The SuperHeroHype Forums

The SuperHeroHype Forums (http://forums.superherohype.com/index.php)
-   Superman Sequels (http://forums.superherohype.com/forumdisplay.php?f=315)
-   -   "Going Wrath Of Khan":The Official MOS Action Thread (http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?t=288869)

Weadazoid 09-06-2006 08:21 PM

"Going Wrath Of Khan":The Official MOS Action Thread
 
Does Singer even know what he is really talking about? I just don
t get it.. I know the whole someone that knows Superman and is from his past thing really spouted alot of this ZOd talk... but first of all it's a terrible idea..and really it aint like Wrath at all.


The thing that made Wrath so great was... the history that was created by the Show... Kahn was without a doubt one of Kircks greatest enemies and the plot they weaved around Khan to make mae him even more insane and out for Kircks blood was Dynamic.....

There is no TV show plot to draw from ..... so what you bring back Zod.... even though Zod died....something clearly very diferent from Khan who was left ona City Alpha that then became a wasteland.


Where is the mad revenge plot? Zod didn't have to suffer through anything he was made human and then frozen if anything.

So what Luthor goes back and gets Zods Body and somehow makes him Kryptonina again? But where is the need for Wrath???? where is the prolonged suffering?


Does Singer even know why the Wrath of Khan was so great???

arty2 09-06-2006 08:44 PM

Re: I don't get the Wrath of Khan reference
 
I think he was referring to the quality of the film, rather than plot devices. Wrath of Khan is considered to be the best Star Trek film, Singer I believe is going out all sci-fi to do the best Superman film (at least his Superman).

Superfreak 09-06-2006 09:18 PM

Re: I don't get the Wrath of Khan reference
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by arty2
I think he was referring to the quality of the film, rather than plot devices. Wrath of Khan is considered to be the best Star Trek film, Singer I believe is going out all sci-fi to do the best Superman film (at least his Superman).

yeah, it has nothing to do with the subject matter, but as mentioned the quality of the film. ST the motion picture, is a terrribly boring movie. It's long slow and boring. STII:The Wrath of Khan was a kick ass take no prisoners action movie (as far as star trek goes).

So it means that SR is a little slow, because they are doing a seudo origin. Now that that is all taken care of, bring on the mindnumbingly awesome super action movie.

Weadazoid 09-06-2006 09:32 PM

Re: I don't get the Wrath of Khan reference
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Superfreak
yeah, it has nothing to do with the subject matter, but as mentioned the quality of the film. ST the motion picture, is a terrribly boring movie. It's long slow and boring. STII:The Wrath of Khan was a kick ass take no prisoners action movie (as far as star trek goes).

So it means that SR is a little slow, because they are doing a seudo origin. Now that that is all taken care of, bring on the mindnumbingly awesome super action movie.

I liked the motion picture... I thought it was very inteligently done with V Ger being an excellent concept

What you sya is boring I call visualy dynamic for the time some very trippy stuff

the realized Machine planet was so far ahead of it's time some trekies feel... that may have been the home world of the Borg...and interesting thought

C. Lee 09-06-2006 10:14 PM

Re: I don't get the Wrath of Khan reference
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Weadazoid
I liked the motion picture... I thought it was very inteligently done with V Ger being an excellent concept

What you sya is boring I call visualy dynamic for the time some very trippy stuff

the realized Machine planet was so far ahead of it's time some trekies feel... that may have been the home world of the Borg...and interesting thought

It was very intelligent....but very slow. The predominate number of non Trekkies and non cerebral science fiction readers felt that the first Trek movie was boring. Khan gave it a much needed kickstart and moved it into a different direction.

matthooper 09-06-2006 10:28 PM

Re: I don't get the Wrath of Khan reference
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by arty2
I think he was referring to the quality of the film, rather than plot devices. Wrath of Khan is considered to be the best Star Trek film, Singer I believe is going out all sci-fi to do the best Superman film (at least his Superman).


I understand your point, and it is well taken, and this question is a bit off topic but is Khan really considered the best? I ask this not because I don't believe it, I just don't know. I am no Trekkie or Trekker, I really enjoyed the TNG series and most of the TNG films, and I liked Khan. But all that said, I would think that First Contact would be considered the best in the entire franchise. It's the best written, best acted and most important one in the franchise. I get Singer's Khan reference, but isn't it lost on most people? If Khan was immediately recognized as important, I can see it, but I just don't see it. Why reference it? It's good but how good?

C. Lee 09-06-2006 10:50 PM

Re: I don't get the Wrath of Khan reference
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by matthooper
I understand your point, and it is well taken, and this question is a bit off topic but is Khan really considered the best? I ask this not because I don't believe it, I just don't know. I am no Trekkie or Trekker, I really enjoyed the TNG series and most of the TNG films, and I liked Khan. But all that said, I would think that First Contact would be considered the best in the entire franchise. It's the best written, best acted and most important one in the franchise. I get Singer's Khan reference, but isn't it lost on most people? If Khan was immediately recognized as important, I can see it, but I just don't see it. Why reference it? It's good but how good?

There are ten Trek movies. When polls are made...the 2 Trek films that predominately come out as the best are "Wrath of Khan" and "First Contact".

Khan was the second film....Contact was the eighth.

Since it takes six more movies before one is considered better than Khan....it's rep is pretty good.

Khan is important to the franchise, because it changed the direction (uniforms, sets, secondary characters, etc...) that the first one had....and they continued until the end of the run of the "original" character's series (it's stuff was carried into the seventh movie).

So...Star Trek the Motion Picture started the movie franchise (and almost killed it)....and Khan managed to resurrect it, make it better, and continue for decades.

Showtime 09-06-2006 11:30 PM

Re: I don't get the Wrath of Khan reference
 
Very good insight. Never have seen these movies, so I was a little clueless, it was cleared up for me previously. I just forget easily.

The Kid 09-07-2006 04:16 AM

Re: I don't get the Wrath of Khan reference
 
I love Wrath of Khan. And as most Singer fans should know, Singer's a big star trek fan.

He even had a role in one of the next generation movies.

I know what he means by wrath of khaning it. More action. faster pace, possibly death of richard. This is all from Khan. And it's what he did for X2, he borrowed A LOT from Khan for that film. I finally noticed how similar they were when I saw khan and said "hey this is like X2... WAIT A MINUTE!"

Villain from the past wants revenge on an old friend/rival? check
Villain uses mind control methods to make characters do whatever he wants. Check
One of our heros sacrafices their life for the good of the many? Check.
Then you've got the x-men(Enterprise crew) being on the run from Striker (Khan)
Referrences to classic Liturature throughout the films.

Damn I love X2. It's a shame all we got as a sequel to it was Rush-men The Last Hour. People just don't know how good a Singer x3 would have been, I tell you...

But yes Singer's very much giving us a big hint here as to what to expect for a sequel IF he's coming back. And yes I think it might be a sly way of saying Zod, really the only one besides luthor who's an old enemy, will be the main baddy. I also think he plans to mirror Wrath of Khan much like he did in x2. Or it could just mean faster pace, and more action. I'm not saying he can't just mean that. I just read between the lines.

Mentok 09-07-2006 06:43 AM

Re: I don't get the Wrath of Khan reference
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by C. Lee
There are ten Trek movies. When polls are made...the 2 Trek films that predominately come out as the best are "Wrath of Khan" and "First Contact".

Khan was the second film....Contact was the eighth.

Since it takes six more movies before one is considered better than Khan....it's rep is pretty good.

Khan is important to the franchise, because it changed the direction (uniforms, sets, secondary characters, etc...) that the first one had....and they continued until the end of the run of the "original" character's series (it's stuff was carried into the seventh movie).

So...Star Trek the Motion Picture started the movie franchise (and almost killed it)....and Khan managed to resurrect it, make it better, and continue for decades.

Nice post :up:

Lestat74 09-07-2006 07:19 AM

Re: I don't get the Wrath of Khan reference
 
Star Trek II isn't just my favorite Trek film, it's one of my favorite films period. I noticed the similarities to Khan when watching X2 the first time...in fact, at a screening of Khan last year in Santa Monica with director Nick Meyer in attendance, my friend asked him what he thought about Bryan Singer taking his ending for his own movie, to which Mr. Meyer just smiled and said "nice try".

And there are similarities between Superman Returns and Star Trek: The Motion Picture, although they are almost all superficial; Both films were almost a decade in development, and a lot of money was spent on many scripts that were abandoned; Both projects were started and stopped at least 3 or 4 times; Both movies were very expensive, and although they were both box office hits, they were percieved as not because the money they made barely covered costs. I'd say the only really big difference is that ST:TMP was not very well reviewed at all back in the day, where SR was mostly very well reviewed.

When Bryan Singer says the SR sequel is gonna be like ST II, I think he means only superficially. ST II was made for a fraction of ST:TMP's budget, re-using as many sets from the original film as possible ( A little bit of trivia for ya: So much money was spent on sets and props and models for ST:TMP, that not only were many re-used for ST II, but also ST III-VII, Star Trek: The Next Generation and Deep Space Nine. Paramount got nearly 20 years of use out of money spent on Star Trek: The Motion Picture ) I believe the Superman sequel is gonna be made for a fraction of Superman Returns budget, and they are gonna re-use as many sets as possible, and up the action just like ST II did. Unlike Star Trek though, I believe Bryan Singer will be back because he has more invested in the Superman franchise than ST:TMP director Robert Wise was in Star Trek. Robert Wise was never really a Star Trek fan.

Trooper 09-07-2006 11:01 AM

Re: I don't get the Wrath of Khan reference
 
hes trying to tell us he wont go with the romantic bull**** and this time, he will go for a kick ass sci-fi movie which is mindblowing... kinda like wrath of khan, which lets admit, was a good movie when it came out.

Immortalfire 09-07-2006 11:17 AM

Re: I don't get the Wrath of Khan reference
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Weadazoid
Does Singer even know what he is really talking about?

Most signs point toward the resounding negative.

ReTrO JuNkIe 42 09-07-2006 03:41 PM

Re: I don't get the Wrath of Khan reference
 
But come on why Zod

Superman: Idols 09-07-2006 04:08 PM

Re: I don't get the Wrath of Khan reference
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Weadazoid
Does Singer even know what he is really talking about? I just don
t get it.. I know the whole someone that knows Superman and is from his past thing really spouted alot of this ZOd talk... but first of all it's a terrible idea..and really it aint like Wrath at all.


The thing that made Wrath so great was... the history that was created by the Show... Kahn was without a doubt one of Kircks greatest enemies and the plot they weaved around Khan to make mae him even more insane and out for Kircks blood was Dynamic.....

There is no TV show plot to draw from ..... so what you bring back Zod.... even though Zod died....something clearly very diferent from Khan who was left ona City Alpha that then became a wasteland.


Where is the mad revenge plot? Zod didn't have to suffer through anything he was made human and then frozen if anything.

So what Luthor goes back and gets Zods Body and somehow makes him Kryptonina again? But where is the need for Wrath???? where is the prolonged suffering?


Does Singer even know why the Wrath of Khan was so great???

As I see it, 'Wrath of Khan" is seen as one of the ultimate sequels, where the action and intensity was amped up. That's what Singer wants--a sequel that blows SR out of the water.

Superman: Idols 09-07-2006 04:13 PM

Re: I don't get the Wrath of Khan reference
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Trooper
hes trying to tell us he wont go with the romantic bull**** and this time, he will go for a kick ass sci-fi movie which is mindblowing... kinda like wrath of khan, which lets admit, was a good movie when it came out.

GIrLs.>.eWw111

aSs-kCIkiNg....yEs!111

Sorry, but you sound like an idiot.

Weadazoid 09-07-2006 08:34 PM

Re: I don't get the Wrath of Khan reference
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Wesyeed
I love Wrath of Khan. And as most Singer fans should know, Singer's a big star trek fan.

He even had a role in one of the next generation movies.

I know what he means by wrath of khaning it. More action. faster pace, possibly death of richard. This is all from Khan. And it's what he did for X2, he borrowed A LOT from Khan for that film. I finally noticed how similar they were when I saw khan and said "hey this is like X2... WAIT A MINUTE!"

Villain from the past wants revenge on an old friend/rival? check
Villain uses mind control methods to make characters do whatever he wants. Check
One of our heros sacrafices their life for the good of the many? Check.
Then you've got the x-men(Enterprise crew) being on the run from Striker (Khan)
Referrences to classic Liturature throughout the films.

Damn I love X2. It's a shame all we got as a sequel to it was Rush-men The Last Hour. People just don't know how good a Singer x3 would have been, I tell you...

But yes Singer's very much giving us a big hint here as to what to expect for a sequel IF he's coming back. And yes I think it might be a sly way of saying Zod, really the only one besides luthor who's an old enemy, will be the main baddy. I also think he plans to mirror Wrath of Khan much like he did in x2. Or it could just mean faster pace, and more action. I'm not saying he can't just mean that. I just read between the lines.



and just who is that Villain then??? I mean really are we really going to get Zod? and again ...where does the need for revenge come from..
True Styker was a bit like Kahn... but thats because of the plot... what Charles did.. or really wasn't able to do the story of his wife eventualy being driven so mad by the son that she had to take power drill to her temple.

See this is my main point... who is that villain for Superman... He doesn't exist really .. Unless Singer rewrites Zod.. and goes with a new Phantom Domain in which case..erm the traielrs alone will be enough to make people run for cover and not see the sequal.

Zod already was Kahn in a way... the time spent in the Phantom Zone trapped much as Kahn was.


So is that it.. Singer rewrites Zod but dopens't include the other 2.. and well it's again a totla rehash.. ZOd will find earth look for this.. Superman realize he is the son of Jorell... ect ect...


It may be 100 times more action packed and even a better movie but fewer people will see it.

WhatsHisFace 09-08-2006 12:17 AM

Re: I don't get the Wrath of Khan reference
 
http://timeforkhan.ytmnd.com/

Venom71 09-08-2006 10:00 AM

Re: I don't get the Wrath of Khan reference
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Wesyeed
I love Wrath of Khan. And as most Singer fans should know, Singer's a big star trek fan.

He even had a role in one of the next generation movies.

I know what he means by wrath of khaning it. More action. faster pace, possibly death of richard. This is all from Khan. And it's what he did for X2, he borrowed A LOT from Khan for that film. I finally noticed how similar they were when I saw khan and said "hey this is like X2... WAIT A MINUTE!"

Villain from the past wants revenge on an old friend/rival? check
Villain uses mind control methods to make characters do whatever he wants. Check
One of our heros sacrafices their life for the good of the many? Check.
Then you've got the x-men(Enterprise crew) being on the run from Striker (Khan)
Referrences to classic Liturature throughout the films.

Damn I love X2. It's a shame all we got as a sequel to it was Rush-men The Last Hour. People just don't know how good a Singer x3 would have been, I tell you...

But yes Singer's very much giving us a big hint here as to what to expect for a sequel IF he's coming back. And yes I think it might be a sly way of saying Zod, really the only one besides luthor who's an old enemy, will be the main baddy. I also think he plans to mirror Wrath of Khan much like he did in x2. Or it could just mean faster pace, and more action. I'm not saying he can't just mean that. I just read between the lines.

Zod an old enemy? I don't recall him being mentioned in SR or that Superman and him have battled before..did I miss that scene? As others have stated..the Wrath of Khan refererence most likely is referring to upping the action and the addition of a Supervillain(other then Luthor) and I don't think it will be Zod...Brainiac my friend...Brainiac.

The Kid 09-08-2006 10:09 AM

Re: I don't get the Wrath of Khan reference
 
Venom you were wrong about the Kid do you want to be wrong again?

Venom71 09-08-2006 10:23 AM

Re: I don't get the Wrath of Khan reference
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Wesyeed
Venom you were wrong about the Kid do you want to be wrong again?

Well see there you go..I was wrong once...I won't be again..I must of been under the weather when I was wrong about Jason...yeah thats it..I was under the weather and wasn't thinking straight. :D :p

Trooper 09-08-2006 01:23 PM

Re: I don't get the Wrath of Khan reference
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Superman: Idols
GIrLs.>.eWw111

aSs-kCIkiNg....yEs!111

Sorry, but you sound like an idiot.


sorry newb but i dont recall mentioning anything about girls or saying that ass kicking was what i wanted in the sequel, i never mentioned it, read it again. so 'sorry' i dont see how i sound like an idiot.

Superfreak 09-08-2006 03:22 PM

Re: I don't get the Wrath of Khan reference
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Weadazoid
I liked the motion picture... I thought it was very inteligently done with V Ger being an excellent concept

What you sya is boring I call visualy dynamic for the time some very trippy stuff

the realized Machine planet was so far ahead of it's time some trekies feel... that may have been the home world of the Borg...and interesting thought

a little late, but no worries. I like STMP. I never said it was a bad movie, but it is very slow, and at times pretty boring. It's the thinking man's star trek. However, when compared to it's sequel, it can definately be called a boring movie. STMP, relative to STII, is boring.

if STMP is to STII, and SR is to SRII, then I can't wait to see SRII. SR was by no means a bad movie, or boring. So if SRII is able to trump SR, as STII trumped STMP, the SRII is gonna be one badass mofo end all say all of superhero movies (if handled correctly of course and so many other cautions aswell).


oh, and just on the topic of STII: favorite 2 momments are 1) "Spock? 2 hours, are you ready?" and the whole sequence of Spock's death, from "ship out of danger?" to the revelation that Spocks photon tube had survived it's landing on Genesis. Both parts were so brilliant.

bruce wang 09-09-2006 07:28 AM

Re: I don't get the Wrath of Khan reference
 
Darkseid

FanboyX_Returns 09-09-2006 08:37 AM

Re: I don't get the Wrath of Khan reference
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Weadazoid
Does Singer even know what he is really talking about? I just don't get it.. I know the whole someone that knows Superman and is from his past thing really spouted alot of this ZOd talk... but first of all it's a terrible idea..and really it aint like Wrath at all.


The thing that made Wrath so great was... the history that was created by the Show... Kahn was without a doubt one of Kircks greatest enemies and the plot they weaved around Khan to make mae him even more insane and out for Kircks blood was Dynamic.....

There is no TV show plot to draw from ..... so what you bring back Zod.... even though Zod died....something clearly very diferent from Khan who was left ona City Alpha that then became a wasteland.


Where is the mad revenge plot? Zod didn't have to suffer through anything he was made human and then frozen if anything.

So what Luthor goes back and gets Zods Body and somehow makes him Kryptonina again? But where is the need for Wrath???? where is the prolonged suffering?


Does Singer even know why the Wrath of Khan was so great???

What Singer means with the "Wrath of Kahn" is that he will bring back a major badguy from SUPERMAN's past... One we have all seen before, and who he will bring back once more because he cant come up with one single original idea for any of his movies... Still trying to copy Richard Donner with a 3rd rate cast...

So yes it's going to be ZOD since you know he only knows the Donner/Reeve movies, and doesnt know about the comic book universe their based on, and well yes ZOD was in number 2... How wacky huh!
He will be in both Donners number 2, and Singers number 2!

Hey Bryan can Dave Chappelle get Richard Pryors job in the 3rd flop you direct for the WB! He would rule that part son!

The WB are just all nuts allowing this fool to ruin the entire theatrical life of Superman because after this mess with SR, and the mess that will come in 2009 its going to be a LONG LONG time before we get a restart... IF EVER!

Don't think Jude Law will make this movie into a big blockbuster in 09 if he gets cast... Dude hasn't really had any major hits in the past, and he's a good actor, and all that jazz but he doesnt put butts on the seats.

Heck the BATMAN casting of Heath Ledger as Joker would go down as a better casting job then Jude Law as ZOD! Trust me on that one...

I mean he is a great actor, and he would be a nice fit into any Superman movie or any Superhero movie for that matter.

But seriously nobody wants to hear him say... Kneel before ZOD! :up:

I mean please have some originality with the sequel I mean for godsakes man you already ruined part 1.. err 2.5?? Well were ever the movie fits into the Superman universe. :p


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:59 PM.

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SuperHeroHype.com, A property of CraveOnline, a divison of AtomicOnline, LLC © 2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.