How long will we have to wait for the next \S/ film?

[\S/JcDc\S/]

Just seeing where people are with the time frame of another Superman film. :super:

[DChero]

I expect Batman 3 to get organized within the year for a reasonable release. I really believe that will push Superman into motion as well. Bryan Singer is soon to be free for the discussion of staying or leaving, another point to add to my guess.

I expect an announcement sometime this summer.

[GreenKToo]

2 to 4 yrs. before we see anything.
We might however get some sorta news about it this yr.

[batman44]

I'm thinking 2-4 years.

[Showtime]

Hmmm. The poll confused me. I think we will hear this year, but the film will not be released for 2-4 years.

[manofsteel4life]

yea, same i think we will hear something this year, but im sure its gonna be vague.....here's to hoping im proved wrong:csad:

[Webhead2006]

I would love if they would make official 100% confirmation on what they are going to go some time this year. Though with all the flip floping between the various studio heads on routh sequel/routh reboot, or a complete reboot who knows how long it will be. I think we are probably looking for another supes film on the screen within the next 4-7 yrs range.

[batman strikes]

I hope to see a new Superman movie by 2012. I don't want the studio to rush this. Let the time from 2009 to 2011 be time for writers and director to pitch their take on the hero. Hopefully the studio will find someone that fits for the movie like Christopher Nolan fit perfectly for Batman.

[batsone]

well we only have three years till the end of the world so.....
i kid, i kid.
i liked SR,for the most part; and would prolly shell out $$ no matter what supes movie they put out. but a real super-villian would kill

[SatEL]

I hope to see a new Superman movie by 2012. I don't want the studio to rush this. Let the time from 2009 to 2011 be time for writers and director to pitch their take on the hero. Hopefully the studio will find someone that fits for the movie like Christopher Nolan fit perfectly for Batman.

Agreed no need for them to rush anything, they should take their time and make sure the quality of the next film is at the very least decent. No more crappy Superman films for the fans, they should also cast an actor a year prior to shooting and get him to work out hardcore for that year, the new Supes has to look like he can at least kick some ass even without powers.

[mjbull23]

I think there's a better than 50% chance we will receive some sort of official announcement as per the fillm's target date, this year. Now as far as seeing the movies theatrical release. I'm calling it a minimum of 3-5 years, easily. So let's just go with a happy medium of 4 years away.

Wow, 2013 sounds loooong ways away :csad:

Let's just hope it's worth the wait.

[Webhead2006]

yea 3-5 yrs is likely when we will see it on the screens again. Hopefully if they do go full on reboot they find the best people to take over the franchise like how u pointed out with nolan.

[I SEE SPIDEY]

I expect news to be released sometime this year and the movie to be released in 2012.

[Webhead2006]

it will be nice but with all the troubles and time it has taken for any dc films to come out it could end up being a long long time. I truly hope it wont be a super long time but with all the issues with the heads some wanting sequel some wanting reboot untill things can get going straight were stuck waiting.

[SatEL]

it will be nice but with all the troubles and time it has taken for any dc films to come out it could end up being a long long time. I truly hope it wont be a super long time but with all the issues with the heads some wanting sequel some wanting reboot untill things can get going straight were stuck waiting.

They are going to need another Superhero franchise after Nolans third Batman film which is probably the last Batman film we might get for a while. I am thinking they might aim for a Superman film perhaps a year after the last Batman film comes out.

[smooth3006]

2-3 years until the movie, we will get news sometime this year im sure. both routh & welling are not getting any younger so i don't think they will wait to long unless they "totally" recast.

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Welling isn't even apart of the discussion.

[JackMercy]

Welling isn't even a part of the discussion.

Well, that depends on whose discussions we're talking about... ;)

[Showtime]

I hope you're not trying to put Smallville fans through the ringer again like "our" friend Save Superman Steve. They've been through enough.

[Webhead2006]

well if gl does well that will be their franchise guy to take after batman is over if they cant get superman moving again in the near future.

[FilmNerdJamie]

2011-2012.

[JackMercy]

I hope you're not trying to put Smallville fans through the ringer again like "our" friend Save Superman Steve. They've been through enough.

Calm down, Showy... ;) My point (as it needs to be reiterated) is that it's not "wrong" for someone to logically expect that Warner Bros. would consider, in the immediate term, either Mr. R or Mr. W for any future role, particularly Superman.

When you have a television franchise that continues to be very financially (and often creatively) successful for its parent company, and when you're talking in general terms of "another Superman film" (as JC/DC has worded), then it's not illogical that Smallville and/or its star(s) will continue to come into the discussion, particularly from those not already firmly allied to one approach or another. In fact, as you know very well from moderating here, it's always been part of the "discussion"...

...and that's ok!

:word:

[I am Batman]

2012, hopefully people won't be tired of these kinds of movies by then.

[FilmNerdJamie]

My point (as it needs to be reiterated) is that it's not "wrong" for someone to logically expect that Warner Bros. would consider, in the immediate term, either Mr. R or Mr. W for any future role, particularly Superman.

The ship for Welling sailed a long time ago...

[Double Down]

hmmm. The poll confused me. I think we will hear this year, but the film will not be released for 2-4 years.

qft

[Webhead2006]

hopefully so i am batman i would hate to see that happen before some dc guys can finally make it on the screens. Though wb/dc just needs to try more then just sitting on their characters. That is one thing i have liked about past/current marvel/marvel studios films they atless are willing to try a film out on a character some have done well were others failed.

[Showtime]

Calm down, Showy... ;) My point (as it needs to be reiterated) is that it's not "wrong" for someone to logically expect that Warner Bros. would consider, in the immediate term, either Mr. R or Mr. W for any future role, particularly Superman.

The one thing that one must never worry about when it comes to me, is being calm.

Considering all that misinformation about Welling being "heavily involved" during the JLM debacle, I just don't want some of the fans being led down that road again to be let down. Just like I don't want Routh fans to think that Routh is a lock at this time.

When you have a television franchise that continues to be very financially (and often creatively) successful for its parent company, and when you're talking in general terms of "another Superman film" (as JC/DC has worded), then it's not illogical that Smallville and/or its star(s) will continue to come into the discussion, particularly from those not already firmly allied to one approach or another. In fact, as you know very well from moderating here, it's always been part of the "discussion"...

...and that's ok!

:word:

They will always come into discussion on forums and blogs by posters, but when you mention "whose" you're obviously not referring to posters and the such. I'm pretty sure WB executives aren't seriously considering "Smaville: The Movie" as their next go around for Superman. I'm sure the idea has been thrown out there by some executives, but seriously considering it is a different story.

[Webhead2006]

Yea that is so true show, nothing is confirmed one way or another with superman so who knows what kind of a film or who we will get in the film at this time.

[Showtime]

Yea that is so true show, nothing is confirmed one way or another with superman so who knows what kind of a film or who we will get in the film at this time.

The real truth lies in Horn's laptop.

Believe it or not I am an avid Smallville watcher, and I do believe Welling should be wearing that suit by the end of the show's run within the TV series itself. Whether he will or not has a lot to do with Welling, WB/CW, and other such factors. I really just do not think we are seeing Welling as Superman on the big screen, it isn't because I love Routh or I hate Welling, it is for no other reason but I think that the opportunity has passed. If it happens then it would be a big surprise and so be it.

[smooth3006]

Welling isn't even apart of the discussion.

welling could very get the role with smallville ending this season. just because you don't like him doesn't mean others don't.

it has to be tom or brandon IMO !!

[RachelDawes]

welling could very get the role with smallville ending this season. just because you don't like him doesn't mean others don't.

it has to be tom or brandon IMO !!

That's premature. We don't know what other actors are being considered for the role. Maybe a third person could do better than either of them.

[Webhead2006]

true show, the best time for welling to maybe have been superman on screen was maybe end of season 4 or season 5. Yes i love welling in the show and i do hope we can see him as superman in the show itself. Though i understand now that welling isnt likely to become superman on screen due to him not wanting to do it, not getting offered it. Yes i would be shocked if he does get role but wont hold my breath hoping he would. Hopefully we dont have to wait for yrs on yrs to know for sure where supes is going and who will be playing him next on screen.

[GreenKToo]

IF W.B. are indeed going for a total reboot, then (IMHO) it needs to be a new actor in the role. They could/should take a cue from B.B. and T.D.K. and surround him with a TOP NOTCH cast.

[Webhead2006]

Yea that is what i hope will happen. Though who knows with all the crazyness with wb heads. Hopefully they are all level headed since the summit talks a few months ago.

[SatEL]

IF W.B. are indeed going for a total reboot, then (IMHO) it needs to be a new actor in the role. They could/should take a cue from B.B. and T.D.K. and surround him with a TOP NOTCH cast.

This certainly seems like the best Route to take.

[Webhead2006]

yea hopefully if they do make the final call for a complete and total reboot they get the right people on board behind the scenes/cameras and they get the best cast they can get.

[Matt]

We'll continue to hear about it...but we will not see it for 5 to 7 years.

[Webhead2006]

yea i to think we will be hearing ideas and thoughts next yr or two but wont see anything come to the screens to 5 yrs at the less. Unless they finally get their heads straight and things can move along at a good pace. Like if in the next few months if they make official decision on what the film is, then officially hire a director and writers to it by the end of the yrs i dont see why we couldnt have a film by 2011 or 2012. But with all the problems they had in the past before SR happen we are probably going to be in another long haul.

[I SEE SPIDEY]

I'm more optimistic than you guys about this situation.

I think that WB will get their s**t together in the middle of or later this year and annouce the writers of the screenplay and the then director somewhat shortly after.

I could see a five to seven year wait if history has something to say about it but I don't think that the hugely long wait will happen this time.

[BH/HHH]

I think that WB will get their s**t together in the middle of or later this year and annouce the writers of the screenplay and the then director somewhat shortly after.


I agree, arent there supposed to be some sort of meetings in April or is that just on the JL film?

[Showtime]

What meetings?

[Webhead2006]

I agree, arent there supposed to be some sort of meetings in April or is that just on the JL film?
you are probably talking about the summit talks that happened a few months ago. Ever since miller's jl mortal was canned they have said jl is not on the front burner right now and they are going to go the solo route for now. Right now the next film we are likely to see is gl since its pretty set to go already. Then batman in 2011 were as supes/flash/ww/shazam who knows with them.

[BH/HHH]

you are probably talking about the summit talks that happened a few months ago. Ever since miller's jl mortal was canned they have said jl is not on the front burner right now and they are going to go the solo route for now. Right now the next film we are likely to see is gl since its pretty set to go already. Then batman in 2011 were as supes/flash/ww/shazam who knows with them.

Ohhhh, I think they only wanted to do JL because of Marvel doing Avengers anyway.

[Showtime]

Great article about budgets.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/the_big_picture/2009/01/why-everyone-li.html

I was at PEN USA's annual Literary Awards Festival a few weeks ago, having a great time, hobnobbing with all sorts of illustrious writers, when I ran into "There Will Be Blood's" writer-director Paul Thomas Anderson, who was there to accept an award for his film script. A huge fan of his work, I told him how much I'd liked his movie. He nodded and shyly smiled, and I thought he might say something like, "Oh, geez, thanks for the compliment." What he really said was: "In that story you did, you got the budget wrong."

If I actually believed in New Year's resolutions, I'd happily promise to never write about a movie's budget ever again -- all it does is cause pain and misery, both for the press, which is always being spun by studio executives and producers, and for the filmmakers, who are always convinced that clueless reporters and columnists are wildly inflating their movie budgets. (It is safe to say that no one in the history of Hollywood has ever complained about the press underestimating the cost of his or her movie.)

To be fair, Anderson wasn't all that angry. We went on to have a perfectly amiable conversation. But I'm sure he was unhappy, since when I made reference to his budget, which I said was in the vicinity of $45 million, I was making the point that his movie -- a dark, intense historical drama -- cost so much (along with the marketing outlays of Paramount Vantage's Oscar campaign) that it could never possibly make a decent profit.

The problem that journalists have in reporting about movie budgets is that nearly everyone they ask about a movie's budget tends to -- how do I put this nicely -- offer a whopper of an untruth. In other words, shock of all shocks, people in Hollywood lie. The studio chief who made the movie gives you a low-ball number. The head of a rival studio, eager to make a competitor look bad, gives you a wildly inflated number. Most journalists have reported that Baz Luhrmann's recent film, "Australia," cost $130 million. 20th Century Fox insists that it cost less, saying it received a hefty subsidy from the Australian government, knocking $30 or so million off that figure. But every rival studio chief I spoke to about the film said with great authority, as if they'd seen a host of internal Fox documents, that the film cost $170 or $180 or $200 million, just to throw out the three different figures I got from three different executives.

What's a reporter to do? Who tells the biggest whoppers? And how does one reporter use triangulation to figure out the real budget number? Keep reading:



I'm old-fashioned about reporting budget numbers. I like to go to the source. In other words, I try not to report a number unless I've gotten it from a top executive at the studio (or financing company) that made the picture or a producer or some other high-level member of the production team. You'd think this would work out pretty smoothly, but even then, I've discovered that budget numbers are a slippery business.

My colleague John Horn, who is something of an expert on movie budgets, since he is always writing about film profitability, reminded me of the legendary example of funny numbers involving Jeffrey Katzenberg and his DreamWorks Animation films. When "Shrek 2" was being released, Katzenberg (like most studio execs) was eager to make the film look as profitable as possible, so he didn't stop reporters from believing his movie cost a pittance. That's why Newsweek, in 2004, reported that the film's stars Mike Myers, Eddie Murphy and Cameron Diaz "got $10 million each to reprise their characters, which accounted for almost half the film's modest $70 million budget." But after DreamWorks Animation went public, its budget figures suddenly soared dramatically, with the company acknowledging that the original "Shrek" cost closer to $130 million, with its and other DreamWorks sequels costing "15 to 30% higher" than that.

Once burned, twice shy, which is why the showbiz media has a healthy skepticism about budgetary information from studio executives. Sometimes you get the feeling that you could ask five people who worked on a film to tell you the budget -- and you'd get five different answers. When I was writing about the unknown screenwriter who'd penned Clint Eastwood's "Gran Torino" last month, I reported that the movie (co-financed by Warners and Village Roadshow) cost $35 million. Warners immediately called to complain, saying my number was totally wrong. Rob Lorenz, a delightful guy who's one of the producers of the film -- and has worked with Eastwood for years -- asked how I could have possibly gotten such a wrong figure. Actually, I told him, I got the budget figure from Bill Gerber, who -- ahem -- was the other producer of the film, with Lorenz and Eastwood. Since Gerber had once been a head of production at Warners, I figured he knew what he was talking about. Lorenz told me the film cost closer to $25 million, so I amended the figure, saying the film cost "less than $30 million."

This happens all the time. I wrote in a recent post that Sam Mendes' "Revolutionary Road," a Paramount film produced by DreamWorks, cost $45 million. I didn't make up the number -- it's what a top executive at Paramount (which then owned DreamWorks) told me the film cost. As soon as the story ran, Stacey Snider, who runs DreamWorks, e-mailed me to say the film only cost $35 million. It seems unlikely that Paramount would inflate the cost of a film it financed and distributed, since if "Revolutionary Road" fails to find an audience, it will look like an ever bigger flop if it cost $45 million instead of $35 million. But I also trust Snider, who has a better track record than most studio chiefs in offering honest numbers. So what does the movie cost? Let's just say -- that's a work in progress.

As you can see, assessing movie budgets is a skill that relies on instinct as much as actual reporting. Horn uses something akin to triangulation, i.e. the art of measuring from three different points of reference, the epicenter being where those lines intersect. As he puts it: "Ask three people without axes to grind, or reasons to lie, what a movie's budget is, and the average of those numbers can be a close approximation of the film's true cost."

When Horn was reporting on the budget of "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button" for his Word of Mouth column, he asked two executives "close to Paramount" what the film cost. One said $175 million. Another said $185 million. Horn ran the lower figure. Even so, the studio complained, saying that while the film's initial budget was in fact $175 million, incentives from Canada and Louisiana -- where much of the film was shot -- reduced the actual cost to $150 million. The Times published a clarification to explain why our original budget number was off the mark.

But right around the time that Paramount was upset that our "Benjamin Button" number was too high, I found myself on the phone with a studio boss who complained that our "Button" number was too low, saying, "You guys are so gullible. That movie cost at least $200 million." I guess that makes us damned if we do, damned if we don't. It makes for a frustrating experience all around. As a baseball junkie, I take pleasure in the sanctity of numbers. You know that at the end of game you can accurately calculate every player's batting average, based solely on his performance. Fudging isn't allowed. If a player's hitting .315, he's hitting .315. If he goes 0-for-4 in the next game, his batting average goes down. No explanation, no exception.

But movie budgets, like everything else about the business, are never black and white. In Hollywood, the numbers are a lot like the truth -- they are always subject to interpretation.

[Webhead2006]

well the whole jl thing came about due to a variety of factors besides just marvel doing avengers which we are going to see most likely before a jl happens. It would have been nice to see it happen and i hope it will down the road.

[Changeling]

Cool read.

[FilmNerdJamie]

I know for a fact that Button was a $200 million+ production half-way through filming...

[I SEE SPIDEY]

^Are you serious Jamie?:wow:

[FilmNerdJamie]

Yes.

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Yes. Ridiculous. I'm sure the movie will be big overseas and it's doing very well here but I have to imagine that they will not make one red cent off of the movie for a long time.

[FilmNerdJamie]

Ridiculous.

Actually, it's not. The motion-capture effects to "de-age" the character throughout the film had never been done before.

So, it was always going to be expensive to pull of - thus why two studios (Paramount and WB) were involved.

[Superark]

Well Button will see its profit on DVD

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Actually, it's not. The motion-capture effects to "de-age" the character throughout the film had never been done before.

So, it was always going to be expensive to pull of - thus why two studios (Paramount and WB) were involved.I understand that but it still seems a bit over the top to me. But I understand why it cost that much. I hope the got their money's worth.

Well Button will see its profit on DVDI'm sure it will but it doesn't look like they are going to be getting tons of money from it. I could be wrong though.

[SatEL]

Ridiculous. I'm sure the movie will be big overseas and it's doing very well here but I have to imagine that they will not make one red cent off of the movie for a long time.

Second biggest movie opening on christmas, although if the budget is as high as that then it might take a while to cash in.

[FilmNerdJamie]

Button's already been labeled as a hit. The reviews and word-of-mouth have been (overall) solid, and the (inevitable) Oscars nominations will have the film playing into March.

It's all good, folks.

[Superark]

Button's already been labeled as a hit. The reviews and word-of-mouth have been (overall) solid, and the (inevitable) Oscars nominations will have the film playing into March.

It's all good, folks.


I'm still waiting to see Button and Valkryie. I've heard great things about both, I can't wait!

Anyways, back on topic. When do you think we'll see the next Superman film Jamie?

[FilmNerdJamie]

When do you think we'll see the next Superman film Jamie?

2011-2012.

^Read above post.

[I SEE SPIDEY]

I hope it's 2012 because I want them to take all the time they need.

I'd really love to see a Superman movie that I like before I die...sigh.

[Webhead2006]

yea sfx work in alot of films can cost alot of money.

[p4poetic]

Later on this year.

[Webhead2006]

i said this before it will be great if we finally do get official 100% news on where superman is going some time this year. Though as i said to its likely 2-4,5-7 yrs likely before we are likely to see it on the screens again. Or maybe not, hopefully they can all finally agree on the best direction to go with superman let alone other dc characters.

[Man of Tomorrow]

2011 is very strong possibility with Terminator 5 being slated that year.

News on the film should surface in 2009 and filming in 2010.

2010 Green Lantern (with CK cameo) and Jonah Hex

2011 Superman and T5

2012 Batman III

[Webhead2006]

will be great if we got that, hopefully wb will make official news so we can start talking about the film itself and stop the whole sequel/reboot talk and just talk about the film itself.

[\S/JcDc\S/]

2011 is very strong possibility with Terminator 5 being slated that year.

News on the film should surface in 2009 and filming in 2010.

2010 Green Lantern (with CK cameo) and Jonah Hex

2011 Superman and T5

2012 Batman III

I like this :up:

[Dark Knight90!]

I think that we will be waiting a while for a Superman film... The franchise is not what it once was. Plus with Warners putting all DC films on hold ( http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/movies/a141004/warner-puts-all-dc-movies-on-hold.html ) things are looking less likely.

The public are simply not responding to the character...

They need to kick Green Lantern or Wonder Woman off the ground first before they even look at Superman again.

[8wid]

2011 if anything.

[GreenKToo]

I said 2 to 4 yrs originally. I now think that was being to generous.:(