Defining Superman's Powers In A Reboot

[Lightning54SC]

Ok some of you may agree others will shed the noses in the air to this but i just watched the FF2 teaser and just he flying and camera shots and angles of Torch and Silver Sufer fly were more amazing the superman as a whole... i think the WB needs to hire the FX for the sequel to our movie... but who agrees that they need to use better shots and angles.... give your opinions

[GreenKToo]

I agree that it was good,but I wouldnt agree thats it better.

[Maze]

I agree that it was good,but I wouldnt agree thats it better.
I agree.

Torch flying is good in the teaser , but Superman flying shot by Singer look way more powerful (and realistic).

[Showtime]

The teaser for FF2 looks pretty damn cool, but I dont see the flying being better than what was used in Returns. The plane sequence included incredible action shots of Superman flying. Picking up speed, stopping, and starting up again. Plus the Torch and Silver Surfer is all CGI.

Seems they included a little nod to Returns with Torch's descent from space after being dropped by Surfer.

[Pickle-El]

I didn't see anything new in that FF2 teaser....we saw the same thing in the Plane sequence, and the flying through the clouds at the end. Except, it was done during the day with McG-ish camera cuts every 2 seconds to make it appear incredibly hectic.

Superman's flying is supposed to be graceful...until he breaks the sound barrier, or is out saving something from killing someone. The most impressive thing about that teaser trailer is the great job WETA has done on the SS.

I saw that Torch fall it looks pretty good......I doubt it will have the same 'no one talks in the theatre' impact that the Superman fall from the heavens had though. :o

[AgentPat]

Gah! Everybody keeps talking about the FF2 trailer but nobody is posting any links. :mad:

Is it verboten or something? :confused:

If so, can somebody pleeeeeze hit me with a pm? Pickle? Showtime? Anybody? :(

[Lightning54SC]

seriously guys look how the camera makes you feel as if hyour flying with em... yes the plane was awsome but i think singer needs to to let brandon move around a bit more and do more camera shots like FF2

agent go to FF in the forums :woot:

[Pickle-El]

Gah! Everybody keeps talking about the FF2 trailer but nobody is posting any links. :mad:

Is it verboten or something? :confused:

If so, can somebody pleeeeeze hit me with a pm? Pickle? Showtime? Anybody? :(


http://www.apple.com/trailers/fox/fantasticfourriseofthesilversurfer/

[AgentPat]

http://www.apple.com/trailers/fox/fantasticfourriseofthesilversurfer/
http://www.patcostello.com/smileys/cool.gif

HAHAHAHAHA!!! Wow! I had to watch the scene going down the building with facade pieces flying off a few times 'cause it was THAT good, and I started giggling after seeing Thing with the tissues. So the FX and the humor worked in the trailer. For me, anyway.

Interesting that they chose a flying battle scene to showcase. Heh. That's Fox for ya. Always going for the jugular. ;)

Anyhoo, that was damn cool. Thanks, Pickle. :up:

[lexlives]

Man, I'd heard it was great and better than any of the SR teaser stuff and they were right! Awesome. Fox knows how to make a superhero film. FF is likely going to be huge at the box office cause the script sounds great and if this is the level of FX - they have set the bar higher!! Kudos to Fox - I am not a Marvel fan but you make me wish I was when I see something like this.

Does anyone know the budget for this film? This is especially good as they are on a fast track - just 2 years since the first and the 3rd has been tentatively said to be set for 2009. If Singer does a sequel he will be up against tough competition in FF3 judging from this. Least in the FX department.

[FlawlessVictory]

Fox knows how to make a superhero film.

:huh: F4, Daredevil, Elektra, and X3. And because you don't like SR, all of a sudden WB does not how to make a superhero film? Did you forget about Batman Begins?

[I Am The Knight]

I can't get the damn thing to work for me.

[lexlives]

:huh: F4, Daredevil, Elektra, and X3. And because you don't like SR, all of a sudden WB does not how to make a superhero film? Did you forget about Batman Begins?

Fox does geenrally much better than WB - with the exception, in recent times, of BB which was great.

But Spiderman 1 - 3, FF2 looking way, way better than FF, Plus some cool stuff in the works like Cap,

Yes FOX does a better job by far most of the time with superheros.

Summer 2009 will be something for FOX with FF3, the first X-Men prequel, Cap and who knows what else. Singer and WB best get their act together cause if they do a sequel they will be facing a strong Marvel juggernaut in summer 2009.

[FlawlessVictory]

Fox does geenrally much better than WB - with the exception, in recent times, of BB which was great.

But Spiderman 1 - 3, FF2 looking way, way better than FF, Plus some cool stuff in the works like Cap,

Yes FOX does a better job by far most of the time with superheros.

Spider-man 1 - 3 is Sony.

[lexlives]

Spider-man 1 - 3 is Sony.

Yes, and Sony does a better job too.

[KaptainKrypton]

I enjoyed the teaser, but felt they blew their load (just like with X3) in their first "teaser." It didn't tease anything when they give me the intial chase sequence between Radd and Storm. Where's the buildup in that? Hell, why don't they just post the whole movie on Apple? Fox is retarted. They crap out two good X-men films (which they produced like *****) and can't buy a clue as to how to market with any sort of subtlety. I hope this sequence isn't the best part in the movie. However, after the way they marketed X3, I wouldn't doubt it. I love that this part of the film looked so cool, but I for one, still remember that Tim Story is directing and I remember what I had to suffer through in 2005 at his hands. Why can't these guys and WB market like Sony does for Spider-Man? They need to find a middle ground that gets you excited to the max when you watch the trailer.

[KaptainKrypton]

As for the main topic of any flying changes to SR's sequel? I would just like to see more running takeoffs and Bob Harman style landings like the old films had. More of the physical flying and less CG work. They have these new kickass XYZ rigs, I just wished they'd actually use them.

[bunk]

The FF2 teaser was cool but nothing new really, it isn't at all evidence that the movie itself will be any good. I like the angles and shots from the plane sequence of SR better than this teaser trailer, but thats just my opinion. Hopefully, in the SR sequel there will be a chase scene and I doubt FF will compare.

[AmbientFire]

wow. that FF2 trailer was amazingly underwhelming in every aspect. THAT is the first piece of silver surfer you give us? wow. And dear god, I hope the crew that gave us the flying in SR does NOT take their cues from these guys because wow. That was NOT in any way spectacular. Precisely every piece of flying in SR overshadows this FF2 nonsense they've given us. Oh god, perish the thought that they should EVER take their cues from these FOX fellows.

[lexlives]

wow. that FF2 trailer was amazingly underwhelming in every aspect. THAT is the first piece of silver surfer you give us? wow. And dear god, I hope the crew that gave us the flying in SR does NOT take their cues from these guys because wow. That was NOT in any way spectacular. Precisely every piece of flying in SR overshadows this FF2 nonsense they've given us. Oh god, perish the thought that they should EVER take their cues from these FOX fellows.

LOL! Love it. Yes, it blew any Singer teaser/trailer away. Heaven forbid the Singer team take a clue from this.

Go look again at the first SR teaser and then this - now tell me which one gets audiences hyped and which doesn't? This is the kind of thing that needs to be fixed in a Singer sequel.

[AmbientFire]

LOL! Love it. Yes, it blew any Singer teaser/trailer away. Heaven forbid the Singer team take a clue from this.

Go look again at the first SR teaser and then this - now tell me which one gets audiences hyped and which doesn't? This is the kind of thing that needs to be fixed in a Singer sequel.

I haven't seen anything to get hyped about in this trailer - but more importantly. It's a trailer. I would HATE to see a Superman movie take it's cues from this in terms of flight (and dramaturgy of course).

[AmbientFire]

LOL! Love it. Yes, it blew any Singer teaser/trailer away. Heaven forbid the Singer team take a clue from this.

Go look again at the first SR teaser and then this - now tell me which one gets audiences hyped and which doesn't? This is the kind of thing that needs to be fixed in a Singer sequel.

I haven't seen anything to get hyped about in this trailer - but more importantly. It's a trailer. I would HATE to see a Superman movie take it's cues from this in terms of flight (and dramaturgy of course). Where was the power? Where was the grace? Whe sense of urgency in this chase? Not in the CG Surfer, that's for sure. And by the way, Human Torch flying sideways? That wasn't it either.

[Crooklyn]

^^ Were you wearing a blindfold as you watched the trailer? You're seriously overexhaggerating to try and make a point. :confused:

The airplane sequence in SR is the only time I really thought Superman was brought back in a good way in terms of flight. Dynamic angles, extreme adrenaline rush, basically felt like you were right there with him. Unfortunately, the rest of the film featured a static cam panning up/down/left/right as Superman flew by. Not terribly exciting by any means.

If Singer intended for us to watch the flying from the public's perspective, and awe at the sight..then yes, he succeeded. But he also has to add in that much needed "spark" to spruce things up. Flying can be inspiring, but it can also be damn cool. No reason why one has to overshadow the other.

[lexlives]

^^ Were you wearing a blindfold as you watched the trailer? You're seriously overexhaggerating to try and make a point. :confused:

The airplane sequence in SR is the only time I really thought Superman was brought back in a good way in terms of flight. Dynamic angles, extreme adrenaline rush, basically felt like you were right there with him. Unfortunately, the rest of the film featured a static cam panning up/down/left/right as Superman flew by. Not terribly exciting by any means.

If Singer intended for us to watch the flying from the public's perspective, and awe at the sight..then yes, he succeeded. But he also has to add in that much needed "spark" to spruce things up. Flying can be inspiring, but it can also be damn cool. No reason why one has to overshadow the other.


Exactly. I am reading SR supporters saying FF2 blew their wad with this. How do they know that? And it tells you they realize this is good - better than most any flying FX they say in SR. The flying overall in SR, safv for plane rescue, was I agree not very exciting. And should not the Superman flying be better than any we see in FF or such. Too bad really. If Singer fets a sequel he will be competing against these guys. That ain't funny.

[dark_b]

the angles were better. i think this thread is about the cameera work.

[dark_b]

^^ Were you wearing a blindfold as you watched the trailer? You're seriously overexhaggerating to try and make a point. :confused:

The airplane sequence in SR is the only time I really thought Superman was brought back in a good way in terms of flight. Dynamic angles, extreme adrenaline rush, basically felt like you were right there with him. Unfortunately, the rest of the film featured a static cam panning up/down/left/right as Superman flew by. Not terribly exciting by any means.

If Singer intended for us to watch the flying from the public's perspective, and awe at the sight..then yes, he succeeded. But he also has to add in that much needed "spark" to spruce things up. Flying can be inspiring, but it can also be damn cool. No reason why one has to overshadow the other.this is what i also think. and this is why i opened the thread and then it was deleted.

someone please explain me how is it possible that they made so much CGI in decemeber? and with SR we had to wait until may. why? we know the answer ,some people just dont want to belive it.

back on topic. i want to see the camera going crazzy when he flys. of course in action. in epic slow flying the camera should be very slow. but show us something new. dont just have the camera on the left side of brandon and than in post put the background. this is boring and nothing fresh.
singer likes to tell a story so much that he doesnt care about teh action and teh CGI stuff. so at the end he makes it only because he has to. thats just my opinion. i hope he will prove me wrong.

[ROBOCOP CPU001]

the flying sequences were amazing in Superman returns.. the only problem was even for simple shots..they used the cgi brandon.. some of the best shots were when Real Brandon and lois fly together.. less cgi..more brandon..and i was sick to death of vertical take offs..i would love to see someflying diagnoly on wires..reeve did..so can they.

[KaptainKrypton]

Exactly. I am reading SR supporters saying FF2 blew their wad with this. How do they know that? And it tells you they realize this is good - better than most any flying FX they say in SR. The flying overall in SR, safv for plane rescue, was I agree not very exciting. And should not the Superman flying be better than any we see in FF or such. Too bad really. If Singer fets a sequel he will be competing against these guys. That ain't funny.
When you release a trailer that is one long and expensive FX shot that doesn't even have a slight bit of narrative other than it being an actual chase sequence, what the hell would you expect us to think? I thought it was good, but different in execution (and a bit stupid). I did think it was dumb that Storm was even remotely able to catch Radd, though. The way I always figured it, Surfer can travel at much higher speeds than The Human Torch could ever dream of...then again Tim Story is directing, so go figger. You may not find the SR flying exciting, and that's your prerogative. If I'd have to compare either the plane sequence or the Metropolis rescue sequences with this FF2 trailer, I'm going with SR by a landslide. Those flight shots were much more exciting to me.

[KaptainKrypton]

and i was sick to death of vertical take offs..i would love to see someflying diagnoly on wires..reeve did..so can they.
Amen. I want to see a balance of the two. After watching what kind of wire rig capabilities they had when I watched the bonus disc, I was very disappointed they didn't use those rigs for a greater number of shots with some of the old school takeoffs. I loved the full-motion fast flying shots and the maneuverability that BR had was insane in the sequences, but I kept asking myself: "Where the hell is Bob Harman when you need him?"

[Showtime]

I didn't see anything new in that FF2 teaser....we saw the same thing in the Plane sequence, and the flying through the clouds at the end. Except, it was done during the day with McG-ish camera cuts every 2 seconds to make it appear incredibly hectic.

Superman's flying is supposed to be graceful...until he breaks the sound barrier, or is out saving something from killing someone. The most impressive thing about that teaser trailer is the great job WETA has done on the SS.

I saw that Torch fall it looks pretty good......I doubt it will have the same 'no one talks in the theatre' impact that the Superman fall from the heavens had though. :o

I think they did an amazing job with Silver Surfer as well. He looks fantastic. I dealt with the same silence in the theaters when I went as well. Twice. Pin drop.

[ultimatefan]

I enjoyed the movie but I felt the flying scenes were a bit lacking. I wanted to see something as dynamic and kinetic as the chase scene in the FF2 teaser.

[Lightning54SC]

I enjoyed the movie but I felt the flying scenes were a bit lacking. I wanted to see something as dynamic and kinetic as the chase scene in the FF2 teaser.

bout time some of you guys see what im saying... :woot:

[Visionary]

With Bryan Singer you'll probably get another sick kid instead.

[lexlives]

this is what i also think. and this is why i opened the thread and then it was deleted.

someone please explain me how is it possible that they made so much CGI in decemeber? and with SR we had to wait until may. why? we know the answer ,some people just dont want to belive it.

back on topic. i want to see the camera going crazzy when he flys. of course in action. in epic slow flying the camera should be very slow. but show us something new. dont just have the camera on the left side of brandon and than in post put the background. this is boring and nothing fresh.
singer likes to tell a story so much that he doesnt care about teh action and teh CGI stuff. so at the end he makes it only because he has to. thats just my opinion. i hope he will prove me wrong.

Definitely Singer's focus is on the story. Reember X-men 3 had lots more FX shots in its teser about a year ago than did SR. We really did not see anything till April and I recall all the compalints about not getting a trailer sooner. And Singer had more time to don SR than Ratner did X-Men3.

Singer is a good director but his focus is not action scenes and CGI. That works for the Usual Suspects but not for a Superman film.

I agree that it is the angles on the FF2 flying scenes that make them so engaging and get your adrenalin running.

[Visionary]

Darksied also flies with an unearthly gizmo. Let Darksied be born in the sequel.

[ervann]

Peter Jackson for the sequel. People forget how great the camera work was for LOTR.

[lexlives]

Peter Jackson for the sequel. People forget how great the camera work was for LOTR.

As the end of year criticism of SR comes out PJ may not be such a stretch. IMO it is in no way certain WB will or can continue with Singer given the polarization out there among fans, GA and critics over his vision.

[ervann]

I think if WB could, they'd have change director already.

But too much was invested in SR and they have little financial choice but to ensure the continuity, and hope that Singer delivers 'more action' which they foolishly assume will translate into 'bigger box office'.

I would wet myself if PJ and Weta take over Superman. Shoot the whole thing in Wellington, I don't care. Thing is I don't think PJ will ever do comics books. He may produce though.

[dark_b]

singer is a good story teller. WB just can not give him 100% freedom. have singer under control go to ILM and ask lucas and spielberg for advice. and you got yourself the ultimate superman movie.

[Visionary]

Didn't Singer ask Lucas or/and Cameron advice on how to go about making Superman? I remember reading that somewhere on these boards.

[dark_b]

Didn't Singer ask Lucas or/and Cameron advice on how to go about making Superman? I remember reading that somewhere on these boards.i also read it .but in the movie i saw 70% CGI flying. even if he asked tehm he didnt do what they told them.

[superhey]

I agree.

Torch flying is good in the teaser , but Superman flying shot by Singer look way more powerful (and realistic).


AGGREE WITH THIS STATEMENT!!!!!:yay:

[Lightning54SC]

AGGREE WITH THIS STATEMENT!!!!!:yay:

you need your eyes checked

[JamalYIgle]

you need your eyes checked
A faux shakey cam affect doesn't make the flying look better. I saw the teaser, it wasn't anything special.

[bosef982]

My God, you fans are so....ugh, you disgust me.

You see a 1 minute teaser for F4 and you're all like, "It's better." Nevermind that we are dealing with two totally different visual characters. Human Torch "looks" more kinetic and energetic due to the fact that he is pure fire.

Superamn Returns did some great flying shots. Would I like some more versatility, of course. But, what we got was more than okay with me.

And LexLives with his "end of the year" criticism and the whole WB can't go on...

I don't know if you heard, by Bryan Singer was hired for the sequel and WB has already chosen him as a director.

Moron.

[TheComicbookKid]

Of course the SS looks cool.

But the thing is that we haven't seen a fight with Superman yet. People keep saying that the airplane sequence was the only time it looked good, because it's the only time in the movie that Superman was actually moving fast speed.

Unfortunately, we have to wait until 2009 to see how Supes looks in frantic flight.

[Lightning54SC]

My God, you fans are so....ugh, you disgust me.

You see a 1 minute teaser for F4 and you're all like, "It's better." Nevermind that we are dealing with two totally different visual characters. Human Torch "looks" more kinetic and energetic due to the fact that he is pure fire.

Superamn Returns did some great flying shots. Would I like some more versatility, of course. But, what we got was more than okay with me.

And LexLives with his "end of the year" criticism and the whole WB can't go on...

I don't know if you heard, by Bryan Singer was hired for the sequel and WB has already chosen him as a director.

Moron.
sorry but surfboard stiff flying doesnt cut it for me i wanna be blown away.... i wanna be able to fly with superman... like superman.... i feel as if we get more of it in 1 min teaser from the FF2 then in a 3 hour superman movie....

[Lightning54SC]

If there is a reboot or even if singer gets his second chance(god i hope not) but whatever... what heroic scenes would you like to see int eh movie....

id like to see...

1. Superman is space, a metor flying down he catches up to it goes threw it but realizes the danger he just made even worse then he races ahead of it and start using his vision blast to stop them from raining down ont he city

2. Stop a plane from flying into a building (kinda of a 9/11 thing) it would be nice to see him smile with red eyes at some terroriest that hijacked a plane that tried crashing it only to be stopped int eh nick of time

3. possible train derail or bridge falling out and him hold it up as people get get off ASAP


what would you liek to see? or if you agree with me just give a x'whatever :woot:

[GreenKToo]

I would like to see something like a russian nuclear sub and an american sub collide, the russian sub suffers more damage and sinks to the bottom. The american navy tries to assist the russian navy in a rescue, but the sub is in to deep of water. the media soon learns of the disaster and rushes to cover it. the whole world is on pins and needles. Just when all seems lost, superman appears and lifts the entire sub up and out of the sea and on to safety, with the williams theme blasting. Newscrews capture it live and the entire world erupts into cheers.

EDIT: I also would love to see supes beat down in a superpowered fight, his suit torn to tatters, but he rises and then kicks some serious butt.

[Showtime]

I like some of your ideas in here, the sub sequence and the plane sequence escpecially. The problem is I don't want to see anything that might be deemed repetative. If he saves the Russian Sub he will be lifting it out of the water, more lifting. If he stops the plane, he will again...be stopping a plane.

[Justice Bringer]

Superman Returns the video game level one;

Save Metropolis from a meteor shower.

[GreenKToo]

I thought about that, but what can you do to really show his power that hasnt been done before? whatever he does, wheather it involves an earthquake, or saving a boatload of people, it will seem repetative, but I do get your point though. I suppose the only thing that wouldnt seem repetative would be an epic superpowered fight, something that would make us go Zod who?? while we are gripping the arm rests in the theater in frenzied excitement..I like some of your ideas in here, the sub sequence and the plane sequence escpecially. The problem is I don't want to see anything that might be deemed repetative. If he saves the Russian Sub he will be lifting it out of the water, more lifting. If he stops the plane, he will again...be stopping a plane.

[Showtime]

I think if we used our imagination we could think of many ways that Superman's seemingly overused powers could result in something new and fantastic on screen.

The scene where Superman uses his X-Ray vision to to destroy the falling glass and melt it down while flying on his back was quite inventive. The basic idea came from the Batman vs Superman script but they twisted it and it worked.

For instance you "flip the script" so to speak.

In Returns Superman caught a falling construction worker and placed him on the ground in midflight. It was a pretty neat sequence, but what if instead of catching the man in mid air, he uses his superbreath? Maybe he is higher up in the sky and blows him back to the ledge or maybe he somehow uses it to guide him down to the ground safely. There are so many ways you can tweak these traditional ideas.

[afan]

I thought about that, but what can you do to really show his power that hasnt been done before?



Superman is speaking at an outdoor public appearance. A woman and her child are among the thousands there. The child perhaps following a balloon drifting thru the crowd wanders away from the mother. Superman finishes his speech bids farewell to the crowd and begins to fly slowly up and away. Amidst the thundering cheers of the crowd he hears the lone voice of the mother frantically calling for her child. He stops and flies directly to her. She explains her plight; he asks what the child is wearing. She answers a Metropolis (team name) baseball cap. He zooms upward above the crowd stopping and looking down at the throng. It takes only a moment for his vision to spot the child. He flies down to the child and brings the child to the mother.

We've seen enough of the over the top super rescues, including lifting an island into orbit, let's see a heroic deed that humanizes the character again.

[Showtime]

That is a pretty classy and simplified moment. I think that he doesn't even have to come down and listen to what the mother's problem is though, he just needs to hear her calling for her child and spots the kid running for the balloon.

It could work on some small level. I like it.

[afan]

That is a pretty classy and simplified moment. I think that he doesn't even have to come down and listen to what the mother's problem is though, he just needs to hear her calling for her child and spots the kid running for the balloon.

It could work on some small level. I like it.

Well he needs to know which one of the multitude of children is hers, but it would also add to the personal touch.

I felt that SR sorely lacked any interaction between Superman and "the little people". The airplane passengers and the population of Metropolis had no identity whatsoever. When Superman caught the man falling from the crane the emotional impact was about the same as when he catches the Daily Planet globe. He might as well have caught a mannekin.

Unlike STM and SII.
Superman saving fluffy and the following interraction between him and the little girl was spot on Superman and thanks to those few low budget moments everyone he subsequently saves has an identity.

[Showtime]

I agree with you on the personal moments between himself and citizens of Metropolis. That is an extremely good point, and I haven't heard it before. The only citizen he really interacted with was Kitty, and she was a major player. Some of the interactions between Superman and citizens were cut or changed.

*The scene where he stops the robbery at the convenient store and they only show a clip on television. That was longer and was filmed as an actual scene where he shakes his hand at the end.

*The scene where he carries mountain climbers stranded on a mountain in a big chain may or may not have been filmed, I am pretty sure it was. He had some connection with them.

Good post though.

[Matt]

Superman is speaking at an outdoor public appearance. A woman and her child are among the thousands there. The child perhaps following a balloon drifting thru the crowd wanders away from the mother. Superman finishes his speech bids farewell to the crowd and begins to fly slowly up and away. Amidst the thundering cheers of the crowd he hears the lone voice of the mother frantically calling for her child. He stops and flies directly to her. She explains her plight; he asks what the child is wearing. She answers a Metropolis (team name) baseball cap. He zooms upward above the crowd stopping and looking down at the throng. It takes only a moment for his vision to spot the child. He flies down to the child and brings the child to the mother.

We've seen enough of the over the top super rescues, including lifting an island into orbit, let's see a heroic deed that humanizes the character again.

I like it!

[what_19]

i know some people hate seing him do "normal" saving like the plane and such, as opposed to fighting someone hand to hand...but i think thats part of the reason he's SUPERMAN...and i like your ideas, but i really think anything having to do with terrorism is a kind of slap in the face to the people who have suffered losses due to terrorism...i think it will be seen as a way to cash in a quick buck.., personally i'd be a little offended if i saw superman doing that...and if we see him stop one terrosrist attack then why isnt he over in the middle east fixing things..i think it just opens a big can of worms that will only hurt the movie

[C. Lee]

You can have him saving people from plane, train, and car crashes (these happen every day).....but certain disasters should be avoided (such as an event similar to 9/11 or a tsunami)...because they were such enormously horrific events, people would protest because of the sensative nature of them.

[afan]

Re. Superman vs Terrorism.

Whether or not Superman belongs in that arena, i.e. pro-actively fighting terrorism is one issue, just as the character does not belong in SR's melodramatic mush, he would not thrive embroiled in a global political theme either, but that being said the act of stopping a terrorist attack on a 9/11 scale would result in a standing "O".

Clearly history shows us that films using heroes to oppose ideologies of hate, are met with cheers not jeers. WW II and the prolific use of America's film and literature icons to battle Nazis and the Axis powers, being the prime example. Surely WW II far surpassed the horrific impact of 9/11 on the American psyche, but the films thrived and undoubtedly raised morale at home.

[Matt]

I'll pass on Superman preventing 9/11 in the sequel. It just has no place in the movie. There are countless things to do with Superman, why really go there?

[C. Lee]

I have no problem with showing him stopping some terrorist plot....but it shouldn't be one too similar to the events of 9/11 (as the first poster suggested).

[afan]

I'll pass on Superman preventing 9/11 in the sequel. It just has no place in the movie. There are countless things to do with Superman, why really go there?

Uhmm, he already has prevented a terrorist action on film, SII, atomic bomb, Eiffel Tower, sound familiar.
"Gee Mr. White that's terrible!"....."That's why they're called terrorists, Kent."

Not advocating it's inclusion either. My post was to argue against the notion that it would automatically recieve a negative reception from the public.

[Spiderine]

The only terrorism shpuld be the villains.IMO

[CGHulk]

Well how about in Superman Returns, Clark is watching the TV and there's a Middle Eastern women angry and before that scene there's tanks shooting misiles, you'd think he'd be taking care of the War than just crying over Lois.

[Excel]

Superman Freezes A Robbery-escape-helicopter Between Two Sky Scrappers!

[Matt]

Uhmm, he already has prevented a terrorist action on film, SII, atomic bomb, Eiffel Tower, sound familiar.
"Gee Mr. White that's terrible!"....."That's why they're called terrorists, Kent."

Not advocating it's inclusion either. My post was to argue against the notion that it would automatically recieve a negative reception from the public.

I understand that. I am just arguing that intentional allusions to 9/11 has no place in the movie. Keep politics out of it.

[The Kid]

Jason and Superman vs Nuclear Man and Nuclear Boy.

[C. Lee]

I understand that. I am just arguing that intentional allusions to 9/11 has no place in the movie. Keep politics out of it.

That was my point too....certain events would just ruin the experience.

[BareKnucklez]

Jason and Superman vs Nuclear Man and Nuclear Boy.

lol don't give Singer any crazy ideas... I wouldn't be mad if they did a scene where Superman stops the events of 9/11 I actually thought about something like that a while back when they said a new Superman movie got green lit.
But I agree it wouldn't go over well... I think most people would be upset that something so tragic would be used in such a way.
Especially since they really did knock down the towers...

My biggest complaint about SR was the scene where Superman is listening to people scream in pain, and agony, and people dying, and what not when he's floating in space, and then he goes to rescue money which is being robbed from a Bank.
Now talk about Superman like heroics... Singer just got the character all wrong!

[The Kid]

Lol, I remember that. I was thinking "wtf dude. There's more at stake out there than bill gate's money."

My imagination's prettygood... but I'm just having a difficult time thinking of stuff supes could do that wouldn't involve that damn kid as a sidekick.

I'm thinking he could start small. Just do little things around metropolis to help. Stop some guy from falling in the subway etc. Then something much bigger happens like a huge explosion and then nuclear man re-awakens!

[Showtime]

"Look he's mutated into human form!"

Looks like you've changed your clothes so to speak Weyseed, gone back to a more classic look.

I'd actually like to see Superman hovering over a battlefield, two countries at war, preferably not superpowers.

He is hovering over the battlefield not interfering with the battle itself but tending to those in need and carrying them to safety on both sides. Maybe a VO by Jorel in regards to not getting involved and interfering.

[GreenKToo]

I just thought of something you guys may or may not like, what with all the mining accidents that have been on the news lately, why not have supes save some coal miners?? say 15 or so of them a 1,000 feet under ground, the tunnel collapses, and a fire starts. rescue efforts get underway, but the oxygen level is running out, and fast.

Clark is at the daily planet, and sees a special news report on the monitor about the accident. He makes his way to the storage room for a quick change into supes and rushes to the scene. tons of rescue workers and media are at the site and witness him land. after a quick word with the lead rescuer, superman bores his way down to the trapped miners, puts the fire out and carries all the miners out at once by towing the elevator up they used to travel down in..

[ervann]

I want to see Superman actually using his brains in addition to his powers to solve a problem or rescue a situation. Stopping a derailed train, saving a plane or a man falling off a building, that's pretty straightforward.

That deleted scene in the original script where a tidal wave rushes towards Metropolis - now that's a sequence where the audience wouldn't know exactly how Superman will fix do.

To me there are two types of heroic scenes ofr Superman:

1) The 'tidal wave' type where the obstacle is so big audiences will be left in awe of the superfeat

2) The 'smaller' personal types that leave the audience cheering e.g. saving the boy at Niagara Falls and even saving Lois from the chopper in STM.

[Matt]

Lol, I remember that. I was thinking "wtf dude. There's more at stake out there than bill gate's money."


Superman = Corporate America's drone :cwink:

[Matt]

I just thought of something you guys may or may not like, what with all the mining accidents that have been on the news lately, why not have supes save some coal miners?? say 15 or so of them a 1,000 feet under ground, the tunnel collapses, and a fire starts. rescue efforts get underway, but the oxygen level is running out, and fast.

Clark is at the daily planet, and sees a special news report on the monitor about the accident. He makes his way to the storage room for a quick change into supes and rushes to the scene. tons of rescue workers and media are at the site and witness him land. after a quick word with the lead rescuer, superman bores his way down to the trapped miners, puts the fire out and carries all the miners out at once by towing the elevator up they used to travel down in..

Again, I feel it is too topical and would just be a sentimental draw back to those miners trapped in Virginia last year. Lets keep the real world out of a movie about a man who flies.

[Showtime]

That deleted scene in the original script where a tidal wave rushes towards Metropolis - now that's a sequence where the audience wouldn't know exactly how Superman will fix do.



In that scene he lifted up a whole set of train cars off the track and into the air as the tidal wave passed below them.

[GreenKToo]

I would have loved to have seen that scene, a pity we didnt.In that scene he lifted up a whole set of train cars off the track and into the air as the tidal wave passed below them.

[Showtime]

I would have liked to seen it too, but you know how it is, others would complain that Superman was lifting things again.

[GreenKToo]

Ha Ha ya. I think that if S.R. would have had one more big action scene such as that, alot of the debates would be moot.I would have liked to seen it too, but you know how it is, others would complain that Superman was lifting things again.

[Matt]

Ha Ha ya. I think that if S.R. would have had one more big action scene such as that, alot of the debates would be mute.

Well, I think it all depends on what said action scene was. Superman Returns had plenty of action scenes, the problem is...they were all basically just Superman lifting something heavy.

[GreenKToo]

Well, I think it all depends on what said action scene was. Superman Returns had plenty of action scenes, the problem is...they were all basically just Superman lifting something heavy.

Thats hard to say, it needed to have something that would make the audience want to stand and cheer, like the plane rescue scene. I like the train scene that showtime mentioned, it sounds like it had the potential to do just that..[

[Matt]

Thats hard to say, it needed to have something that would make the audience want to stand and cheer, like the plane rescue scene. I like the train scene that showtime mentioned, it sounds like it had the potential to do just that..

I don't think so. I think it would've just been another lifting of a heavy object. Plus, it would greatly mirror the plane scene, which would kind of be stupid as the plane sequence would've just happened an hour ago.

[GreenKToo]

well, its what he does, hes superman after all. He is supposed to lift heavy things, and I see no way around that. It would be like someone saying about spider-man, "oh no, not the spidey sense thing again"I don't think so. I think it would've just been another lifting of a heavy object. Plus, it would greatly mirror the plane scene, which would kind of be stupid as the plane sequence would've just happened an hour ago.

[Matt]

well, its what he does, hes superman after all. He is supposed to lift heavy things, and I see no way around that. It would be like someone saying about spider-man, "oh no, not the spidey sense thing again"

Superman has a multitude of powers. The only one he really displayed in SR was his ability to lift heavy objects. If you see so much of that, it inevitably becomes underwhelming.

[GreenKToo]

yes I know, and singer touched on that, but not enough. hopefully we'll get to see more of his powers in the sequel. I would love to see him unleash his heat vision at full power on a supervillain, with his eyes glowing bright red from the power and anger.Superman has a multitude of powers. The only one he really displayed in SR was his ability to lift heavy objects. If you see so much of that, it inevitably becomes underwhelming.

[Excel]

JJ Abrams Script had some cool ideas

-superman stops a volcano from destroying an indi's village
-superman takes a wifebeater upt o 5,000 feet, drops him, and catches him at the last minute
-superman saves a fishing boat in an enormous storm lost at sea

IMO, you have to start with his powers, and think of ideas where he can utilize them.

[TheComicbookKid]

Unfortunatetly, the superfeats is why some people don't like Superman.

My friend who saw the movie and thought it was good, hates Superman because he could "undo a tornado by spinning around it." But that's what Supes is. My mom hates Batman because of the utility belt with everything and I couldn't get her to watch BB even though I told her he wasn't like that in the movie.

On the subject I want a thousand Brainiac drones come to Earth and Supes have to race back to Metropolis while stopping drones around the world. You can refrence the genecide in Africa by him stopping drones attacking them( in refrence to the thread about global warming)

[Showtime]

JJ Abrams Script had some cool ideas

-superman stops a volcano from destroying an indi's village
-superman takes a wifebeater upt o 5,000 feet, drops him, and catches him at the last minute
-superman saves a fishing boat in an enormous storm lost at sea

IMO, you have to start with his powers, and think of ideas where he can utilize them.

The volcano thing was already explored in Superman 4, I don't remember how he stops it in the Abrams Script. The wifebeater thing is interesting, but if people are complaining Singer's Superman is not an idealistic Superman, I don't think Superman would do something like that. In regards to the boat thing, I don't want to see anymore involvement with cars, planes, boats, or trains. They need to mix things up a bit now.

[Matt]

I personally wish Abrahams got a chance to take his movie further. Apparently the re-write featured Corporate Lex who was NOT from Krypton, Krypton was infact destroyed, no resurrection scene, and was considerably better.

Abrahams has proved on countless occassions just how talented he can be. I wish he could've used that talent on Superman.

[Showtime]

I personally wish Abrahams got a chance to take his movie further. Apparently the re-write featured Corporate Lex who was NOT from Krypton, Krypton was infact destroyed, no resurrection scene, and was considerably better.

Abrahams has proved on countless occassions just how talented he can be. I wish he could've used that talent on Superman.

The fact that he would even write Superman like that to begin with blows my mind, he absolutely destroyed the character. Due to that alone, he didn't deserve a chance.

Anything else he's done has been pretty damn good in my opinion though. He has a knack.

[Matt]

The fact that he would even write Superman like that to begin with blows my mind, he absolutely destroyed the character. Due to that alone, he didn't deserve a chance.

Anything else he's done has been pretty damn good in my opinion though. He has a knack.

I doubt it was all Abrahams. At the time, Abrahams was only the writer with both McG and Peters above him. I would love to see what Abrahams could do if he were given full creative control like Singer.

[Showtime]

He could put Superman's suit in a can...heh heh.

[Obi Wan Kenobi]

WB and Bryan Singer better get a damn clue. I just saw the trailer for Will Smith's new movie "Hancock". I thought it was going to be stupid but I was absolutely FLOORED by the special effects and the story. Hancock is nothing but a Superman with a tan.

I'm tired of seeing Superman fly around with Lois under 1 arm for half the film while other studios are kicking ass. The Hulk, Iron Man & even this new Smith flick has surpassed anything seemingly the Man of Steel can do on film.

Its quite depressing. I hope Brandon Routh is right about this next film show casing Superman's real abilities because WB has done a piss poor job of illustrating what Supes can really do in an entertaining manner. It doesn't have to be versus a super villian the entire time. Go watch the Hancock trailer of him stopping a carjacking, a robbery and saving a female cop under fire.

Why can't anyone make a Superman film with that kind of action MINUS the campy stuff?

[Slugster]

WB and Bryan Singer better get a damn clue. I just saw the trailer for Will Smith's new movie "Hancock". I thought it was going to be stupid but I was absolutely FLOORED by the special effects and the story. Hancock is nothing but a Superman with a tan.

I'm tired of seeing Superman fly around with Lois under 1 arm for half the film while other studios are kicking ass. The Hulk, Iron Man & even this new Smith flick has surpassed anything seemingly the Man of Steel can do on film.

Its quite depressing. I hope Brandon Routh is right about this next film show casing Superman's real abilities because WB has done a piss poor job of illustrating what Supes can really do in an entertaining manner. It doesn't have to be versus a super villian the entire time. Go watch the Hancock trailer of him stopping a carjacking, a robbery and saving a female cop under fire.

Why can't anyone make a Superman film with that kind of action MINUS the campy stuff?


WORD!

[Odin's Lapdog]

actually when hancock or anyone starts throwing whole continents into space, please let me know

:up:

[Slugster]

The thing is thats part of the camp.
I mean we know Superman has abilities far beyond those of mortal men... BUT???

[superbaby]

well, superman is powerful, everybody knows that. let singer spending more time on how to kick superman's butts again in the sequel. bravo!

[The Guard]

Can I have some of what you're all smoking?

How does HANCOCK showcase Superman's true abilities better than SUPERMAN RETURNS? Is a blurry shot of a man throwing a whale out to sea somehow what Superman should be about?

What SUPERMAN RETURNS were you all watching that you didn't see Superman do something infinitely cooler than the few shots of action you get during the HANCOCK trailer?

The man just turns into a blur when he flies around. The special effects are B level at best. SUPERMAN RETURNS had a much better showcasing of powers on almost every level. Hancock apparently just throws things. Superman lifted a continent, planes, a yacht, caught the Daily Planet globe, and had a number of other more impressive uses of power.

Selective memories, I guess.

[I SEE SPIDEY]

^Nope. Just his and my opinion.

[\S/JcDc\S/]

I knew a thread like this would happen after that trailer was shown :-/

[wellsy]

Honestly, the showcase in SR is easily better than that trailer.

Yes, Supes' full powers weren't showcased in SR. They never really have been. However, Hancock doesn't match even SR. Not by a very long shot.

And I'm not even talking about the quality of the SFX.

[TheComicbookKid]

I'm amazed at how people get upset that Superman accidently killed two people in SR, but want him to crush a train like Hancock which will easily kill hundreds of people. The only thing Hancock has is the charming Will Smith to count on.

With that said. I will kill for a space battle. And no Superman 4 style slow motion crap. Superman can overcome it.

[I SEE SPIDEY]

I don't think that he wants Superman to act like Hancock, I believe he just wants to see some better f**king visuals in a Superman film, and oh yeah, fight scenes. Pardon my french but it had to be said.

[Visionary]

Iron Man's flying was also a lot better visually than Supes.

[thatsabadoutfit]

That's because it's a lot easier to create something of metal look real visually than a man with a face, hair, and a cape. Hancock even has glasses and a hat on for most of the movie which makes things even easier. Making a man look realistic with facial features and everything is hard to do and I think that shot at the end of SR is as close as you can get. I think the problem with that shor however is that it was slow moving and graceful. If you were put put that kind of render in live and fast action in the right lighting, it would look real but still not completely real. SUperman is exposed.

Things can be done action wise and visually wise to improve the way it looks. But in terms of making the graphics better for Supes, I dont think its possible.

[KobiKai]

Iron Man's flying was also a lot better visually than Supes.

I watched Iron Man a couple of hours ago, it's amazing and totally kicks SR's ass. Plus the flying is very cool :grin:

[Ita-KalEl]

Yesterday I saw Iron Man.
It was an amazing sh movie. Really fantastic!

When I was in the theatre I was thinking about my hero: Superman, and how it was underused in SR.
All the terrific action scenes made by Iron Man, could have been made better by Superman.
Superman can flight (and he has his amazing cape), can use his heat vision like laser beams, he could fight with F-22s, with robots, with monsters...
Wake up WB!You have a gold mine, use your best franchise properly and greenlit a terrific sequel.

[CGHulk]

I was thinking the same thing when watching Iron Man, I whispered over to my father, "Superman Returns is a joke compared to this!"

[Jul-el]

Yup.Same here.Makes ya sick don't it???

I remeber thinking during FF2 that the flying was better.

[FaT_tONle]

WB needs to take control of themselves. And that doesn't mean going Transformers by giving us a hapass JLA that will appease the seven year olds. Luckily that seems to be out of the way now. Get rid of the soap opera. Get rid of the kid (kill him off to some medical complication at the end or something... its the only way)... give us a big time villain. And update Lex to modern standards. There won't be a second go around if they screw this up again, or else it will be Batman films for another 50 years. What really killed SR for me personally was the kid... so as long as they fix that I'll jump back on the band wagon.

[Ita-KalEl]

I was thinking the same thing when watching Iron Man, I whispered over to my father, "Superman Returns is a joke compared to this!"

The problem of SR is that it was too nostalgic and romantic for a summer movie.
We really need a SR sequel with the right amount of action, because only Superman can do the coolest things.

I'm a great fan of Batman Begins, but with all the respect for The Dark Night, Batman is a limited character. If you look at the TDK trailer, it seems only "more of the same" of BB. I'm sure that the movie will be terrific, but at WB they have Superman...they must use him properly.
I don't know, they have to put Doomsday or Darkseid in the movie, or an epic battle with some military forces, but they have to do something!

[Ita-KalEl]

WB needs to take control of themselves. And that doesn't mean going Transformers by giving us a hapass JLA that will appease the seven year olds. Luckily that seems to be out of the way now. Get rid of the soap opera. Get rid of the kid (kill him off to some medical complication at the end or something... its the only way)... give us a big time villain. And update Lex to modern standards. There won't be a second go around if they screw this up again, or else it will be Batman films for another 50 years. What really killed SR for me personally was the kid... so as long as they fix that I'll jump back on the band wagon.

I understand you points, and I agree with you. Nevertheless I think that it's too late for a reboot (even because another origin movie doesn't guarantee a better performance at the box office). I'm for the "Wrath of khan" idea.
They have to do a terrific superman movie (with brandon routh) with great action and great drama (with a bit of humor for the kids).

For the problem of the kid, IMO it isn't a great problem, but I think that in the world there is a writer able to cancel the kid from the story (The kid is brainiac, is a kryptonian clone...or I don't know).

I know only that the 99.9% of this forum will go to see TMOS after a trailer full of terrific action.

[FaT_tONle]

Kryptonian clone... not a bad idea... they got to do something with that man... I am not gonna see this franchise go Zorro or something along those lines.

[Ita-KalEl]

Kryptonian clone... not a bad idea... they got to do something with that man... I am not gonna see this franchise go Zorro or something along those lines.

For example there was the "Doomsday Wars" saga that can give some good ideas. In this saga Brainiac dies and looks for a body for his mind/spirit. Then he uses Doomsday but the monster is difficult to control so he needs the modified body of a human baby.

In the sequel they can say that kid was a kryptonian clone made by Brainiac for his "incarnation" and that Richard White was mind controlled or a Brainiac's servant.
IMO there are a ton of ways to solve to problem of the kid. But it depends by Singer.

[Compi716]

WB and Bryan Singer better get a damn clue. I just saw the trailer for Will Smith's new movie "Hancock". I thought it was going to be stupid but I was absolutely FLOORED by the special effects and the story. Hancock is nothing but a Superman with a tan.

I'm tired of seeing Superman fly around with Lois under 1 arm for half the film while other studios are kicking ass. The Hulk, Iron Man & even this new Smith flick has surpassed anything seemingly the Man of Steel can do on film.

Its quite depressing. I hope Brandon Routh is right about this next film show casing Superman's real abilities because WB has done a piss poor job of illustrating what Supes can really do in an entertaining manner. It doesn't have to be versus a super villian the entire time. Go watch the Hancock trailer of him stopping a carjacking, a robbery and saving a female cop under fire.

Why can't anyone make a Superman film with that kind of action MINUS the campy stuff?
Damn straight.
:up::up:
:supes:

[The Guard]

he's not saying superman has to act like hancock you closed minded fools, he's saying that superman movies don't showcase thier abilities as well as hancock did in the trailer. Using his abilities for so many different thing's.

Try debating without resorting to namecalling. Maybe then people will take you seriously.

Obviously many of you have selective memories when it comes to what was in SUPERMAN RETURNS, where Superman used his abilities for a number of things, including several things similar in nature to what Hancock does in the trailer.

Oh, but he didn't stop a speeding train or throw things or hit people. I forgot that's what Superman was all about.

Wait...something's coming back...he did throw things. He threw a freaking space shuttle.

A blur?? exactly what are you smoking?. every flying shot of superman in SR was a friggin blur or simply to dark to make out.

That is simply not true. Flight effects and shots were fantastically realized. You could very much make out the visuals of the character. Hancock turns into a blur, he takes off in a blur, and he lands in a blur.

hancock is an improvement & ppl don't like it so they come up with rediculous claims like the one above in quotes. So sad.

No, what's sad that people like you think Superman should be about "fighting things". I blame STAS for this mindset.

Iron Man's flying was also a lot better visually than Supes.

What are you basing this on, exactly?

[KobiKai]

I'm a great fan of Batman Begins, but with all the respect for The Dark Night, Batman is a limited character.

Isn't this the very problem with Superman? Batman has a coolness factor because of the gadgets, dark character, vehicles and women. Even when he's Bruce keeping up the facade he's driving Ferrari's and accompanied be multiple blondes.
Superman on the other hand has Lois, glasses and ma & pa that's it.

P.S this isn't to start an argument but it was a comment without foundation

[The Guard]

Neither Batman nor Superman are limited characters. The possibilities with both, as with almost any superhero, are almost limitless.

[tekcopedis]

I do not agree with Superman's powers being underutilized, I think they were undramatized. I mean sure he did some feats, but they were so slow and repeated so often that they became boring.

Oh wow, he can lift heavy things. Whoopedy dooo.

It dose not have the same hysterical and coolness of flying into the back seat of a car, trying to negotiate with the criminals peacefully, then they shoot at him and archive nothing and going to plan B which is to kick out the entire back seat of the car and pin them up on a building.

In fact, I remember seeing that scene in the trailer and laughing thinking how that would be a perfect fit for a Superman movie with a dialog adjustment.

Superman: Hello fellas. My name is Superman and I am here to let you know that stealing is wrong. Now, I am not here to judge you guys-

*robbers look at each other like the man is nuts*

Superman: -but I think we can talk to each other like civilized adults and I believe if you turn yourself now you will not face the severity if you-

BLAM! BLAM! BLAM! BLAM! BLAM!

*as they yell cusses in Spanish, all that happens is bullet holes in the back seat and some shells rolling into Superman's lap*

Superman: ....ok, plan B then.

*blows out back seat of the car and pins them to a skyscraper*

:grin:

[The Guard]

Superman wouldn't use that method anyway.

[Superman90]

True SR didn't show how powerful Superman is but, at least we still got some power rather than nothing at all. Hopefully in MOS he punches the hell out of something/someone to send them flying. That would be great to see.

[boog_spin]

True SR didn't show how powerful Superman is but, at least we still got some power rather than nothing at all. Hopefully in MOS he punches the hell out of something/someone to send them flying. That would be great to see.


yeh him throwing a continent into space really underutilizes his raw power and determination. i totally agree

[KobiKai]

yeh him throwing a continent into space really underutilizes his raw power and determination. i totally agree

The continent thing looked very cheesy though and wouldn't look out of place in a comedy sketch

[Superman90]

yeh him throwing a continent into space really underutilizes his raw power and determination. i totally agree

Thanks and hopefully Superman gets into multiple fist fights. That's what I'm waiting for.

[KobiKai]

IMO the only way to save the franchise is to bring out Doomsday and make him look so powerful you'll think that Superman doesn't stand a chance. I'd even leave the death at the end because if it's successful you can always bring him back like the comic

[superbaby]

c'mon it wasn't the superman power under used. it's the way it was shot.
it was boring, non creative and animated.
singer is just bad in action. and if he returns, the problem will still be there. we will still not be blown and sastified with the action.

[Odin's Lapdog]

why is everyone forgetting he threw a CONTINENT INTO SPACE, A KRYPTONITE LACED CONTINENT WITH KRYPTONITE EMBEDDED INSIDE HIM

if you sit back and think about that alone, it's insane to imagine what he could do on a good day...

don't be saying supes has got no chance of showcasing power, it's the hulk everyone should be worried about.

[darthbakpao]

the problem with SR is that it lacked imagination and joyless. Aside from the plane rescue scene, i can't remember any scene that made me cheer or smile.

In Hancock's trailer, you see him stopping the car using his feet, and uses the car as a shield while carrying the injured officer. That's funny and imaginative. It plays with the possibilities of how Hancock can apply (or abuse) his powers.

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Can I have some of what you're all smoking?

How does HANCOCK showcase Superman's true abilities better than SUPERMAN RETURNS? Is a blurry shot of a man throwing a whale out to sea somehow what Superman should be about?

What SUPERMAN RETURNS were you all watching that you didn't see Superman do something infinitely cooler than the few shots of action you get during the HANCOCK trailer?

The man just turns into a blur when he flies around. The special effects are B level at best. SUPERMAN RETURNS had a much better showcasing of powers on almost every level. Hancock apparently just throws things. Superman lifted a continent, planes, a yacht, caught the Daily Planet globe, and had a number of other more impressive uses of power.

Selective memories, I guess.

Agreed, i like the look of Hancock, and will be seeing it, but nothing i have seen him do in the trailers surpass what Superman did in SR. The lifting of the continent alone is a feat far more powerful than anything ANY other character has ever managed in a movie.

[Mostpowerful]

Agreed, i like the look of Hancock, and will be seeing it, but nothing i have seen him do in the trailers surpass what Superman did in SR. The lifting of the continent alone is a feat far more powerful than anything ANY other character has ever managed in a movie.

Agreed, but I'm not interested in Hancock at all. It looks too campy, and I'm tired of Will Smith; he always does the same character, meh.

But yeah, the lifting of New Krypton is an amazing feat, and something we had never seen before. It was indeed a job for a Superman. Besides, the best part of that scene is not just the impressive lifting of it, but the fact that Superman was willing to give his life to save the world. Everything worked for me, the magnificent score, the emotion, Superman's determination, the imagery (Superman falling back to Earth unconcious), yeah, just so awe-inspiring, beautiful and compelling. Superman rocks!

[FlawlessVictory]

the problem with SR is that it lacked imagination and joyless. Aside from the plane rescue scene, i can't remember any scene that made me cheer or smile.

Completely agreed.

[VenomsMom]

Nothing wrong with him hurling an island in space. And not that it was not impressive. I think we really wanted to see him hurl a supervillain around in this movie. and we should not had to wait for a sequel to see it.

[Billy Batson]

WHOA! WHOA! WHOA! Stop the F'en Presses.
Tell me you guys ARE NOT ragging on SR the GREATEST SUPERMAN FILM OF ALL TIME.
Please tell me that my eyes are deceiving me. :wow:
Finally the TRUTH is revealed SR SUCKED TO high heaven.
SR2 will not be any different than the first train wreck.
I hope the success of Hancock help the WB too stick a fork in SINGERMAN pt.2.
:im: :applaud

[The Guard]

the problem with SR is that it lacked imagination and joyless. Aside from the plane rescue scene, i can't remember any scene that made me cheer or smile.

Lacked imagination...in what way? Most of the usage of his powers was pretty imaginatively realized, especially several of the Metropolis Rescue sequences.

In Hancock's trailer, you see him stopping the car using his feet, and uses the car as a shield while carrying the injured officer. That's funny and imaginative. It plays with the possibilities of how Hancock can apply (or abuse) his powers.

But again, Superman doesn't tend to work that way. That's Hancock, who doesn't give a squat about collateral damages.

I'm not going to pretend that there couldn't be a bit more "fun" to Superman, though.

[Bren]

The way I see it is;

Your Dad is great and all, he puts good food on the table. He provides the warm, safe house, your comfy bed. He gets you into a good school, and he treats his wife, you, everyone, with the greatest respect. He stops the bagsnatcher but makes no issue of it because... Well, because that's how he is. In fact, the only people who know about it (if he can help) are the police!

But you still find your hard drinking loudmouthed uncle more fun, because he lets you drink some of his whiskey. You just didn't know that he beats his wife when he gets totally wasted and doesn't have a job.

Make Daddy more FUN and he'll be the (rightfully so) greatest hero on screen!

SR was depressing imo, and I don't want to go watch a depressing Superman movie. Ever.

[fabman]

LOL...

Good post Bren, sums it up nicely... Bruce Timm & Co. MADE "daddy" a lot cooler!

Because, when done right, Superman can be the best ****ing badass icon of the comic book world... really, THE MAN...

...if done right.

[nintendo nerd]

Neither Batman nor Superman are limited characters. The possibilities with both, as with almost any superhero, are almost limitless.

I hate to disagree, but we saw Batman at his full potential on BB and it barely made more than 200 million. And SR had quite a good story but lack of action and made 200 million. IMO the highest both characters can make at the BO is 250 - 300 million. But no Spider - man and probably Iron - Man numbers.

[superbaby]

I hate to disagree, but we saw Batman at his full potential on BB and it barely made more than 200 million. And SR had quite a good story but lack of action and made 200 million. IMO the highest both characters can make at the BO is 250 - 300 million. But no Spider - man and probably Iron - Man numbers.
oh pls, it is really pissing me off.
if supes and bat have limited potential, why bother to do their movies???!!!
what spidey and ironman things that supes and bat can't offer???!!!

SR / BB can't do that much, doesn't mean it will forever can't. it is simply because SR & BB ain't the best for both characters.
:cmad:

[tekcopedis]

Lacked imagination...in what way? Most of the usage of his powers was pretty imaginatively realized, especially several of the Metropolis Rescue sequences.



But again, Superman doesn't tend to work that way. That's Hancock, who doesn't give a squat about collateral damages.

I'm not going to pretend that there couldn't be a bit more "fun" to Superman, though.

1) Yes but none of them were not done in any punctuation. When you have no punctuation, the action then seems flat. When action is flat, it bores people.

2) Like the whole Zod fight right? Or when he was crashing through buildings to save Metropolis in SR?

Sounds like someone never actually payed attention to the films he watches.

[wellsy]

oh pls, it is really pissing me off.
if supes and bat have limited potential, why bother to do their movies???!!!
what spidey and ironman things that supes and bat can't offer???!!!

SR / BB can't do that much, doesn't mean it will forever can't. it is simply because SR & BB ain't the best for both characters.
:cmad:
Agreed.

Hmmm... that's a first, now isn't it?

[fabman]

It seems like The Dark Knight will make much more than Batman Begins this year, now that the character has got his dignity back.

Get Superman's dignity back and one day his movie could have monster hype as TDK.

[Ita-KalEl]

oh pls, it is really pissing me off.
if supes and bat have limited potential, why bother to do their movies???!!!
what spidey and ironman things that supes and bat can't offer???!!!

SR / BB can't do that much, doesn't mean it will forever can't. it is simply because SR & BB ain't the best for both characters.
:cmad:

So wasn't BB a good Batman movie?
Good to know.

[Ita-KalEl]

It seems like The Dark Knight will make much more than Batman Begins this year, now that the character has got his dignity back.

Get Superman's dignity back and one day his movie could have monster hype as TDK.

I doubt that TDK will do far more than $380-$390m ww.

[JaD]

WB and Bryan Singer better get a damn clue. I just saw the trailer for Will Smith's new movie "Hancock". I thought it was going to be stupid but I was absolutely FLOORED by the special effects and the story. Hancock is nothing but a Superman with a tan.

I'm tired of seeing Superman fly around with Lois under 1 arm for half the film while other studios are kicking ass. The Hulk, Iron Man & even this new Smith flick has surpassed anything seemingly the Man of Steel can do on film.
Half the film?

Being cheeky or not, I think you need to get a clue, but that's just me

Its quite depressing. I hope Brandon Routh is right about this next film show casing Superman's real abilities because WB has done a piss poor job of illustrating what Supes can really do in an entertaining manner. It doesn't have to be versus a super villian the entire time. Go watch the Hancock trailer of him stopping a carjacking, a robbery and saving a female cop under fire.

Why can't anyone make a Superman film with that kind of action MINUS the campy stuff?

This thread is nothing more than another bash at SR and it's lack of a great amount of "action". I chatted about this with someone else earlier and that it seems the longer it is that MOS hasn't moved into production, the more SR bashers come in with another idea of what it should've done or should do. This delaying is clearly forcing people to get their frustration off their chests in any way they can.

I'm not sure how you can compare Hancock's effects to SR, I mean, did you even see the movie. There was a scene in there that was pretty amazing, Hancock's got nothing to this scene alone in terms of effects.http://img74.imageshack.us/img74/6898/supermanreturnsplanerespi0.jpg
http://img74.imageshack.us/img74/4035/supermanreturnsplaneresdm7.png
http://img74.imageshack.us/img74/5749/supermanreturnsplaneresqf7.png
http://img74.imageshack.us/img74/6733/supermanreturnsplaneresdu5.png
http://img74.imageshack.us/img74/4827/supermanreturnsplaneresuv8.jpg
http://img74.imageshack.us/img74/1615/supermanreturnsplanerespd6.jpg
http://img74.imageshack.us/img74/5254/supermanreturnsplaneresxw2.jpg

[Ita-KalEl]

I hope that the WB will be honest with the Superman fans. If they don't want to make another Superman movie, they have to tell us, because 3 years of debate about SR and its supposed sequel are enough.

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Agreed, but I'm not interested in Hancock at all. It looks too campy, and I'm tired of Will Smith; he always does the same character, meh.

I like the look of Hancock, looks like it will have nice twist on the SH genre, and i think Will Smith is great, he is so watchable, but he can act also, he was fantastic in I Am Legend. Hancock should be good fun, i cant wait for it, but doubt i'll enjoy it as much as i did SR.

But yeah, the lifting of New Krypton is an amazing feat, and something we had never seen before. It was indeed a job for a Superman. Besides, the best part of that scene is not just the impressive lifting of it, but the fact that Superman was willing to give his life to save the world. Everything worked for me, the magnificent score, the emotion, Superman's determination, the imagery (Superman falling back to Earth unconcious), yeah, just so awe-inspiring, beautiful and compelling. Superman rocks!

Agreed, superb scene that i can watch over and over. In fact, i just love the whole 3rd act.

[The Guard]

I hate to disagree, but we saw Batman at his full potential on BB and it barely made more than 200 million. And SR had quite a good story but lack of action and made 200 million. IMO the highest both characters can make at the BO is 250 - 300 million. But no Spider - man and probably Iron - Man numbers.

Disagree all you want.

That is not Batman's full potential.

SUPERMAN RETURNS didn't lack action. It lacked fight scenes.

[GreenKToo]

I hope that the WB will be honest with the Superman fans. If they don't want to make another Superman movie, they have to tell us, because 3 years of debate about SR and its supposed sequel are enough.
I agree. It's getting real tiresome.

[FlawlessVictory]

I hope that the WB will be honest with the Superman fans. If they don't want to make another Superman movie, they have to tell us, because 3 years of debate about SR and its supposed sequel are enough.

Agreed. It' so damn frustrating. We have no idea what's going on with JLA and MOS and here we have Marvel laying out their gameplan for the next three years.

[Nixon]

I like the look of Hancock, looks like it will have nice twist on the SH genre, and i think Will Smith is great, he is so watchable, but he can act also, he was fantastic in I Am Legend. Hancock should be good fun, i cant wait for it, but doubt i'll enjoy it as much as i did SR.




The Hancock trailer looks great but Hancock looks like a different sort of character than Superman albeit with similar powers.

One point I'll give Hancock over Superman Returns, just from seeing the trailer, is for being more upfront. From the trailer we see Hancock saying "It's hard to live here being the only one of my kind . . ." or something along those lines. We needed a similar scene in Superman Returns to explain to everyone why it is so hard for Superman on Earth and why it was so important for Superman to leave Earth and try and find Krypton. I could've sworn we had a similar line in the trailer for Superman Returns but it certainly wasn't in the movie.

Yes, the material is there in Superman Returns but it was handled in such a subtle way that a lot of people seemed to miss it.


Oh and JaD, thanks for posting those pics. Great stuff.

[Nixon]

Agreed. It' so damn frustrating. We have no idea what's going on with JLA and MOS and here we have Marvel laying out their gameplan for the next three years.


Agreed not knowing definitively what's next with Superman is annoying. That being said, the superheroes are only one piece of Warner Bros. gameplan while for the newly minted Marvel Productions it's pretty much the whole thing. It shouldn't be too surprising that they're giving it much more attention.

[Ita-KalEl]

Agreed not knowing definitively what's next with Superman is annoying. That being said, the superheroes are only one piece of Warner Bros. gameplan while for the newly minted Marvel Productions it's pretty much the whole thing. It shouldn't be too surprising that they're giving it much more attention.

Yes, but they continue to waste money in crappy projects like SpeedRacer.

[Crook]

SUPERMAN RETURNS didn't lack action. It lacked fight scenes.
It lacked action with spectacle and awe.

[fabman]

It lacked action with spectacle and awe.

It lacked spectacular action. It lacked suspense. It lacked a good storyline. It lacked drama. Not bore-fest, drama. It lacked humour. It lacked fleshed-out characters. All we got were empty "shells". Such poor material for an actor such as Kevin Spacey. It lacked anything you could imagine. It's... empty. It's bland. It tries to be a homage of Richard Donner's "Superman", but doesn't share any of its qualities, other than superficial stuff, such as the theme, and a Clark Kent who resembles Christopher Reeve's... in looks! Because, live I've said, Clark Kent was an empty shell aswell in the movie. And it sure isn't Brandon Routh's fault. Poor script. Poor, bloated, directing. Poor... Superman!

Please save this character before he definitely becomes a joke to the general audience. While this movie is nowhere as bad as Batman & Robin, people are definitely not interested in the character after Superman Returns... well, apart from die-hard fans.

It's just such a bland, mediocre and forgettable film... :csad:

[Mostpowerful]

Totally agree JaD! The plane rescue is The Best superhero action scene ever, IMO!! And Bryan Singer directed it.

I have NO doubt that he Can do that and more in MOS. Just look the wonders he did in X-Men 2. I want him to return. He knows what's at stake here, and he will deliver, no doubt. Give him another chance WB. Bryan Can do good action, he just wanted to focus more on the story in SR, and the story was very good, IMO.

BRING ON MAN OF STEEL!

Superman Returns was a beautiful and poetic film and a good reintroduction of Superman to new audiences, but now it's time to kick butt with an action-packed sequel.......just remember to also have a good story with lots of heart, after all, Superman is The romantic superhero. As much as I enjoyed Iron Man, he is not my superhero at all. He kills, he is a womanizer, an smartass......he is fun, by not my ideal superhero.

Superman is MY Hero.

[Lightning54SC]

say what you will but Superman is a superhero thats on the verge of life support.. after SR people were turned off.. i used to be a superman fan but since this movie ive given up on him and gone to batman...

its tiem for a restart, BR did an ok job but i think hes not the answer, also i dont think the WB really cares anymore... people want stuff like iron man and the dark knight, not some half f*ggy blue suited twit... im sorry you guys can get angery but the public is already displaying this... you can come back at me with the movie made 400 million... guess what Irona nd an the dark knight will surpass it buy almost double i bet..

i really wish the wb got their crap together and gave us a awsome superman movie but ever since the days of donner and reeve era these movies were doomed so to speak

[Mostpowerful]

It's just such a bland, mediocre and forgettable film... :csad:

Totally disagree. It may be bland to YOU, not to me and others, for instance. I think it's a very beautiful and epic film, and with a timeless storyline. SR is full of wonderful imagery, has a great score, and it's full of subtext that is awesome. Maybe it is you who couldn't see all of these things some of us do.. what a shame. To me, Superman is more than just an action figure......and SR showed that to me, that he has a soul.

[Lightning54SC]

Totally disagree. It may be bland to YOU, not to me and others, for instance. I think it's a very beautiful, epic, and with a timeless storyline. SR is full of wonderful imagery, great score, and full of subtext that is awesome. Maybe it is you who couldn't see all of these things some of us do.. what a shame. To me, Superman is more than just an action figure......and SR showed that to me, that he has a soul.

are you kidding me? all the movie was, was a bunch of epic shots.. ???? boring... it had no script, a half cast and no real threat... hoenslty man i can sit through just about any movie, but i cant seem to do it with SR...

this is totally true

http://youtube.com/watch?v=JieDtKAj0P4

[FlawlessVictory]

Totally disagree. It may be bland to YOU, not to me and others, for instance. I think it's a very beautiful and epic film, and with a timeless storyline. SR is full of wonderful imagery, has a great score, and it's full of subtext that is awesome. Maybe it is you who couldn't see all of these things some of us do.. what a shame. To me, Superman is more than just an action figure......and SR showed that to me, that he has a soul.

Guess what. It wasn't just bland to HIM.

[Mostpowerful]

say what you will but Superman is a superhero thats on the verge of life support.. after SR people were turned off.. i used to be a superman fan but since this movie ive given up on him and gone to batman...

its tiem for a restart, BR did an ok job but i think hes not the answer, also i dont think the WB really cares anymore... people want stuff like iron man and the dark knight, not some half f*ggy blue suited twit... im sorry you guys can get angery but the public is already displaying this... you can come back at me with the movie made 400 million... guess what Irona nd an the dark knight will surpass it buy almost double i bet..

i really wish the wb got their crap together and gave us a awsome superman movie but ever since the days of donner and reeve era these movies were doomed so to speak

:huh: Well, The Dark Knight being a sequel IS supposed to surpass SR's BO, no? It's obvious to me, just like I expect Man of Steel to surpass SR and TDK in BO terms. I don't get your logic. SR made nearly 400 mil without superfights. Just imagine what it will make with superfights and a supervillain... lots more, I'm sure.

[Mostpowerful]

Guess what. It wasn't just bland to HIM.

:huh: Really?! that's new to me, that you think so too... :cwink: :grin: What a surprise!

[FlawlessVictory]

:huh: Really?! that's new to me, that you think so too... :cwink: :grin: What a surprise!

:woot:

[Lightning54SC]

it made 400 million... why? cuz hes been gone for 20+ years... guess what its bee said that Man of Steel wont come CLOSE to those numbers... as a matter of fact the budget is cut hugley

[fabman]

ld Totally disagree. It may be bland to YOU, not to me and others, for instance. I think it's a very beautiful and epic film, and with a timeless storyline. SR is full of wonderful imagery, has a great score, and it's full of subtext that is awesome. Maybe it is you who couldn't see all of these things some of us do.. what a shame. To me, Superman is more than just an action figure......and SR showed that to me, that he has a soul.

How could I not see that stuff. Singer, Harris and Dougherty really THREW that "yeah, Superman is like Jesus Christ" (:whatever:) stuff at us. I don't think the movie had any sould... it sooo tries to be polished and classy all the time... but it the end it's just a bland, mediocre film. I'm sorry.

But I'm not saying that you can't like it. If the movie appeals to you, why not. It's definitely not for me, and I really wanted to like it. And I don't even hate it. It's far worse. It's so mediocre to me I don't even ****ing care about Superman Returns... even though I care(d) about Superman in general.

[Lighthouse]

Maybe it is you who couldn't see all of these things some of us do.. what a shame. To me, Superman is more than just an action figure......and SR showed that to me, that he has a soul.

How incredibly condescending.

[FlawlessVictory]

Maybe it is you who couldn't see all of these things some of us do.. what a shame. To me, Superman is more than just an action figure......and SR showed that to me, that he has a soul.

How incredibly condescending.

Agreed. Mostpowerful, you did not like it you accused The Guard of speaking down to you in a condescending manner, yet you go ahead and state stuff like this?

[Mostpowerful]

What? that some people can't read behind the lines? It's a reality, IMO. I just can't understand how some people say that SR was shallow, bland and mediocre, just can't. If I sounded condescending, I'm sorry. I agree that the film is not heavy on action, but shallow or boring it isn't, at least not to me.

And I really don't want to start discussing the subject further. It's pointless. By now, everybody has made up their minds about the film.

[fabman]

What? that some people can't read behind the lines? It's a reality, IMO. I just can't understand how some people say that SR was shallow, bland and mediocre, just can't. If I sounded condescending, I'm sorry. I agree that the film is not heavy on action, but shallow or boring it isn't, at least not to me.

And I really don't want to start discussing the subject further. It's pointless. By now, everybody has make up their minds about the film.

It is shallow... there might be something in the movie that clicked with your tastes... fine.

But it's bland. You get Bryan Singer's agenda and "emotions" thrown at you, when there isn't really any substance.

I simply didn't care, nor did I like, the characters.

[Lighthouse]

Start being more tolerant than. I found it depressing and dull. Other people have to. Both sides WILL frequent these forums.

[Slugster]

the first Incredible Hulk movie was rebooted because so much time was used on the love story between Banner and Ross, that it lost focus on it's main character The Incredible Hulk.
Superman the love story between him and Lois, has been played over and over again. Now its time for a Superhero movie for cryin out loud!
You have the greatest Superhero and he is getting his butt whipped by almost every other comic movie.
Superman needs a new direction in the movie world and...
SINGER, AIN'T IT!

[fabman]

It's time for a science-fiction thriller. For something interesting, exciting... but without ignoring the heart and characters...

[The Guard]

1) Yes but none of them were not done in any punctuation. When you have no punctuation, the action then seems flat. When action is flat, it bores people.

I can't discuss this until I know what you mean by it. So what does "punctuation" mean in your context, exactly?

I'm sorry, I just cannot call Superman flying backward down the street while he he melts falling glass with his Heat Vision "flat".

I can't call him racing the explosion through the sewer under Metropolis, doing a flip and using his Superbreath to stop the explosion's flames seconds before it impacts the power plant flat.

Nor can I even begin to call the plane rescue sequence flat.

Nor can I call Superman's beating at the hands of Luthor and his thugs flat.

All of these things are action. And I just cannot see how any of them could be considered "flat".

2) Like the whole Zod fight right? Or when he was crashing through buildings to save Metropolis in SR?

Sounds like someone never actually payed attention to the films he watches.

Sounds like someone needs to learn to read in context. I said "That's Hancock, who doesn't give a squat about collateral damages". I didn't say "Superman never causes collateral damages", nor did I imply it.

That said, there is a huge difference between collateral damage to stop superhumans and being reckless to stop some fleeing criminals because you find it enjoyable or fun, as Hancock clearly does.

And again, the methods are completely different, so going "Superman should do this" just doesn't hold water. Superman doesn't land in the backseat of fleeing cars in the middle of a firefight. Could he? Sure, but that's just not his method.

It lacked action with spectacle and awe.

See, I just can't agree with that. Maybe SOME of the action lacked this, but hardly all of it. If you don't consider the plane rescue sequence and some of the stuff he does in Metropolis "spectacle and awe", I'm really not sure what you would.

It lacked spectacular action.

The plane/shuttle sequence. Young Clark learning his powers. The Metropolis Rescue sequence. Superman lifting New Krypton. Was there a TON of spectacular action? No, but to say it "lacked" implies something to the effect that there was none, which is absurd.

It lacked suspense.

It lacked a good storyline.

I guess that depends on what you consider "good". The storyline featured all of the classic Superman elements as well as a new direction for the mythology.

It lacked drama.

And what do you consider "drama" if not this storyline?

It lacked humour.

It didn't have a LOT of humor, but it didn't lack humor. There were plenty of humorous moments for Clark and Jimmy in particular, and several with Richard and Lois.

It lacked fleshed-out characters.

That I will agree with, to a point. Especially Luthor.

Again, if you didn't like SUPERMAN RETURNS because it was too serious or strayed from the mythos, fine. But the hyperbole around here about what it actually contained is ridiculous. It's the same thing with many of the "action" and "drama" complaints about the X-MEN movies. It's like people complain about it, but clearly can't even remember the movie itself accurately.

[aka Kal el]

WORD!
:word:I could not agree more Hancock looks sick!! Especially the new trailer! they def have to step up their game!

[X-Maniac]

I can see what critics of the action mean. Only the plane rescue had tension in it, I was gripping my seat in the cinema when that was happening. The rest was not filmed with a sense of threat. urgency or energy. It was done with a sort of quiet dignity (Singer's signature with action, as can be seen in the X-movies) and that can make it seem 'flat'. Roger Ebert said the action was 'functional but not exhilarating' and I can see why he thought that - because it was filmed with little dramatic tension, apart from the plane rescue.

[fabman]

You can't really call what you've seen in Superman Returns... action. It wasn't exciting, nor was it very well directed. I don't think Bryan Singer knows how to do exciting action scenes, that really have an impact.

The drama in Superman Returns... Sorry for my kinda dark humour in my next comparison, but...

Guy dying from cancer (drama in other movies)
Guy staying two weeks at home with chicken pox (drama in Superman Returns)

That's how much I cared about the "drama" in Superman Returns.

[Mostpowerful]

-the build up to the catching of the Daily Planet globe had good tension, and it was beautiful, graceful and Iconic. Lots of subtext there.

-Superman rescuing Lois and fam from the sinking yacht had lots of drama and tension. I really thought that Lois and fam could die! But then here comes the saviour Superman epitomizing Hope, just at the last moment. Beautiful.

-The beating of Superman, sorry but that was as dramatic as it gets.

-The plane rescue, it was also full of tension, excitement, with Fleischer's like flying, and that powerful score! And also lots of subtext. Superman performing miracles. I remember a blond lady with her hands together like praying to God to save them. She sure knew she was going to die. But then Superman appeared, and even Lois couldn't believe it by the look she had when she saw that blue and red blurr passing by the window. Again, Superman represented Hope.

-Oh, and all the tension during the Jason throwing the piano at the tug to protect his mother. That's how you make drama.

[Ita-KalEl]

-the build up to the catching of the Daily Planet globe had good tension, and it was beautiful, graceful and Iconic. Lots of subtext there.

-Superman rescuing Lois and fam from the sinking yacht had lots of drama and tension. I really thought that Lois and fam could die! But then here come the saviour Superman epitomizing Hope, just at the last moment. Beautiful.

I loved these scenes. Infact I don't understand how they can say that Singer isn't able to direct an action sequence. The problem with SR was in the script (infact Moriarty understood perfectly the tone of the movie simply reading it).

After the plane sequence the public in the theatre was really excited...the fact is that for the rest of the movie there isn't another sequence of the same magnitude, and for a summer movie this is a great mistake.

[Compi716]

I can't discuss this until I know what you mean by it. So what does "punctuation" mean in your context, exactly?

I'm sorry, I just cannot call Superman flying backward down the street while he he melts falling glass with his Heat Vision "flat".

I can't call him racing the explosion through the sewer under Metropolis, doing a flip and using his Superbreath to stop the explosion's flames seconds before it impacts the power plant flat.

Nor can I even begin to call the plane rescue sequence flat.

Nor can I call Superman's beating at the hands of Luthor and his thugs flat.

All of these things are action. And I just cannot see how any of them could be considered "flat".



Sounds like someone needs to learn to read in context. I said "That's Hancock, who doesn't give a squat about collateral damages". I didn't say "Superman never causes collateral damages", nor did I imply it.

That said, there is a huge difference between collateral damage to stop superhumans and being reckless to stop some fleeing criminals because you find it enjoyable or fun, as Hancock clearly does.

And again, the methods are completely different, so going "Superman should do this" just doesn't hold water. Superman doesn't land in the backseat of fleeing cars in the middle of a firefight. Could he? Sure, but that's just not his method.



See, I just can't agree with that. Maybe SOME of the action lacked this, but hardly all of it. If you don't consider the plane rescue sequence and some of the stuff he does in Metropolis "spectacle and awe", I'm really not sure what you would.



The plane/shuttle sequence. Young Clark learning his powers. The Metropolis Rescue sequence. Superman lifting New Krypton. Was there a TON of spectacular action? No, but to say it "lacked" implies something to the effect that there was none, which is absurd.





I guess that depends on what you consider "good". The storyline featured all of the classic Superman elements as well as a new direction for the mythology.



And what do you consider "drama" if not this storyline?



It didn't have a LOT of humor, but it didn't lack humor. There were plenty of humorous moments for Clark and Jimmy in particular, and several with Richard and Lois.



That I will agree with, to a point. Especially Luthor.

Again, if you didn't like SUPERMAN RETURNS because it was too serious or strayed from the mythos, fine. But the hyperbole around here about what it actually contained is ridiculous. It's the same thing with many of the "action" and "drama" complaints about the X-MEN movies. It's like people complain about it, but clearly can't even remember the movie itself accurately.
Damn straight Guard. Damn straight.

[fabman]

-the build up to the catching of the Daily Planet globe had good tension, and it was beautiful, graceful and Iconic. Lots of subtext there.

-Superman rescuing Lois and fam from the sinking yacht had lots of drama and tension. I really thought that Lois and fam could die! But then here comes the saviour Superman epitomizing Hope, just at the last moment. Beautiful.

-The beating of Superman, sorry but that was as dramatic as it gets.

-The plane rescue, it was also full of tension, excitement, with Fleischer's like flying, and that powerful score! And also lots of subtext. Superman performing miracles. I remember a blond lady with her hands together like praying to God to save them. She sure knew she was going to die. But then Superman appeared, and even Lois couldn't believe it by the look she had when she saw that blue and red blurr passing by the window. Again, Superman represented Hope.

-Oh, and all the tension during the Jason throwing the piano at the tug to protect his mother. That's how you make drama.

I'm glad you liked it but... that's not really how to make drama... If you REALLY want to see something dramatic I suggest David Cronenberg's The Fly.

P.S.: Subtext alone doesn't make a good movie. Batman Forever and Batman & Robin also had subtext. Quite different... but still subtext.

[Ita-KalEl]

Are we talking of the same director that made this?

http://it.youtube.com/watch?v=XbmcSU-Osxs

X2 is still a terrific movie. I'm sure that Singer will do an amazing sequel.

[tekcopedis]

I can see what critics of the action mean. Only the plane rescue had tension in it, I was gripping my seat in the cinema when that was happening. The rest was not filmed with a sense of threat. urgency or energy. It was done with a sort of quiet dignity (Singer's signature with action, as can be seen in the X-movies) and that can make it seem 'flat'. Roger Ebert said the action was 'functional but not exhilarating' and I can see why he thought that - because it was filmed with little dramatic tension, apart from the plane rescue.

Bingo. That is what I mean by punctuation.

Punctuation is like Superman stopping the plane in the most dramatic way in the baseball feild, instead of just stopping the plane. Punctuation is not just Neo and Trinity taking out the Agent on the rooftop, but having Neo try to shoot the Agent, doge all the bullets, but gets trapped and then Trinity bales him out with "Doge This". Terminator does not just stop the T-1000, he instead pulls the tanker over, freezing then thing and then shooting it into a thousand pieces. Instead of Ewolin killing the Witch King, she battles with him seemingly hopeless, but Pippin stabs him and she delivers the final blow with a line that made everyone give a standing ovation in the theater.

One of the major problems with Superman Returns is that it had "Dragonball" action. Big explosions. Flights. Heavy objects. But none of them had any weight, none of them made us care and even so there was no punctuation or stylization that made them seem more or less important than any other action we could see in other movies. You cannot show us an explosion or someone dying and just expect us to feel, you need to show us WHY we need to care, you need to make us care. Just like the Blues, its not just enough to play the right notes but you need to know and feel why those notes need to be played. SR did not do any of that.

One of the reasons of this is of course, that every single plot element was in cliff notes rather than stretched to its limits and any possibly good idea that the public would want to see (everyone abandoning and even hating Superman) was abandoned.

If they just stuck to the original pitch: "Superman comes back to a world that has moved on without him, does not need him and does not care for him. Beaten down into the ground physically and emotionally until he rediscovers himself, his humanity and why the world needs him."

That would have been a true beauty to watch on screen.

The travesty is that they could have keeped 80% of the film they had and added in the other 20% that would have made it spectacular. A true "close but no cigar".

I am going to make a post about what should have been done shortly...

[Billy Batson]

It lacked spectacular action. It lacked suspense. It lacked a good storyline. It lacked drama. Not bore-fest, drama. It lacked humour. It lacked fleshed-out characters.

It lacked action with spectacle and awe.

:whatever: It lacked SUPERMAN.

[The Guard]

Punctuation is like Superman stopping the plane in the most dramatic way in the baseball feild, instead of just stopping the plane.

So which scenes lacked "punctuation"?

[Slugster]

he said doge. :hehe: kinda like duk :lmao: i'm sorry I couldn't help it

[Mostpowerful]

I'm glad you liked it but... that's not really how to make drama... If you REALLY want to see something dramatic I suggest David Cronenberg's The Fly.

P.S.: Subtext alone doesn't make a good movie. Batman Forever and Batman & Robin also had subtext. Quite different... but still subtext.

:huh: What?!! Are you serious?! Are you seriously comparing SR to those movies?! ...:dry: I think we are done with this particular subject, really.

Are we talking of the same director that made this?

http://it.youtube.com/watch?v=XbmcSU-Osxs

X2 is still a terrific movie. I'm sure that Singer will do an amazing sequel.

:up::cool: Of course Singer can do an awesome sequel. I have NO doubts. I loved SR, but I know that MOS has to be more action-packed, and with some superfights, and Singer knows it.

He also did this:

Http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6LyhTAEPxOw

[Slugster]

But I do however agree, with you.

[tekcopedis]

So which scenes lacked "punctuation"?

Lex and his goons beating up Superman.

No emotional payoff, just seemed like it was there to be there.

Superman running around saving threats from Metropolis.

Superman acts like it is his job than he is genuinely cares for the city, repeating the same methods of flawlessly blocking all threats to the point of boredom. We know that he can do all the stuff, what we want to know is why. Hell, we all know what Neo can do, but we feel for him because he wants to save Morpheus in the first film.

Superman confronts Lois.

Like was said in another thread, this seemed selfish and there was no drama or tension between two characters what so ever.

Not to mention, Singer's pitch was about the world forgetting and not needing Superman. Were was that in the movie? Everyone loved him when he came back, worshiped him like Jesus. Was Lois supose to represent the world not caring about Superman? Because she does not represent the world and the only reason she is mad is because Superman did not say goodbye to her. Whoopidy doo, very intense drama!

If they went with the original pitch, this movie would have been a true character study that would have critically been the best movie of that year. Add in a physical villain to counter Lex's intellectual villain and you would have had gold.

Oh and like another forum member, I am going to start ignoring you from now on. Like I said, I am working on a thread to explain how they could have fixed it. Now if you like it or not, that is your problem, however I agree that unlike other members you like hound anyone who dislikes Superman Returns, you worship it like god and you grip at straws in any shape or form in order to rebuttal a person in a non existent argument.

Not to mention quite frankly IMO, you seem to like the worst crap as long as it tickles the 12 year old in you. Like the J.J script with a black suited Matrix rip of Superman.

So to this I say goodbye.

:word:

[Mostpowerful]

I don't even know what the heck 'punctuation' means in this context, lol.. :oldrazz:

[The Guard]

"Seems like it was just there to be there"

????

The entire movie builds to that sequence. There are themes, storylines, etc tied up in that culminating event. Which then builds to something else. You clearly don't know much about the JJ Abrams SUPERMAN project beyond what AICN told you before they retracted their "Abort this project" stance, or remotely understand why I like any of the elements of it.

I'm not sure what kind of emotional payoff you expected to a scene involving Superman getting the crap kicked out of him other than the obvious and most relevant/emotional. Superman at his weakest, in terrible danger, realizing it, experiencing some level of mortality and desperation, and still standing up to them to Luthor and his thugs at the end, and the relevant Jor-El connection/human rescue afterward. Or are you just mad that Superman never gives a speech about how he almost died, but he's just fine now, thank you.

Singer never said that his pitch included actually EXPLORING the world moving on without Superman. Should the movie have? Sure, probably, but pretending you know exactly what his pitch was in relation to the final product is just priceless. Although, you may well be clairvoyant at that, because you obviously know exactly what I do and do not like and dislike about anything, so...

Of course I like the moments in SUPERMAN RETURNS that absolutely nail what the character is about. There something wrong with the twelve year old in me loving that?

But hey, it is much easier to ignore a point of view you don't care for or fully understand than to engage in level headed discussion.

You keep talking about your "How it should have been" thread? So where is it?

[Obi Wan Kenobi]

c'mon it wasn't the superman power under used. it's the way it was shot.
it was boring, non creative and animated.
singer is just bad in action. and if he returns, the problem will still be there. we will still not be blown and sastified with the action.

Yes that's exactly what I was trying to say. It was boring & non creative. The plane sequence in SR rocked. I have no problems with it, in fact thats the part of SR I watch the most & lifting the yacht was awesome. But................

Saving Kitty in the Mustang was boring
The bank robbery scene was dull until he was shot in the eye
Saving metropolis from the quake wasn't very creative

[superbaby]

Yes that's exactly what I was trying to say. It was boring & non creative. The plane sequence in SR rocked. I have no problems with it, in fact thats the part of SR I watch the most & lifting the yacht was awesome. But................

Saving Kitty in the Mustang was boring
The bank robbery scene was dull until he was shot in the eye
Saving metropolis from the quake wasn't very creative
the choatic scene in metropolis is so "kindergarden level" compare to the choatic scene in transformer.

and ya, most of the fanmake MOS trailer are using the transformer's scene. because it has the heat, intense and a real choatic situation.

[superbaby]

Like I said, I am working on a thread to explain how they could have fixed it. Now if you like it or not, that is your problem, however I agree that unlike other members you like hound anyone who dislikes Superman Returns, you worship it like god and you grip at straws in any shape or form in order to rebuttal a person in a non existent argument.

:word:

don't do that unless you really want to or it is your school works. most of us, the dislikers of SR know how and why the miss opportunity of SR, and the SR worshipper will never agree with you no matter how sensible and logical your theory is.

[tekcopedis]

don't do that unless you really want to or it is your school works. most of us, the dislikers of SR know how and why the miss opportunity of SR, and the SR worshipper will never agree with you no matter how sensible and logical your theory is.

I just want to get it out of my system. Plus, it would be a interesting look at "what could have been". What makes this film tragic is that it had a lot going for it, there were just too many cracks that could not hold it all together.

Oh and two quick quibbits:

1) All I am repeating is what the Warner Brothers executives were told what Singer pitched to them when they green lit it.

2) I will say it many many times, you cannot just show us a man getting beaten up and expect us to care. As a film maker and story teller, you need to set up the back story and moment to MAKE us care. Show, not tell. Feel, not see.

[superbaby]

I just want to get it out of my system. Plus, it would be a interesting look at "what could have been". What makes this film tragic is that it had a lot going for it, there were just too many cracks that could not hold it all together.

Oh and two quick quibbits:

1) All I am repeating is what the Warner Brothers executives were told what Singer pitched to them when they green lit it.

2) I will say it many many times, you cannot just show us a man getting beaten up and expect us to care. As a film maker and story teller, you need to set up the back story and moment to MAKE us care. Show, not tell. Feel, not see.
so it's gonna be in a thesis length? :woot:
ya, i agree the official sysnosm sounds very promising. but the execution yuck. and as i have said in other thread that it's just a major common mistake of WB to think that the GA will instantly care for superman when he shows up. they have forgetting today there are tons of competitors like spidey, bats, xmen,ff4 unlike 70s and superman HAS to fight for his place in the movie world. nothing for grant.

[VenomsMom]

I just want to get it out of my system. Plus, it would be a interesting look at "what could have been". What makes this film tragic is that it had a lot going for it, there were just too many cracks that could not hold it all together.

Oh and two quick quibbits:

1) All I am repeating is what the Warner Brothers executives were told what Singer pitched to them when they green lit it.

2) I will say it many many times, you cannot just show us a man getting beaten up and expect us to care. As a film maker and story teller, you need to set up the back story and moment to MAKE us care. Show, not tell. Feel, not see.You just said a mouth full. After all these years and the mess Lex has caused, the confrontation between them just made you feel empty for Supes. He go whupped and that was pretty much it.

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Looks like some of the SR fans fell off their rocker. You can praise the movie for two years and I can complain about it for two years.

[Paste Pot Pete]

Oh and like another forum member, I am going to start ignoring you from now on.

How incredibly mature. You must win all your debates that way.

[I SEE SPIDEY]

If it's immature to not respond to a man who covertly calls you an idiot for not liking a movie, call me miss immature!

I respond to your post because I'm quite sure tekcopedis is referencing me.

Plain and simple, I don't like the way he talks about people who don't like SR. He talks as if we are all dumb monkey's who only wanted non-stop action in the movie. He is rude and so is that waste of human flesh The Batman. I also don't respond to El Payaso for the same reason. Excluding The Guard, because he hasn't quite gotten to this point, if I respond to the posters I just mentioned I would be banned, so I try not to.

And yes, I realize that I'm talking about people who I've never seen on a Superhero messageboard.

[Superhobo]

If it's immature to not respond to a man who covertly calls you an idiot for not liking a movie, call me miss immature!

I respond to your post because I'm quite sure tekcopedis is referencing me.

Plain and simple, I don't like the way he talks about people who don't like SR. He talks as if we are all dumb monkey's who only wanted non-stop action in the movie. He is rude and so is that waste of human flesh The Batman. I also don't respond to El Payaso for the same reason. Excluding The Guard, because he hasn't quite gotten to this point, if I respond to the posters I just mentioned I would be banned, so I try not to.

And yes, I realize that I'm talking about people who I've never seen on a Superhero messageboard.

How are you getting all of this from his posts? Seriously?

[wellsy]

If it's immature to not respond to a man who covertly calls you an idiot for not liking a movie, call me miss immature!

I respond to your post because I'm quite sure tekcopedis is referencing me.

Plain and simple, I don't like the way he talks about people who don't like SR. He talks as if we are all dumb monkey's who only wanted non-stop action in the movie. He is rude and so is that waste of human flesh The Batman. I also don't respond to El Payaso for the same reason. Excluding The Guard, because he hasn't quite gotten to this point, if I respond to the posters I just mentioned I would be banned, so I try not to.

And yes, I realize that I'm talking about people who I've never seen on a Superhero messageboard.
Well, I just get ignored by everyone, so...

[fabman]

:huh: What?!! Are you serious?! Are you seriously comparing SR to those movies?! ...:dry: I think we are done with this particular subject, really.

Actually, I was joking... Of course I'm not comparing it to those movies, but it was just to tell you that subtext alone doesn't make a movie. Even those two movies had (gay) subtext... :hehe:

[Slugster]

I went to see Iron Man last night and I'm telling ya the WB and DC need to raise the bar!
I thought Iron Man was one of the best Superhero movies I have seen.

[FlawlessVictory]

^WB raised the bar with Batman Begins (Favreau even acknowledged this). And they will raise it again with TDK. They just need to get their act together with their other superhero properties.

[The Guard]

the choatic scene in metropolis is so "kindergarden level" compare to the choatic scene in transformer.

True, but then TRANSFORMERS has a particular kind of "chaos". It's giant robots beating up on each other in the middle of a war zone. Of course it's going to involve a lot of "chaos". It's got chaos that dwarfs almost any movie I've ever seen...as it should, because it's TRANSFORMERS. A success for TRANSFORMERS does not neccessarily constitute a failure for SUPERMAN RETURNS. If the moments fit the character, then they should be embraced, not poo-pooed because "another movie is bigger".

SUPERMAN RETURNS is pretty big in scale. The scenes in Superman feature the kinds of danger you would generally expect for a Superman story. More personal, alien-savior-helping-individual humans stuff. Luthor's plot causing disasters, random bank robberies, natural disasters, accidents, etc.

If it's immature to not respond to a man who covertly calls you an idiot for not liking a movie, call me miss immature!

I never called you an idiot. To my knowledge, I have never implied that you were an idiot.

Plain and simple, I don't like the way he talks about people who don't like SR. He talks as if we are all dumb monkey's who only wanted non-stop action in the movie. He is rude and so is that waste of human flesh The Batman. I also don't respond to El Payaso for the same reason. Excluding The Guard, because he hasn't quite gotten to this point, if I respond to the posters I just mentioned I would be banned, so I try not to.

Find me a passage where I take this tone with you, and I will apologize. But I doubt you will, because I don't tend to treat people badly just because I disagree with them. I respond to their points.

WB raised the bar with BATMAN BEGINS, THE DARK KNIGHT, and likely with WATCHMEN. All three of those movies will be among the best superhero movies ever come 2009.

[tekcopedis]

I never called you an idiot. To my knowledge, I have never implied that you were an idiot.



Find me a passage where I take this tone with you, and I will apologize. But I doubt you will, because I don't tend to treat people badly just because I disagree with them. I respond to their points.

And when you respond to peoples posts, you use language to talk down to them like they are in kindergarten. You also instead of saying "I know you see it this way but this is how I see it", use language to try to bend the person's opinion to yours.

Its this kind of speaking, as well as using gross assumptions and generalizations of people you talk to, makes you look like oh what is that word...

An ass?

[The Guard]

And when you respond to peoples posts, you use language to talk down to them like they are in kindergarten. You also instead of saying "I know you see it this way but this is how I see it", use language to try to bend the person's opinion to yours.

Kindergarten? Hyperbolic much?

See, this is you reading WAYYYY too much into my statements.

Sometimes people make ridiculous statements in the middle of a debate. I don't see what the issue with pointing out the obvious absurdities in their statements are. Last time I checked, that was the nature of disagreement and debate. I'd want people to do so for me. I guess I can try holding your hand and agreeing that oft-absurd points of view are valid and correct...no...I'm not going to do that.

You also instead of saying "I know you see it this way but this is how I see it", use language to try to bend the person's opinion to yours

Unless you ARE an idiot, you shouldn't need me to prefix everything I say by saying "I know what you see, but this is how I see it". It's not my job to validate your point of view, because I don't agree with you. That's your job.

Simply agreeing that you have an opinion like I do...is boring. Why would I waste time typing that out when it's already implied? Far more interesting to me is to show people other angles to things that they may not have considered, or may not have given much weight to. That is, after all, how people tend to learn. In theory. Can you think of a better way to reach common ground on a disagreement than actually hashing out the issues together?

If you don't want to debate, if you just want to post blazing hatred toward a movie, fine. Don't debate with me. But time and time again, you come back and respond to my posts, which clearly take the form of debate, and the form of "Let's determine the relevant truth to this particular angle or point of view".

Its this kind of speaking, as well as using gross assumptions and generalizations of people you talk to, makes you look like oh what is that word...

An ass?

So I'm an ass. I'm an ass who demands more from people than "I don't like this because I'm biased about the whole thing and think in such black and white and closeminded terms that I cannot enjoy elements of something if I don't like another element of it" attitudes.

I am confident in my opinions and their relative awesomeness, and I make no apologies for this. It occurs to me that if you were comfortable with your opinions and not just throwing out random statements about everything that confirm to your "bias" that you likely wouldn't be so bothered by them being challenged in the first place. In other words, methinks the lady doth protest too much.

If you have an issue with my assumptions about you or your point of view, then CORRECT me. I make my assessment based on what you give me. If all you give me is venemous bias that simply doesn't hold up upon close inspection, I assume you're just biased toward the movie, or that your thinking is so black and white you cannot allow for good elements to the movie.

[Superhobo]

Kindergarten? Hyperbolic much?

See, this is you reading WAYYYY too much into my statements.

Sometimes people make ridiculous statements in the middle of a debate. I don't see what the issue with pointing out the obvious absurdities in their statements are. Last time I checked, that was the nature of disagreement and debate. I'd want people to do so for me. I guess I can try holding your hand and agreeing that oft-absurd points of view are valid and correct...no...I'm not going to do that.



Unless you ARE an idiot, you shouldn't need me to prefix everything I say by saying "I know what you see, but this is how I see it". It's not my job to validate your point of view, because I don't agree with you. That's your job.

Simply agreeing that you have an opinion like I do...is boring. Why would I waste time typing that out when it's already implied? Far more interesting to me is to show people other angles to things that they may not have considered, or may not have given much weight to. That is, after all, how people tend to learn. In theory. Can you think of a better way to reach common ground on a disagreement than actually hashing out the issues together?

If you don't want to debate, if you just want to post blazing hatred toward a movie, fine. Don't debate with me. But time and time again, you come back and respond to my posts, which clearly take the form of debate, and the form of "Let's determine the relevant truth to this particular angle or point of view".



So I'm an ass. I'm an ass who demands more from people than "I don't like this because I'm biased about the whole thing and think in such black and white and closeminded terms that I cannot enjoy elements of something if I don't like another element of it" attitudes.

I am confident in my opinions and their relative awesomeness, and I make no apologies for this. It occurs to me that if you were comfortable with your opinions and not just throwing out random statements about everything that confirm to your "bias" that you likely wouldn't be so bothered by them being challenged in the first place. In other words, methinks the lady doth protest too much.

If you have an issue with my assumptions about you or your point of view, then CORRECT me. I make my assessment based on what you give me. If all you give me is venemous bias that simply doesn't hold up upon close inspection, I assume you're just biased toward the movie, or that your thinking is so black and white you cannot allow for good elements to the movie.


TOO MANY BIG WORDS!!!!! :cmad:

[X-Maniac]

Well, chaos or no chaos, something about SR didn't look enticing enough to get huge numbers of people to the theater/cinema/what-ever-you-call-it.

The movie did feel flat, and dated. It was not in keeping with today's expectations.

At a horror movie, I expect to be scared; at a comedy, I expect to laugh; at a comicbook-derived movie of any kind i expect to feel there are elements/themes/roles from the original material; at a superhero movie, I expect to see something escapist, entertaining, noble and heroic on to which I could project my own desires. Superheroes are like us but taken to an ultimate level, they have the powers to fight back against whatever threat and they do the right thing.

Most comicbook creators are male, most comicbook readers are male, go to any sci-fi convention and it's mostly male (apart from the giggly girls who come along for autographs of their favourite TV show hunk but don't care about the show!). I want heroes I could look up to, who I could imagine being.

I can't imagine leaving earth for five years without telling my girlfriend/lover/soulmate. This isn't a casual mistake, like forgetting to take your sandwiches into the office or leaving your wallet on the table at home. Going to Krypton was a massive undertaking that required growing a ship from the Fortress, saying goodbye to Ma Kent... yet he couldn't say goodbye to Lois. Disregarding the fantasy elements of Donner's movies 30 years ago with time-reversals and amnesia kisses, which would be dismissed by today's critical audiences, the portrayal of Superman in SR doesn't add up.

But, more importantly, something about the movie didn't appeal to modern audiences. Even all those positive critical reviews meant diddly-squat to Joe Public. Many people waited for the DVD, as is shown by the very good DVD sales. Why didn't they rush to see it like they did with Iron Man, Pirates, Spider-Man, Transformers?

[Billy Batson]

Well, chaos or no chaos, something about SR didn't look enticing enough to get huge numbers of people to the theater/cinema/what-ever-you-call-it.

The movie did feel flat, and dated. It was not in keeping with today's expectations.

At a horror movie, I expect to be scared; at a comedy, I expect to laugh; at a comicbook-derived movie of any kind i expect to feel there are elements/themes/roles from the original material; at a superhero movie, I expect to see something escapist, entertaining, noble and heroic on to which I could project my own desires. Superheroes are like us but taken to an ultimate level, they have the powers to fight back against whatever threat and they do the right thing.

Most comicbook creators are male, most comicbook readers are male, go to any sci-fi convention and it's mostly male (apart from the giggly girls who come along for autographs of their favourite TV show hunk but don't care about the show!). I want heroes I could look up to, who I could imagine being.

I can't imagine leaving earth for five years without telling my girlfriend/lover/soulmate. This isn't a casual mistake, like forgetting to take your sandwiches into the office or leaving your wallet on the table at home. Going to Krypton was a massive undertaking that required growing a ship from the Fortress, saying goodbye to Ma Kent... yet he couldn't say goodbye to Lois. Disregarding the fantasy elements of Donner's movies 30 years ago with time-reversals and amnesia kisses, which would be dismissed by today's critical audiences, the portrayal of Superman in SR doesn't add up.

But, more importantly, something about the movie didn't appeal to modern audiences. Even all those positive critical reviews meant diddly-squat to Joe Public. Many people waited for the DVD, as is shown by the very good DVD sales. Why didn't they rush to see it like they did with Iron Man, Pirates, Spider-Man, Transformers?

Let's start with the trailer.

For the 2nd straight summer, we've seen a lesser known source matriel become a huge box office hit and we are all left to wonder why Superman Returns did not achieve this. I am now more than ever certain Bryan Singer is not the man for the job.

And it all starts, obviously, with the film itself. Lets compare the trailers for the 2 film I was refering to, and the Superman Returns one. Dont even look so far at the matrial itself-look at the look & feel, the general tone the trailers give off:

yZp2qpZtfbo
XnwmUZuF5OY

and then we have...

v4IOoyrfi0s



Let's not forget to mention the power of word of mouth

A friend of mine whom you all would classify as Modern audience member:
" Hey Billy, you're one of those comic book dweebs right?"
Me: " :o I guess."
Modern audience member: " So, what do you think about the new Superman movie?"
Me: "I wouldn't call :whatever: IT a Superman movie."
Modern audience member: " Why not? "
Me: " You wouldn't understand, just go check it out, take your girlfriend she may like it. I heard that the Superman story has been updated to be a chick flick.
Modern audience member:" REALLY!? Ok, thanks Billy"
Me: "your welcome"

Days later

Modern audience member: " BILLY! :cmad: "
Me: " Yes :csad: "
Modern audience member: " YOU A$$!!! THAT MOVIE SUCKED.
I should kick my $22 dollars out of your DUMBA$$. I fell asleep on that crap."
Me: " My BAD. :csad: "
Modern audience member: " dude you suck."

[El Payaso]

Well, chaos or no chaos, something about SR didn't look enticing enough to get huge numbers of people to the theater/cinema/what-ever-you-call-it.

Under that PoV, Batman Begins didn’t either, judging from the numbers it did.

There’s a hunch within me, nevertheless, that tells me that’s not exactly the problem.

The movie did feel flat, and dated. It was not in keeping with today's expectations.

At a horror movie, I expect to be scared; at a comedy, I expect to laugh; at a comicbook-derived movie of any kind i expect to feel there are elements/themes/roles from the original material; at a superhero movie, I expect to see something escapist, entertaining, noble and heroic on to which I could project my own desires.

I know how it works today. It has to be damn formulaistic and predictable or it’s a huge risk.

Superheroes are like us but taken to an ultimate level, they have the powers to fight back against whatever threat and they do the right thing.

You’re very right. As us, superheroes makes mistakes, but their mistakes have biblical proportions. But in the end they fix things up and have to live with the consequences. That’s the ultimate heroism. (Anyone can be a hero when you’re indestructible).

Most comicbook creators are male, most comicbook readers are male, go to any sci-fi convention and it's mostly male (apart from the giggly girls who come along for autographs of their favourite TV show hunk but don't care about the show!). I want heroes I could look up to, who I could imagine being.

It’s up to every one who do we want to be. I for sure know that no super-power (or any other kind of power) will free me of making mistakes and live with the copnsequences of my actions.

I just fail to get what the “male” thing has to do with anything here. Women can’t have idols or what?

I can't imagine leaving earth for five years without telling my girlfriend/lover/soulmate. This isn't a casual mistake, like forgetting to take your sandwiches into the office or leaving your wallet on the table at home. Going to Krypton was a massive undertaking that required growing a ship from the Fortress, saying goodbye to Ma Kent... yet he couldn't say goodbye to Lois.

It’s like when he decided to be qith Lois and leave Earth unprotected without a simple good.-bye to that human race he swore to defend. As you say, not like forgetting a sandwich. But it’s in Superman’s character, according to this particular franchise.

Disregarding the fantasy elements of Donner's movies 30 years ago with time-reversals and amnesia kisses, which would be dismissed by today's critical audiences, the portrayal of Superman in SR doesn't add up.

It’s just consistent with Donner’s franchise.

But, more importantly, something about the movie didn't appeal to modern audiences. Even all those positive critical reviews meant diddly-squat to Joe Public. Many people waited for the DVD, as is shown by the very good DVD sales. Why didn't they rush to see it like they did with Iron Man, Pirates, Spider-Man, Transformers?

Lots of CGI mindless action with giant robots and shaky cameras and stuff like that would have helped a lot with average moviegoers, as it did with all of those blockbusters. I thought that was no secret.

[superbaby]

It’s just consistent with Donner’s franchise.
so???
you saying singer made a dated movie???



Lots of CGI mindless action with giant robots and shaky cameras and stuff like that would have helped a lot with average moviegoers, as it did with all of those blockbusters. I thought that was no secret.
at least the CGI was done in great.
why are we seeing that fake and poor CGI superman so many f times, even for close up??? is it something wrong with brandon face? or he can't act???
this one i really can't understand.

[Jerome Siegel]

(Anyone can be a hero when you’re indestructible).

In the short documentary The Mythology of Superman (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1020893/), a guy named Tom Morris says that he defines heroism as a power in service to others, and I personally think that's true. I don't think it matters whether or not you put yourself at any risk. My opinion is, if you use your skills and abilities to help and save other people, without expectation of reward, that's heroic.

why are we seeing that fake and poor CGI superman so many f times, even for close up??? is it something wrong with brandon face? or he can't act???
this one i really can't understand.

That reminded me of the old Kirk Alyn serials from 60 years ago.

[The Guard]

If anything Singer's take on Superman was too MODERN. Not dated. Think about it. Lois was modern, modern ideas about families, modern ideas about responsibility to one's lover, etc. And the technology and so forth that was showcased...also fairly modern.

[batman44]

If anything Singer's take on Superman was TOO modern. Not dated.

Yeah, the situations dealt with in SR are generally more associated with contemporary times.

[Nixon]

In the short documentary The Mythology of Superman (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1020893/), a guy named Tom Morris says that he defines heroism as a power in service to others, and I personally think that's true. I don't think it matters whether or not you put yourself at any risk. My opinion is, if you use your skills and abilities to help and save other people, without expectation of reward, that's heroic.

I think he may have meant infallible or perhaps even emotionally indestructable rather than merely physically indestructable.

[Mostpowerful]

The movie did feel flat, and dated. It was not in keeping with today's expectations.



Most comicbook creators are male, most comicbook readers are male, go to any sci-fi convention and it's mostly male (apart from the giggly girls who come along for autographs of their favourite TV show hunk but don't care about the show!). I want heroes I could look up to, who I could imagine being.



The movie felt flat To YOU.

And are you saying that all girls are shallow and can't look beyond the physical appearance of an atractive actor, or be able to appreciate a good story, acting, cinematography, score, etc. in a movie?! Because if you do, well, I feel sorry for the girs you know.


Under that PoV, Batman Begins didn’t either, judging from the numbers it did.

There’s a hunch within me, nevertheless, that tells me that’s not exactly the problem.



I know how it works today. It has to be damn formulaistic and predictable or it’s a huge risk.

.

Well said. I think it's clear that since both BB and SR were very serious, mature, and character-driven films (and SR without a supervillain and superfights) it somehow diminished the appeal that a kiddie movie like Spiderman or Transformers had with the mainstream. Not because they were bad films.

[mojo-x]

That's because it's a lot easier to create something of metal look real visually than a man with a face, hair, and a cape. Hancock even has glasses and a hat on for most of the movie which makes things even easier. Making a man look realistic with facial features and everything is hard to do and I think that shot at the end of SR is as close as you can get. I think the problem with that shor however is that it was slow moving and graceful. If you were put put that kind of render in live and fast action in the right lighting, it would look real but still not completely real. SUperman is exposed.

Things can be done action wise and visually wise to improve the way it looks. But in terms of making the graphics better for Supes, I dont think its possible.

So your reasoning is that superman could not look any better flying is because it was hard to do. Sorry but in a movie that cost over 200million I do not fine that acceptable.

[mojo-x]

"Seems like it was just there to be there"

????

I'm not sure what kind of emotional payoff you expected to a scene involving Superman getting the crap kicked out of him other than the obvious and most relevant/emotional. Superman at his weakest, in terrible danger, realizing it, experiencing some level of mortality and desperation, and still standing up to them to Luthor and his thugs at the end, and the relevant Jor-El connection/human rescue afterward. Or are you just mad that Superman never gives a speech about how he almost died, but he's just fine now, thank you.

You keep talking about your "How it should have been" thread? So where is it?

He doesn’t even throw a single punch; he just gets his ass handed to him by Kumar then Lex stabs him. That what I called unexciting especially for a Superman film

[Superhobo]

He doesn’t even throw a single punch; he just gets his ass handed to him by Kumar then Lex stabs him. That what I called unexciting especially for a Superman film

You know the entire island/continent/whatever was laced through with Kryptonite, right? Just saying.

[afan]

If any thing Superman has become too powerful. He's no longer super-powered he's ludicrously super-powered. That level of power takes away the suspense and or interest in Superman's deeds.

The Fleischer cartoon "Magnetic Telescope" is just about where I want my Superman's powers to be, and it includes a use of his powers in a creative method to save Metropolis from destruction.

[dark_b]

superman in SR was waaay to powerful. for the sequel they need to make him weaker.

[superbaby]

superman in SR was waaay to powerful. for the sequel they need to make him weaker.
powerful??? oh ya, he defeated the gaint island!!! wow,that's super powerful, man, i'm telling you.
.
.
.
but
.
.
.
people discussing SR right after watching it: "superman is damn pathetic, he was kicked like a dog by the old men and screamed like a little girl."
.
.
.
it's all about the strong image/message projected into the audience's mind.

[Nixon]

So, is this a bit of equivocation or do you just not remember the movie all that well?

Defeated the giant island? No, he defeated Lex Luthor after Luthor damn near killed him. To do that, he lifted an island of Kryptonite infused rock at least the size of Metropolis, and quite likely larger, into space while slowly being poisoned.

That's a pretty damn impressive feat of strength. It's something that we've not seen before and something we're not likely to see in any other superhero's movie anytime soon. You can't say that about a punch-up.

[I SEE SPIDEY]

^The thing is, did we want to see that? I'd also ask the same thing about the kid.

And oh yes I agree, Superman has gotten to powerful in the comics and other media, I would totally dail down his powers so a fight would actually be interesting.

[Slugster]

Yes Superman is way too powerful I think he should stuggle just a lil bit more when lifting a Kryptonite infused Island from the ocean and throwing it into space
but.... who am I???

[superbaby]

So, is this a bit of equivocation or do you just not remember the movie all that well?

Defeated the giant island? No, he defeated Lex Luthor after Luthor damn near killed him. To do that, he lifted an island of Kryptonite infused rock at least the size of Metropolis, and quite likely larger, into space while slowly being poisoned.

That's a pretty damn impressive feat of strength. It's something that we've not seen before and something we're not likely to see in any other superhero's movie anytime soon. You can't say that about a punch-up.
oops. i forgetten! silly me.
.
.
did you read my post properly? i said the strongest image/message perceived by and projected to the audience.
let's compare the two scenes; the 'pussy' superman fleeing around and being beatened to death; and the 'powerful' superman struggling lifting the giant rock; do you think which scene has more impact to the audience? and which image the audience will remember more?

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

So, is this a bit of equivocation or do you just not remember the movie all that well?

Defeated the giant island? No, he defeated Lex Luthor after Luthor damn near killed him. To do that, he lifted an island of Kryptonite infused rock at least the size of Metropolis, and quite likely larger, into space while slowly being poisoned.

That's a pretty damn impressive feat of strength. It's something that we've not seen before and something we're not likely to see in any other superhero's movie anytime soon. You can't say that about a punch-up.

Agreed 100%, i found the 3rd act of SR much more emotional and powerful than the usual 'dust-up in the street to show that our character is a hero' stuff we keep getting. I'm glad a movie had the balls to try something different, and for me, it worked in SR.

[I SEE SPIDEY]

You know what? some folk here seem to think that myself and others of my ilk just wan't a mindless movie with only mindless messy fight scenes but thats really not true.

Transformers had some pretty good action (when you could tell what the bleep was going on) but I very much disliked it, despite it's entertainment value, because the movie is dumb as hell.

I grew up on the Timm/Dini Superman cartoon. It wasn't as good as their Batman but I dug it all the same and couldn't wait to see some slugfeast like I'd seen in them in live action. I didn't want a liveaction version ofthe show but I did want to see some villians finally make it to the bigscreen. The old movies never had him battling anybody from the comicbooks so I just knew a cool villian would be choosen along side Lex Luthor in a liveaction film.

Imagine my surprise when we only hear that Spacey will play Lex Luthor in what, 2005? For the longest I doubted the fact that Lex would be the only villian, after a while I realized that he would be and thought okay, but Superman is going to fight a big robot or robots right? Uh hell no I figured out soon after. So after years of limbo a Superman movie finally is being made/ is made and he still doesn't have physical villain from the comicbooks? Uh no. Huh, then what the hell have I been waiting for? With all of this techonology the director decides that what we can't handle a Supervillian from the comics after never really getting one? No? Really? Okay...but why, it's a freakin comicbook movie, isn't that part of the fun of watching these things? No you are going to enjoy a mopey Superman and Lois with a kid around. But isn't Superman supposed to be more upbeat and fun than Batman? Uh no, Superman needs to be more serious and realisitic. But he isn't real, he would never exist in real life. Okay, uh okay interestng vision anyway. But it isn't really my vision it's more of a dour version of Donners Superman, it kinda a sequel to the first one or second one, uh vague history. Uh alright but why would you want to do that, not very any people actually remember that first movie or the second one for that matter, wouldn't you want to atleast put your vision out there. Well my vision is a "darker" version of Donners Superman. So you only watched Donner's Superman as a point of reference? No cartoons or shows or most impportantly the comicbooks? Nope, the movie is all I need. Okay, well that sounds like a pretty dumb thing to do but I'll see when it comes to the dollar theaters. Okay.

Well after seeing it I have to tell you...that it was as lame as I thought it would be. Really? but the critics liked it. Good for the critics and anybody else who did but I didn't. You manged to make me realize one thing though. What is that? Uh the lack of a Supervillain should have been the least of my worries, so in a way you proved me wrong. Yes, hang on for the sequel, this time a game of chest with Zod will decide the fate of earth!! You really need to get over Richard Donner. I mean your new ideas are fairly awful but atleast they would have been yours.

I just wanted to post that for some reason.

It's such a confusing situation to me.

[The Guard]

Superman's flying looked fine. Really, complaints about that are just...ridiculous.

He doesn’t even throw a single punch; he just gets his ass handed to him by Kumar then Lex stabs him. That what I called unexciting especially for a Superman film

It's impossible for me to take someone seriously when they cannot get excited about Superman unless he's duking it out with someone. That displays a fundamental flaw in their understanding of the character itself. Is it cool when Superman punches someone? Sure. Is it somehow a poor portrayal if he doesn't? Hardly.

When does he gets his ass handed to him by Kumar?

And what does this have to do with whether or the scene has the requisite emotion?

If any thing Superman has become too powerful. He's no longer super-powered he's ludicrously super-powered. That level of power takes away the suspense and or interest in Superman's deeds.

Which is why Singer showed him in a moment of weakness. Which people then *****ed about because they're so insecure about their own masculinity that...

I'm sorry, but so many of the complaints with this movie obviously boil down to "I wanted Superman to throw a punch, he didn't, and so I'm going to ***** about the entire movie". It's like you all don't care about supervillains except for the action quotient involved. Nevermind the themes or the story possibilities. Superman would get to throw a punch.

[I Am The Knight]

oops. i forgetten! silly me.
.
.
did you read my post properly? i said the strongest image/message perceived by and projected to the audience.
let's compare the two scenes; the 'pussy' superman fleeing around and being beatened to death; and the 'powerful' superman struggling lifting the giant rock; do you think which scene has more impact to the audience? and which image the audience will remember more?

So by your logic Iron Man will be remembered as a "pussy" for being beaten and almost killed by Iron Monger, yes?

And yes, the Superman beating is supposed to have great impact on audiences. THAT WAS THE POINT. Superman, who was presented as virtually indestructible up to that point, experiencing brutal, HUMAN, pain.

If anyone thinks that makes Superman a "pussy" then, welll....Wow. Just Wow.

[FlawlessVictory]

So by your logic Iron Man will be remembered as a "pussy" for being beaten and almost killed by Iron Monger, yes?

And yes, the Superman beating is supposed to have great impact on audiences. THAT WAS THE POINT. Superman, who was presented as virtually indestructible up to that point, experiencing brutal, HUMAN, pain.

If anyone thinks that makes Superman a "pussy" then, welll....Wow. Just Wow.

I think the problem was not the beatdown, every superhero/good buy eventually gets a beatdown in the movies. But in Superman's case he never got to come back and lay into whoever gave him the beatdown. Of course he couldn't in this case because they are human and he would end up just killing them. But I think the audience likes the hero to be down only to be able to rise up and physically take down the villain. That's why the beatdown here and the lack of it coming by a supervillain really hurt it, IMO.

[I Am The Knight]

You know what? some folk here seem to think that myself and others of my ilk just wan't a mindless movie with only mindless messy fight scenes but thats really not true.

Transformers had some pretty good action (when you could tell what the bleep was going on) but I very much disliked it, despite it's entertainment value, because the movie is dumb as hell.

I grew up on the Timm/Dini Superman cartoon. It wasn't as good as their Batman but I dug it all the same and couldn't wait to see some slugfeast like I'd seen in them in live action. I didn't want a liveaction version ofthe show but I did want to see some villians finally make it to the bigscreen. The old movies never had him battling anybody from the comicbooks so I just knew a cool villian would be choosen along side Lex Luthor in a liveaction film.

Imagine my surprise when we only hear that Spacey will play Lex Luthor in what, 2005? For the longest I doubted the fact that Lex would be the only villian, after a while I realized that he would be and thought okay, but Superman is going to fight a big robot or robots right? Uh hell no I figured out soon after. So after years of limbo a Superman movie finally is being made/ is made and he still doesn't have physical villain from the comicbooks? Uh no. Huh, then what the hell have I been waiting for? With all of this techonology the director decides that what we can't handle a Supervillian from the comics after never really getting one? No? Really? Okay...but why, it's a freakin comicbook movie, isn't that part of the fun of watching these things? No you are going to enjoy a mopey Superman and Lois with a kid around. But isn't Superman supposed to be more upbeat and fun than Batman? Uh no, Superman needs to be more serious and realisitic. But he isn't real, he would never exist in real life. Okay, uh okay interestng vision anyway. But it isn't really my vision it's more of a dour version of Donners Superman, it kinda a sequel to the first one or second one, uh vague history. Uh alright but why would you want to do that, not very any people actually remember that first movie or the second one for that matter, wouldn't you want to atleast put your vision out there. Well my vision is a "darker" version of Donners Superman. So you only watched Donner's Superman as a point of reference? No cartoons or shows or most impportantly the comicbooks? Nope, the movie is all I need. Okay, well that sounds like a pretty dumb thing to do but I'll see when it comes to the dollar theaters. Okay.

Well after seeing it I have to tell you...that it was as lame as I thought it would be. Really? but the critics liked it. Good for the critics and anybody else who did but I didn't. You manged to make me realize one thing though. What is that? Uh the lack of a Supervillain should have been the least of my worries, so in a way you proved me wrong. Yes, hang on for the sequel, this time a game of chest with Zod will decide the fate of earth!! You really need to get over Richard Donner. I mean your new ideas are fairly awful but atleast they would have been yours.

I just wanted to post that for some reason.

It's such a confusing situation to me.

Yes, good for us!! :yay: We get a Superman movie that we like. You get to write about your "confusion". Oh well. There's always The Incredible Hulk.

[Mostpowerful]

Which is why Singer showed him in a moment of weakness. Which people then *****ed about because they're so insecure about their own masculinity that...

I'm sorry, but so many of the complaints with this movie obviously boil down to "I wanted Superman to throw a punch, he didn't, and so I'm going to ***** about the entire movie". It's like you all don't care about supervillains except for the action quotient involved. Nevermind the themes or the story possibilities. Superman would get to throw a punch.

:up::up:

Yup.

Fans can't agree on anything, especially on Superman. Lots of people complain that Superman is too powerful and that he can't be seriously hurt. But when he is finally in serious peril they don't like it either....:huh: I don't get it. IMO, they just wanted Superman to be in a superfight, and won't accept anything else, no matter how dramatic and emotional may be. *sigh* That's why there are sequels..

[The Guard]

So by your logic Iron Man will be remembered as a "pussy" for being beaten and almost killed by Iron Monger, yes?

EXACTLY. It's these kinds of ridiculous double standards that make the "bias" factor blatantly obvious.

The fact that he didn't come back to lay into them after what they did to him...I'll grant that. Maybe he should have, to some extent. But that also shows something about Superman. He's far more concerned with his duties than his personal vendettas. Always has been, always will be. And I think people tend to forget..."they" were on an CONTINENT MADE OF KRYPTONITE. What Superman did when he did "come back" was every bit as impressive as punching out a human being. EASILY.

[Mostpowerful]

Well after seeing it I have to tell you...that it was as lame as I thought it would be. Really? but the critics liked it. Good for the critics and anybody else who did but I didn't. You manged to make me realize one thing though. What is that? Uh the lack of a Supervillain should have been the least of my worries, so in a way you proved me wrong. Yes, hang on for the sequel, this time a game of chest with Zod will decide the fate of earth!! You really need to get over Richard Donner. I mean your new ideas are fairly awful but atleast they would have been yours.

I just wanted to post that for some reason.

It's such a confusing situation to me.

Just don't watch the sequel and problem solved, right? Fortunately, there are many other movies and heros out there to enjoy. :yay:

[I Am The Knight]

I think the problem was not the beatdown, every superhero/good buy eventually gets a beatdown in the movies. But in Superman's case he never got to come back and lay into whoever gave him the beatdown. Of course he couldn't in this case because they are human and he would end up just killing them. But I think the audience likes the hero to be down only to be able to rise up and physically take down the villain. That's why the beatdown here and the lack of it coming by a supervillain really hurt it, IMO.

Yeah, that would have been "overkill" for them :pal:... Luthor's henchmen do actually die, though. But Superman never gets any kind of "traditional" superhero comeback fight. The situation just doesn't applies here, the only thing he can do is get that island off the planet as soon as possible and that is the climax, wich works for some people and for others it doesn't.

[The Guard]

I'll take Superman lifting a continent to save the world, and the events that resulted from that over a fistfight with humans any day of the week. I mean, they just don't even compare.

[Mostpowerful]

Great posts, I am the Knight.

[I SEE SPIDEY]

^Ofcourse I won't watch the sequel but that hardly solves the problem because well, I like Superman.

[Mostpowerful]

I'll take Superman lifting a continent to save the world, and the events that resulted from that over a fistfight with humans any day of the week. I mean, they just don't even compare.

Exactly, it's just on another level. It is actually on an Epic level. It's different to what's out there, and something that ONLY Superman can do.

[I SEE SPIDEY]

I am Knight and most Powerful sittin in a tree. lol I'm just kidding. Me and Matt are that way when talking about our dislike for SR. Good show sirs.

[Mostpowerful]

:oldrazz: hehe.

[I SEE SPIDEY]

EXACTLY. It's these kinds of ridiculous double standards that make the "bias" factor blatantly obvious.

The fact that he didn't come back to lay into them after what they did to him...I'll grant that. Maybe he should have, to some extent. But that also shows something about Superman. He's far more concerned with his duties than his personal vendettas. Always has been, always will be. And I think people tend to forget..."they" were on an CONTINENT MADE OF KRYPTONITE. What Superman did when he did "come back" was every bit as impressive as punching out a human being. EASILY.This post is the exact reason that I don't much care for you. You immeadiately dismiss others opinion as whinning. You immeadiately say that everyone who disliked the movie only had a problem with the lack of action and can't see straight because of that. I'd hate to talk to you face to face.

[I Am The Knight]

I am Knight and most Powerful sittin in a tree. lol I'm just kidding. Me and Matt are the way when talking about our dislike for SR. Good show sirs.

Thank you, gal. :cwink:

[I SEE SPIDEY]

:oldrazz: hehe.lol. I sometimes think when talking to Matt that we annoy people with how much we agree on the subject.

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Thank you, gal. :cwink:You are welcome sir. You guys are so adorble when you are agreeing on your love for SR.

[I Am The Knight]

You are welcome sir. You guys are so adorble when you are agreeing on your love for SR.

Wait till Angeloz "cums" back. The sex crazed SR love fest wil really start then. No kidding. :word:

[Mostpowerful]

You are welcome sir. You guys are so adorble when you are agreeing on your love for SR.

And believe me, this ain't anything...but you can have an idea if you go to the SR forum and read the entire Favorite Scene thread.

But thanks.