s ideas were great in concept but unrealistic from a studio standpoint.I want to start on Krypton, a thousand years ago, and end with Superman alone on Planet Earth, the last being left on the planet, as the yellow sun turns red and starts to supernova, and he loses his powers. Warner Bros cares about the character as a franchise, and a franchise can’t exist if it has a finite conclusion. In May Millar revealed (http://www.slashfilm.com/2009/07/2009/03/25/mark-millar-gives-up-on-superman-for-now/) that talk of the movie had slowed down, and that he had moved on to another project.Warner’s talked to us and a few other writer/ director teams, but things seem to be in stasis right now. As far as I understand, nothing is happening with Superman at the moment and so the director and I are just working on another project. If it happens, great. If it doesn’t, no biggie. Kick-Ass taught me that creating your own stuff can be at least as much fun and you don’t have to answer to anyone. It’s the future, baby. Interesting. I still think this would've been what it would take to rejuvenate the franchise, despite some of Millar's "radical" ideas. I'm even more convinced since it was Vaughn that wanted to direct. He's a fantastic director.

*sigh*

Get off your asses WB. :(

[RachelDawes]

^If WB does make a new movie here soon they could still bring on Vaughn. I assume he'd still be interested. I'd just prefer it if Millar stayed far away from the project. I hated his whole Superman dying alone ending, among other things.

[FilmNerdJamie]

As I recall, a number of posters here said it was probably Matthew Vaughn. So..."Big name American action film director" = Vaughn? :whatever:

[\S/JcDc\S/]

As I recall, a number of posters here said it was probably Matthew Vaughn. So..."Big name American action film director" = Vaughn? :whatever:


L to the OL

:)

QFT as the kids say.

[FilmNerdJamie]

And now some realize why I never took anything Millar said seriously.

[dark_b]

i think i need to insult Millar here. i am sorry but if he meant Matthew Vaughn then i need to insult him.
i think you can not be born that dumb. i think you need to really try hard to be so dumb like MIllar is. how in the f..... name of god is Matthew Vaughn a big american action director?

of course my opinion on this is if MIllar was really talking about Matthew Vaughn.

[\S/JcDc\S/]

http://i25.tinypic.com/atxmgy.jpg

Ok had to post that once more...


Seriously, he wanted to hype this up like it was Bay or Cameron :rolleyes:

[Fresh Prince]

Do you honestly think an 8 hour LOTR epic triology of Superman would of worked? 8 hours?!?! I know no one gonna be in the movies for 8 hours he insane people leave after 3 and a half hours.

The Godfather thing is great however but the rest is dumb Superman's whole life and stuff like that lame! But as for the director good though. Has Mark Miller have good comic books i only heard about him a year ago?

[Double Down]

Do you honestly think an 8 hour LOTR epic triology of Superman would of worked? 8 hours?!?! I know no one gonna be in the movies for 8 hours he insane people leave after 3 and a half hours.

The Godfather thing is great however but the rest is dumb Superman's whole life and stuff like that lame! But as for the director good though. Has Mark Miller have good comic books i only heard about him a year ago?

It would have been spilt into three movies.

[Lighthouse]

Do you honestly think an 8 hour LOTR epic triology of Superman would of worked? 8 hours?!?! I know no one gonna be in the movies for 8 hours he insane people leave after 3 and a half hours.

The Godfather thing is great however but the rest is dumb Superman's whole life and stuff like that lame! But as for the director good though. Has Mark Miller have good comic books i only heard about him a year ago?

I don't see why it couldn't work. Thats kind of what Nolan is doing with his Batman series. If he does a third, I'm certain it will be an ending chapter, not the usual open-ended Gotham status quo.

[Showtime]

In real news, WB picked writers such as Morrison, Wolfman, and Johns to work as consultants to their comic book properties. I didn't notice Millar's name mentioned...

[Crook]

Consultant is a pretty worthless position unless they have significant input in the creative process.

[Showtime]

If they are writing the treatments for what eventually becomes the script, seems pretty significant. If you want to look at it from your point of view above then, all it means is that Millar couldn't even get that.

[Lighthouse]

If they are writing the treatments for what eventually becomes the script, seems pretty significant. If you want to look at it from your point of view above then, all it means is that Millar couldn't even get that.

Considering he's mostly a Marvel guy, I don't think they would have ever considered him.

[S_H_F_4839]

I just want to see a new superman movie made, yeah it would be great if they could set it up as a trilogy or a franchise or whatever i just want to see a new movie made.

[StorminNorman]

Anyone else want to see a Superman movie that is a bit...dare I say...political?

I mean The Dark Knight demonstrated there was an audience for a movie that appeased both 13 year old boys and film students - and I think Superman is a perfect property to do something similar with. Dating back Superman's first stories are themselves political, and Superman is the most iconic character in American entertainment. The key is understanding how to utilize the characters to their fullest.

My idea would be to place Metropolis in a position most American's would recognize: a once prosperous city falling on bad times. The city is in debt, people are leaving and even Lex Corps. is cutting jobs (though not cutting R&D costs).

In a time where internal divides are as devastating to our nation as they are today - lets see that reflected in Metropolis. The key to any hero is his antagonist, so lets look at Lex Luther. When written well, he can be one of the most interesting characters in fiction - but handled like a simple evil genius or stereotypical corporate fat cat, you leave potential off the page.

So my Lex Luther would embody a Machiavellian, pragmatic, corporate hero that every business owner will love, no matter how devious his scheme. Rush Limbaugh should be going on the air talking about how the new Superman movie has Lex Luther playing the hero. None of his motives should be made simply for greed, but for the ideal of the "greater good". Lex Luther: Man of Steel paints my Luther perfectly: he wants to see humanity succeed and is willing to do anything to aid that success - he sees in Superman a threat to human's evolution. A force that coddles a race, that limits a race, whose mere presence threatens a race. Superman is a threat and as such Lex Luther owes it to the world to stop him. Lex, however, is not evil. In my Superman world, Lex Luther wouldn't ever have to kill someone by his own hand and would never be seen in a Kryptonite robot helping destroy downtown.

Luther will need a counter weight, and in no way am I giving that role to Superman. If we are predictably giving the business man the right, lets give the media the left. Lois Lane, ever the journalist and thirsty to paint the immorality of Lex Luther, should have an answer to ever Luther argument. A constant skeptic more empathetic to the needs of the small person than Lex she is the perfect foil.

Jimmy Olsen would play the youth, reacting to Superman in a way you would expect a college student to react to such a revelation. If Olsen is to ever work, he must not be a cartoon.

Superman can retake his relevance by becoming a figure that is beyond pity Metropolis disputes, a figure that inspires individuals in Metropolis to take pride in their city and for an optimistic spirit restore a struggling city. A hope that Americans so desperately want, as reflected in the 2008 election.

I think it's also important to re-evaluate the focuses of the Superman story. For example, can Superman arrive before Clark Kent? Most importantly, however, is how the public reacts to Superman as an alien. I don't think enough work has been done on how massive that revelation would be on a people. Before Luther knows that Superman is an alien, does he perhaps see in Superman the perfect man? If Superman was a human, would Lex Luther have the same animosity? I think that aspect of Superman's story has a lot of material there to work with.

Now placing some depth behind recognizable characters is important to the respect the film receives by critics - but there must be action as well. Just because there world of Metropolis is relevant to today's climate doesn't mean it has to lose what makes comics - and especially Superman - an escape. Bring on super villains and giant robots and brianiac or whatever - but do so in an intelligent manner. I know it can be done.

[ultimatefan]

Here´s some thoughts I´ve collected recently on the matter:

- Leave the damn origin alone. Supes already has a great origin movie, and we´re getting more than our share of superhero origin movies as it is.

- Enough with the Donner references and Bible allegories.

- Don´t try to reinvent the wheel, whether it´s a kid or whatever, modernize Supes by creating his most exciting adventure ever, with all that modern technology can do.

Here´s an idea: The movie starts as Superman is on the top of the world on Earth. He can protect Earth from anything, he´s the most powerful being on the planet, he´s beloved by all. Then the hordes of Darkseid attack the Earth. Huge battles ensue, and Supes realizes even he´s not powerful enough to stop Darkseid and his army. He finds out the answer may be out of Earth, on Apokolips. He´s forced to fly away from Earth at the verge of humankind´s extinction, just like he had to do with Krypton. As he arriveon Apokolips, his powers are reduced by the distance from Earth´s sun, Darkseid is seen as a God and even the mention of the name Superman inspires rage and hatred. More than his powers, Supes has to count on his mind - and heart - to get what he needs to get - haven´t decided on that yet, let´s leave some suspense here - get back to Earth and fight Darkseid with all his might. Ultimately, Supes realizes his greatest power is in his humanity.

Tell me you can´t make an exciting, dramatic and compelling Superman movie out of this.

[MAN O STEEL]

Here´s some thoughts I´ve collected recently on the matter:

- Leave the damn origin alone. Supes already has a great origin movie, and we´re getting more than our share of superhero origin movies as it is.

- Enough with the Donner references and Bible allegories.

- Don´t try to reinvent the wheel, whether it´s a kid or whatever, modernize Supes by creating his most exciting adventure ever, with all that modern technology can do.

Here´s an idea: The movie starts as Superman is on the top of the world on Earth. He can protect Earth from anything, he´s the most powerful being on the planet, he´s beloved by all. Then the hordes of Darkseid attack the Earth. Huge battles ensue, and Supes realizes even he´s not powerful enough to stop Darkseid and his army. He finds out the answer may be out of Earth, on Apokolips. He´s forced to fly away from Earth at the verge of humankind´s extinction, just like he had to do with Krypton. As he arriveon Apokolips, his powers are reduced by the distance from Earth´s sun, Darkseid is seen as a God and even the mention of the name Superman inspires rage and hatred. More than his powers, Supes has to count on his mind - and heart - to get what he needs to get - haven´t decided on that yet, let´s leave some suspense here - get back to Earth and fight Darkseid with all his might. Ultimately, Supes realizes his greatest power is in his humanity.

Tell me you can´t make an exciting, dramatic and compelling Superman movie out of this.


I'll pass. We all know what happened last time Superman got an established story movie *coughSRcough*. Superman deserves another origin just the same as the others are getting one. STM a great origin movie?? really??. It was a movie that showed Superman as a slave to destiny, a superman who's inlove with a chainsmoking Lois, a Superman who selfishly decided to risk humanities existance on one female by turning the world backwards, a Superman with dated special effects & a horrible lack of screen time for the kents, who are supposed to be the moral backbone of why he chose to become Superman. No it's not a great origin at all. Superman deserves the proper treatment & a new origin will help show ppl that it has no ties to SR. Your idea lacks any real weight IMO. It relies on mindless action on the part of darkseid & a story that takes place mainly on apokoli[ps rather than earth as that's where Superman will be. I say let geoff johns write an origin then have it scripted by someone like the Nolans & have it directed by Steven Spielberg. i trust with a team like that, that we'll get a great origin.





Steve

[GreenKToo]

did you guys read the front page? They mention a returns sequel.

[Dave_W]

did you guys read the front page? They mention a returns sequel.

The Returns sequel isn't really mentioned in the actual article...

Also, ever since Bryan Singer's 2006's "Superman Returns," a new Superman has been in limbo.

"Our hope is to develop a Superman property and to try again," Warner Bros. Entertainment president Alan Horn said in April. "What hurt us is that the reviews and so on for the Superman movie did not get the kind of critical acclaim that Batman got, and we have other issues with Superman that concern us."

[GreenKToo]

The Returns sequel isn't really mentioned in the actual article...
Your right. the front page said they mentioned it but the actual article didnt...

[ultimatefan]

I'll pass. We all know what happened last time Superman got an established story movie *coughSRcough*. Superman deserves another origin just the same as the others are getting one. STM a great origin movie?? really??. It was a movie that showed Superman as a slave to destiny, a superman who's inlove with a chainsmoking Lois, a Superman who selfishly decided to risk humanities existance on one female by turning the world backwards, a Superman with dated special effects & a horrible lack of screen time for the kents, who are supposed to be the moral backbone of why he chose to become Superman. No it's not a great origin at all. Superman deserves the proper treatment & a new origin will help show ppl that it has no ties to SR. Your idea lacks any real weight IMO. It relies on mindless action on the part of darkseid & a story that takes place mainly on apokoli[ps rather than earth as that's where Superman will be. I say let geoff johns write an origin then have it scripted by someone like the Nolans & have it directed by Steven Spielberg. i trust with a team like that, that we'll get a great origin.





Steve
]
Disagree with everything. Being an established Superman wasn´t the problem with SR, there were lots of things that contributed to its BO disappointment. Superman is not a slave to destiny, so much that he challenged his father´s advice. Superman didn´t risk Earth to save Lois, if anything he undid all the damage the San Andreas crack caused, even the ones he couldn´t prevent. Lois being chainsmoking wasn´t a big deal at the time, and every classic movie would have to be discarded if you´re gonna pick on things that were typical from that time, like smoking. Pa Kent appeared as much as he needed to in that story, giving him advice - which DID help him to decide being Supeman - and also showing him even his powers have limits.

A new Superman story needs plenty of action, lack of action was one of the things that doomed SR. There is plenty of weight in the idea of Superman not being capable to protect Earth and having to leave it to save it. The movie can intercut between Apokolips and Earth, and there will be still plenty of screen time for Earth before his departure and after his return. Plus, the previous franchise shows him on Earth all the time, seeing Superman on an alien planet - as is often the case in the comics - is a good change of pace.

An origin movie is the absolute last thing Superman needs. I have zero doubt about it. Getting back to the whole Krypton blows up Kal-El goes to Earth is raised by the Kents that even my granny knows front and backwards for minor things like updating FX and Lois not smoking, THAT has no weight.

[GreenKToo]

As much as it pains me to say, I bet you that WB won't see it like that and will do an origin film, ala B.B.

[Superman Prime]

Great ideas, ultimatefan.

[ultimatefan]

^Thanks!

[knowsbleed]

Even with a lot of action... a Superman movie with just action will just be a Transformers clone. That is the only thing going for that franchise anyway, that and toilet humor... and Megan Fox.

A new Superman movie will have to draw upon what audiences today find inspirational. Superman has always inspired and the things that inspire people now are very different from the things that inspired people in 1978. I can't really put my finger on what that would be... the closest thing I've come to is this last presidential election. It inspired the entire world to pay attention to what the US was doing... because we were (are) in desperate times and we needed a hero (of sorts) to look up to. Now I know that Obama is no Superman... but it's something like this that people will need to have in order to become interested in a 71 year old comic book character.

[ultimatefan]

Even with a lot of action... a Superman movie with just action will just be a Transformers clone. That is the only thing going for that franchise anyway, that and toilet humor... and Megan Fox.

A new Superman movie will have to draw upon what audiences today find inspirational. Superman has always inspired and the things that inspire people now are very different from the things that inspired people in 1978. I can't really put my finger on what that would be... the closest thing I've come to is this last presidential election. It inspired the entire world to pay attention to what the US was doing... because we were (are) in desperate times and we needed a hero (of sorts) to look up to. Now I know that Obama is no Superman... but it's something like this that people will need to have in order to become interested in a 71 year old comic book character.

I never said the movie will, or should be just action, or that it will draw in anyway from the Transformers series - which I absolutely despise, BTW.

I agree that Superman is inspirational, and I agree that it may be different from what was inspiration in 1978. Back then Supes was a God-like figure, now I think he needs to inspire on a human level, not for having a kid out of wedlock, but by being capable to rely on his mind and heart, instead of just his superpowers.

Some of my favorite Supes stories touch on that, like the TAS ep where Clark solved a case using his investigating reporter skills instead of just his powers.

[knowsbleed]

I don't know... they might want to take a different angle and not get so personal into Supe's life. Maybe a take on the point of view that Marvels went. Humans looking in on what Superman does... at least for a good part of the story. Then change the angle and get a little bit personal... but not too much. That would be enough to make audiences excited without burdening them with too much of the drama that Superman Returns brought to the screen. Give the audiences a sense of awe that a real life Superman would generate. You can only get that experience viewing Superman from a distance... get too close and like anything you admire from afar... it loses part of it's charm.

[ultimatefan]

That´s why my story focuses on Superman´s quest for saving Earth, not his personal life. People wanna see Superman save the day methinks, you just need a bit of a different angle on it.

[BenReilly]

Considering he's mostly a Marvel guy, I don't think they would have ever considered him.

I don't think that really makes a difference.

Marc Guggenheim is exclusive to Marvel and WB had no problem hiring him to write Green Lantern.

[StorminNorman]

An origin movie is the absolute last thing Superman needs. I have zero doubt about it. Getting back to the whole Krypton blows up Kal-El goes to Earth is raised by the Kents that even my granny knows front and backwards for minor things like updating FX and Lois not smoking, THAT has no weight.

I still think a new Superman universe needs to be created. I don't think we need to see Krypton's destruction and Superman in Smallville - but I think seeing Superman's first interaction with Metropolis is important.

[Dark Helmet]

I say do a big budget Hollywood End Of The World story with surviving Kryptonians coming to make Earth their new home ala a Big Budget Lois & Clark New Krypton Saga & this can also be a sequel to Returns :o

[Crook]

An origin movie is the absolute last thing Superman needs. I have zero doubt about it. Getting back to the whole Krypton blows up Kal-El goes to Earth is raised by the Kents that even my granny knows front and backwards for minor things like updating FX and Lois not smoking, THAT has no weight.
You don't necessarily need to chronologically start from square one, but I'd hardly call any of those things minor. Much less factors that hold no weight. You're thinking WAY too small and narrow, my friend.

Destruction of an entire alien planet, Clark's introduction to a thriving metropolitan city after being raised in a humble countryside, Supes' first (insert heroic power act here), the various city personalities occupied by Perry, Lois, Jimmy, and Lex, etc etc.

It'd be foolish to ignore these elements for the modern generation. All we've had is tv shows watched by a subgroup of people that only make a fraction of the Hollywood audiences, and a film that came, went, disappeared, and split the fanbase. C'mon. The character deserves better than this.

We need something fresh, and like it or not, that does include reintroducing the mythos. The key is to make it fresh, so any recurring themes/plots do not seem like retreads. I think a lot of people are underestimating the potential this franchise will always have. Especially since it hasn't been taken advantage of yet with all the advances we have in film.

[terry78]

The main thing is that we have never really seen Krypton in live action, with all the descriptions and art the books have showcased, no one has tried to attempt it.

[Showtime]

I still think a new Superman universe needs to be created. I don't think we need to see Krypton's destruction and Superman in Smallville - but I think seeing Superman's first interaction with Metropolis is important.

I agree with you. We need a "Superman Starts".

I love what you had to say above. Very much on board with your thoughts.

[GreenKToo]

IF they're going to make another film, then I really hope WB gets a top notch director that knows Superman is much more than just donners take on him.
When, and if, they announce the director, thats gonna set the tone for me on how excited I will be.

[Fresh Prince]

I don't see why it couldn't work. Thats kind of what Nolan is doing with his Batman series. If he does a third, I'm certain it will be an ending chapter, not the usual open-ended Gotham status quo.

Nolan is not doing the samething. He not doing a whole life story on Batman.

[Crook]

...yes he is. What do you think the films are about?

[StorminNorman]

I agree with you. We need a "Superman Starts".

I love what you had to say above. Very much on board with your thoughts.

:up:

Superman's world is so interesting, with fantastic characters - it would be such a waste to just breeze past the establishment of that world simply because others have gotten it wrong. We have yet to see a truly great Lex Luther, we have never seen a complete Lois Lane and we have never seen Clark Kent that isn't a cartoon, much less a Jimmy Olsen that can be described as a real human being. Metropolis itself has been complete forgettable.

This can all be changed, but it needs to be done right. And that means telling the story from the top.

[Crook]

Wait, I thought you loved SR. :huh:

[StorminNorman]

I thought Superman Returns was a good movie - mainly because I loved t. But that doesn't mean it took full advantage of the characters. Lex Luther was still merely a greedy comic book villain, Clark Kent was a one trick clumsy goof, Lois Lane was...well the worst part of the movie.

[Fresh Prince]

...yes he is. What do you think the films are about?

So your saying he doing the samething Mark Millar Superman film was gonna be?

[Crook]

I thought Superman Returns was a good movie - mainly because I loved t. But that doesn't mean it took full advantage of the characters. Lex Luther was still merely a greedy comic book villain, Clark Kent was a one trick clumsy goof, Lois Lane was...well the worst part of the movie.
I see, so you loved the film in spite of the admitted faults and missteps. Fair enough. I thought it was an alright film, and not nearly as horrible as people claim it to be. But on the other hand, I feel that the missed opportunity is what makes the project seem so disappointing. The return of Supes could have been so much more.

So your saying he doing the samething Mark Millar Superman film was gonna be?
Not what I said. I said both are life stories about the characters, which is obvious. And Millar's ending was one scene at the very end of the trilogy. Hardly anything monumental that affects the entire story.

[\S/JcDc\S/]

I think taking a page from Star Trek, brief intro/back story of the father figure for the main character, would serve the story well.

While it may not be that important to visit Smallville, I do think seeing Jor-el on Krypton is imperative. Possibly showing him give up his own life to save his son. If there was a Brainiac element, that would be very easy to write in, and effective.

[StorminNorman]

I see, so you loved the film in spite of the admitted faults and missteps. Fair enough. I thought it was an alright film, and not nearly as horrible as people claim it to be. But on the other hand, I feel that the missed opportunity is what makes the project seem so disappointing. The return of Supes could have been so much more.

Haha, I should have reread my message before posting, but yea - you got the gist of what I was saying. I think it was the right movie for an end to the Donner series - but it was the wrong movie to start a franchise with, which is exactly what this needed to be following Batman.

[Excel]

]An origin movie is the absolute last thing Superman needs.

I dont know. I feel like its in the middle, i.e. with Batman Begins being a 100% of an origin film and SR being 0%, Superman needs a 50%; something along the lines Burtons first Batman film. The next Superman film needs to be both exciting and interesting; if it assumes we already know the characters, their motivations & traits, I think they would be missing the mark.

I do feel people vastly overrate Supermans popularity these days-to assume everybody (espec. the 1990s and 200s generations) know Supermans origins (Krypton and Smallville) is imo absurd. Films are, after all, the only way 99% of people see these heros origins anyway currently. NOBODY buys comics anymore and there are not any Superman cartoons, and Smallville hasnt been big for a while. I feel the film should leave certain things for the audience to figure out ala BATMAN rather than spelling them out for us like BATMAN BEGINS or SUPERMAN THE MOVIE...i.e. maybe a quick montage of him in Smallville discovering his powers, or Krypton exploding set to narration...but thats it.

My take would open in the midst of a massive battle, one of the super fights before the 3rd act. Right as were about to hit the climax, we rocket back to find Clark Kents arrival in Metropolis, where he's being helping out in secret. He begins work at the planet where he falls for Lois, whome he saves in his world debut as Supes. Chaos in some form ensues, with Supermans emotional journey being one of self discovery; the 3rd taking place directly after the climax of the opening action scene and featuring Superman learning from Jor-el in the fortress of origin, as do we, and thus discovers the proper motivation for being on Earth just in time to save the day.

A big thing some people dont seem to get is we arent going to root for him just because hes the main character; we wont think he is cool just because he can fly; we wont like him or the film just because of his powers. Superfights for sake of having them are nonsense; like in TRANSFORMERS or IRON MAN, they are only more than "cool to look at" and actually become "exciting" when we give a damn about the people involved with them. Just being Superman is not going to make us root or care for him. We are going to have feel the same sort fo sense of growth that he feels. If they are there just to be there we get THE INCREDIBLE HULK or FANTASTIC FOUR

Imagine the 2nd and 3rd acts of Spiderman stretched out into one huge film and thats what I am thinking (post debut, start of Oscorp crap).

HERE is a link to my fan story I made about 2 years ago-

http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?t=282813

Give it a read, its pretty good. It was written with the above sypnosis in mind and with a goal of being a crowd pleasing origin film, so sorry for the lack of epicness. Some comments:

This story idea is absolutely incredible. I'm not a fan of the complete reboot/origin route but this has kinda turned me around on that. I am extremely impressed.

The only way I found this gem was through a random google image search lol

This sounds amazing, Excel. Brilliant work :up:

CFE

You have a stunning vision, this would make a truly fabulous film. Maybe one day you could be put in the situation to pitch this to WB.

Some interesting ideas, not the Superman movie I'd want to see, but some good stuff in places. I like the way Superman doesn't quite discover who he is until later on, and that it's something of a mystery that Lois "uncovers" (a la BATMAN sort of).

Nice story!!!:up:

And thats just beginning. There is still the fact they need to cast ADULT actors and market the film as an popcorn actioner to build buzz (and then dazzle unsuspecting audiences with depth too boot ala IRON MAN or TRANSFORMERS), the fact that they need to make it brighter and more modern, make Lois hot, make everybody less pale, increase the lighting so it looks like theres always an absurd amount of sun ala Mike Bay films, ect.

[Showtime]

I see, so you loved the film in spite of the admitted faults and missteps. Fair enough. I thought it was an alright film, and not nearly as horrible as people claim it to be. But on the other hand, I feel that the missed opportunity is what makes the project seem so disappointing. The return of Supes could have been so much more.

I like that quote, that is what handcuffed WB. Wasn't a flop, wasn't a big success. Here we are.

:up:

Superman's world is so interesting, with fantastic characters - it would be such a waste to just breeze past the establishment of that world simply because others have gotten it wrong. We have yet to see a truly great Lex Luther, we have never seen a complete Lois Lane and we have never seen Clark Kent that isn't a cartoon, much less a Jimmy Olsen that can be described as a real human being. Metropolis itself has been complete forgettable.

This can all be changed, but it needs to be done right. And that means telling the story from the top.

I agree with you wholeheartedly. I think there is so much to be explored and Metropolis itself can tell an entire story.

[SuperDaniel]

Smallville is as importantas Krypton, IMO. We need to see both in the reboot to erase the bad concepts and feelings of the TV series.

[StorminNorman]

I don't think we need to see either, necessarily.

I mean it's easy to dismiss Smallville entirely - but it did a lot right and has a significant following. While I don't ever want to see it made into movie cannon, I don't think making people forget about that TV show is of the greatest significance.

[SuperDaniel]

It is a disgrace to Superman. It has a few good moments. But we need a complete origin. Krypton, Smallville and everything should appear but not in a linear storytelling. They should just show Krypton in the end of the movie, through Brainiac's eye.

[sdc10]

It is a disgrace to Superman. It has a few good moments.

But making Superman a depressed stalker with a child was just the way to go:grin:. I just dont wanna see the basic superhero film formula where half of the movie is spent on the origin. Everyone knows what Superman origins are i.e. alien from a destroyed planet raised in Kansas. No need to keep shoving that down our throats.

[Superman Prime]

^ He's watching what you type from the bushes.

[Fresh Prince]

I see, so you loved the film in spite of the admitted faults and missteps. Fair enough. I thought it was an alright film, and not nearly as horrible as people claim it to be. But on the other hand, I feel that the missed opportunity is what makes the project seem so disappointing. The return of Supes could have been so much more.


Not what I said. I said both are life stories about the characters, which is obvious. And Millar's ending was one scene at the very end of the trilogy. Hardly anything monumental that affects the entire story.

So you think Millar's Superman movies be great?

[Compi716]

You know what I just thought? Imagine if instead of Smallville, they made a show called Krypton. It would be all about Jor-El and Lara as a newly married couple, and eventually the birth of their son with the finite end of the show being the explosion of Krypton. That way, they probably could have screwed with all kinds of continuity stuff since the Man of Steel wouldn't even be born.

Just a thought.

[The Englishman]

So what happened with Mark Millars script, did he take it to warners. Also did he mention who the big name action director he was planning on making it with was??

[patrickbateman]

thats what people used to say abt JJ's Superman

[GreenKToo]

So what happened with Mark Millars script, did he take it to warners. Also did he mention who the big name action director he was planning on making it with was??

It was shot down...Matthew Vaughn was the director.

[FilmNerdJamie]

Because as we all know "big-name American action film director" = the British director behind Layer Cake and Stardust. :whatever:

Yet another example of how full of crap Millar is.

[GreenKToo]

Hey, I liked ''sawdust'' lol

[StorminNorman]

Stardust was a great film.

But Matthew Vaughn is not a big action director.

[FilmNerdJamie]

The sad part is you'll still see tons of articles and what the next time Millar opens his mouth about the next Superman film.

[Double Down]

The sad part is you'll still see tons of articles and what the next time Millar opens his mouth about the next Superman film.

But not at Think McFly Think, of course.

[GreenKToo]

I'm really gonna be bummed if we dont get a superman reboot thrown in with all these other cb films wb has planned.
G.L. and flash are great and all, but they're not near as exciting to me as superman.
I'll see them them of course, but i'll be thinking ''if only they could have did this with superman'' while watching :( .

[FilmNerdJamie]

But not at Think McFly Think, of course.

I'll second, third and fourth that remark!

[ultimatefan]

I dont know. I feel like its in the middle, i.e. with Batman Begins being a 100% of an origin film and SR being 0%, Superman needs a 50%; something along the lines Burtons first Batman film. The next Superman film needs to be both exciting and interesting; if it assumes we already know the characters, their motivations & traits, I think they would be missing the mark.

I do feel people vastly overrate Supermans popularity these days-to assume everybody (espec. the 1990s and 200s generations) know Supermans origins (Krypton and Smallville) is imo absurd. Films are, after all, the only way 99% of people see these heros origins anyway currently. NOBODY buys comics anymore and there are not any Superman cartoons, and Smallville hasnt been big for a while. I feel the film should leave certain things for the audience to figure out ala BATMAN rather than spelling them out for us like BATMAN BEGINS or SUPERMAN THE MOVIE...i.e. maybe a quick montage of him in Smallville discovering his powers, or Krypton exploding set to narration...but thats it.

My take would open in the midst of a massive battle, one of the super fights before the 3rd act. Right as were about to hit the climax, we rocket back to find Clark Kents arrival in Metropolis, where he's being helping out in secret. He begins work at the planet where he falls for Lois, whome he saves in his world debut as Supes. Chaos in some form ensues, with Supermans emotional journey being one of self discovery; the 3rd taking place directly after the climax of the opening action scene and featuring Superman learning from Jor-el in the fortress of origin, as do we, and thus discovers the proper motivation for being on Earth just in time to save the day.

A big thing some people dont seem to get is we arent going to root for him just because hes the main character; we wont think he is cool just because he can fly; we wont like him or the film just because of his powers. Superfights for sake of having them are nonsense; like in TRANSFORMERS or IRON MAN, they are only more than "cool to look at" and actually become "exciting" when we give a damn about the people involved with them. Just being Superman is not going to make us root or care for him. We are going to have feel the same sort fo sense of growth that he feels. If they are there just to be there we get THE INCREDIBLE HULK or FANTASTIC FOUR

Imagine the 2nd and 3rd acts of Spiderman stretched out into one huge film and thats what I am thinking (post debut, start of Oscorp crap).

HERE is a link to my fan story I made about 2 years ago-

http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?t=282813

Give it a read, its pretty good. It was written with the above sypnosis in mind and with a goal of being a crowd pleasing origin film, so sorry for the lack of epicness. Some comments:











And thats just beginning. There is still the fact they need to cast ADULT actors and market the film as an popcorn actioner to build buzz (and then dazzle unsuspecting audiences with depth too boot ala IRON MAN or TRANSFORMERS), the fact that they need to make it brighter and more modern, make Lois hot, make everybody less pale, increase the lighting so it looks like theres always an absurd amount of sun ala Mike Bay films, ect.

I have to disagree. People who never read a comic book in their lives know Superman came from the destroyed planet of Krypton. The movies and TV shows get reruns and are discovered by younger generations. With all its liberties, Smallville still keeps a basic "Krypton explodes, Kal-El comes to Earth, is adopted by Kents, learns about his origin from Jor-El" scenario. Not to mention all the references, homages, parodies, etc. It permeates pop culture, even if Supes doesn´t seem to be so popular anymore.

I don´t think you need go back to the origin to make an audience care for Supes. Just give him a good character arc. Make him suffer, make him make mistakes, make him learn, make him beat a great challenge. That makes an audience care.

I don´t say NOTHING from the origin should be mentioned in the movies. If you want to add a few twists and details, get back to it in little flashbacks and stuff. But I don´t really see the point of getting yet again back to Clark meets Lois saves her as Superman, Superman learns from Jor-El who he is. This stuff has been done to death in tons of medias, and has been refered to in another ton of them. Especially as a fan, I´d find that repetitive and boring. As far as I´m concerned, Superman doesn´t need to be reintroduced, just a good, exciting story.

You keep beating the origin drum, you know that the studio might, with 99,99999999% of certainty end up doing? They will want to tell a "fresh and new" version of the origin, and you´re gonna be pissed all over again cuz it´s not the origin you know and love. That´s how we ended up with that script everyone hated that had Krypton not destroyed, Superman as part of some BS new age prophecy, Lex as a Kryptonian, and so on.

[MAN O STEEL]

I don´t think you need go back to the origin to make an audience care for Supes. Just give him a good character arc. Make him suffer, make him make mistakes, make him learn, make him beat a great challenge. That makes an audience care.



I saw this in SR & still didn't give a rats. IMHO it comes to not what content you put in the movie but how you execute that content. You can take a scene that means nothing & doesn't move the story along & find a way to make it exciting, relevant & meaningful then you got something. Sr did all the above you mentioned but failed to do it in a way that made ppl care. I personally think you need an origin. I know ppl say, well he's had enough origins, let's move on, but what origins do we have?. A Demi god origin in '78', a cartoon origin in the mid 90's & a few origins in the comics, which not everyone reads. For the GA they'll be wanting an origin for them & thier time, thier not gonna want to go & watch a 30 something yr old movie that's flawed to begin with to watch Superman's origin & nor should they IMO. Superman needs an origin so that ppl can see that Superman's roots goes far deeper than a demi god who saves ppl because of "destiny". they need to be shown the real Superman, in all his glory from stage one.




Steve

[ultimatefan]

^And you can do all I mentioned and make it work and connect with people. I mean, it´s not like you fans don´t see the potential of the character yourselves. There are over 70 years of Superman stories and all you can think of is get back to the origin that has already been told and retold to death?

And the Superman movie is still reran, rediscovered and appreciated by audiences. One can argue any movie has flaws, you can find flaws in Citizen Kane if you want to. And as well the cartoons and TV shows are rediscovered - that´s what they invented DVDs, cable and Itunes for. It´s ridiculous to imply any audience with an even moderate knowledge of pop culture doesn´t know the basics of Superman´s origin.

[MAN O STEEL]

And you can do all I mentioned and make it work and connect with people. I mean, it´s not like you fans don´t see the potential of the character yourselves. There are over 70 years of Superman stories and all you can think of is get back to the origin that has already been told and retold to death?



Yes. Every generation deserves thier own origin. When I went through JB Hifi the other day, my local DVD store, I was sifting through the Superman section trying to decide if the old George Reeve Series is cheap enough yet to buy & I had about 2 different groups of ppl between what I woulsd guess to be around 20 - 22 ish, all of whom were seeing the old Superman sets & laughing at them, calling Superman a goodie goodie *** & instead picking up Iron Man. Sadly this is not the first time, nor will it be the last. I also tried showing my ex STM in the hopes she'd enjoy it as much as me. She fell asleep before we even got to metropolis. She later said it was boring crap for geeks. the new generation needs a proper origin for thier time. you give em an established movie & all you'll be doing is saying to them, "hey, remember that boring origin you guys hated & intern called Superman a *** over?, well here's an established movie that could very well be representing that exact incarnation, not that you'll know because we didn't cover that area". If you give them a different origin you'll be sever;ly seperating yourself from previous versions & giving ppl a reason to be interested.





Steve

[solidsnake86]

Man O Steel. I think the point about your girlfriend not caring for STM is really what most need to realize, not many people care for that movie anymore besides fans. I know it hurts for some of you, but superman needs a new origin now. Its not like it has to start on krypton, go to smallville, and 3 hours later we see superman. It needs to be done quickly and I think the most essential thing is to show Clark's first time at the daily planet to really estabilsh the supporting cast.

People don't care about smallville and krypton. Its all about lois and seeing as how they managed to create a show called lois and clark, and smallville's been limping on because of her addition I think its clear people like the dynamic of the 2 characters. Thats something SR lacked and I feel many superman movies will if they don't touch upon it.

[GhostPoet]

As much as I liked the original Superman flicks...I don't think Superman has ever been shown justice in ANY live-action film.

Especially not the last film. Give Superman an enemy (or 2) that is smarter than Superman...and is on equal or greater strength level as Superman. I want to see Superman get punched through a building.

[C. Lee]

I want to see Superman get punched through a building.

Superman II and IV.

[SuperDaniel]

Those movies are dated and they are stupid as hell, IMO. I agree that Superman has never been FULLY explored in a live-action movie. STM is incredibly campy and dated. THe origin is the ONLY REASONABLE WAY to go with the next movie.