All Things Superman: An Open Discussion - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Part 27

[Kevin Smith]

Originally Posted by hopefuldreamer

Seriously, I don't think it's possible for me to be dissapointed that immediately.

I mean, I left SR absolutely elated. Granted I was a lot younger and less well read on Supes and not as involved in online communities. But it took me a good while to start really recognising my dissapointment. I was too busy swooning over getting a new on screen Supes story at all.

Dude me too man. That was my exact reaction to SR. At first my mind was so blown just because of all the pent up anticipation of seeing Superman on the big screen in the 21st century.


And Zimmer hasn't finished the score yet...I do wonder how long he's been working on it if he's been working on it. Also, anyone else think maybe he'll just give up and say **** it and put the Williams theme in there haha? Not like the opening credits like SMTM, but using Williams theme throughout or at the end at least haha. I would probably jump through the roof if I heard it build and catch my hands on fire in a blaze of clapping if it crept out of nowhere completely unexpectedly and was in the film lol.

Also, does anyone know when/how long it took Zimmer to score Batman Begins? (Or TDK for that matter but I say Begins because that was where the "Nolan" theme that would be used pretty much throughout the rest of the franchise began...did he only start working on BB a few months in advance of the film or was it like a year or so? Anyone know?)

[STARMAN]

Junkie Xl made it sound like the score was finished and they were onto doing the CD soundtrack. Maybe the print that was screened didn't have the finished score but it sounds like it's close to done.

I have no idea about Batman Begins although he worked with another composer on it. I think it was James Newton Howard. Or something like that.

[DKDetective]

Originally Posted by Showtime

Bingo. Although it is only one critic, when you weigh both of them against each other. Critic for me. That being said, it is only one critic.

Of course, it is only one critic, but the person who reported the critic's opinion also seemed to indicate the general reaction to Cavill's performance was mixed at best. While all of this should be taken with a huge mound of salt at this time, it's understandable why some people here would be worried. Cavill's recent projects (reaction to his performance in Immortals was mixed, CLOD was largely negative) have instilled little confidence in his acting talent. As a result, these latest reports seem to confirm a lot of earlier suspicions and concerns.

Since Man of Steel is supposed to be a modern reinvention of Superman that revitalizes the public's interest in the character, Cavill's interpretation of the character is arguably integral to its success. Even isolated criticisms like this carry lots of weight given how little WB is showing of Man of Steel. I have to admit, I'm a little apprehensive because I found the early negative reviews and criticisms of TDKR that others bashed and dismissed to be incredibly reflectively of my own appraisal of the movie.

However, as you said Showtime, we shouldn't put too much weight in such little information. Personally, after all the criticism Brandon Routh got as being a bland and wooden Superman who was nothing more than Christopher Reeve lookalike, I have a hard time believing that Warner Bros. didn't test the hell out of Cavill and make sure they had the right man for the job.

[Greeneyes]

Well I don't mind that some people are going to be critical,it's inevitable,I will see the film for myself and make my own mind up,and after I've seen it if I feel a reviewer is wrong,then maybe I'll get involved and have my say,as someone who likes Superman Returns(for what it is),if I'd listened to the opinions of everyone who dislikes that film,then I'd burn my copy and never watch it again.

Hopefully we get more good reviews than bad ones for Henry and MOS,but at the moment I couldn't really give a farty poo poo

[ConnorKon-El]

Originally Posted by Greeneyes

Well I don't mind that some people are going to be critical,it's inevitable,I will see the film for myself and make my own mind up,and after I've seen it if I feel a reviewer is wrong,then maybe I'll get involved and have my say,as someone who likes Superman Returns(for what it is),if I'd listened to the opinions of everyone who dislikes that film,then I'd burn my copy and never watch it again.

Hopefully we get more good reviews than bad ones for Henry and MOS,but at the moment I couldn't really give a farty poo poo

[Showtime]

Originally Posted by DKDetective

Of course, it is only one critic, but the person who reported the critic's opinion also seemed to indicate the general reaction to Cavill's performance was mixed at best. While all of this should be taken with a huge mound of salt at this time, it's understandable why some people here would be worried. Cavill's recent projects (reaction to his performance in Immortals was mixed, CLOD was largely negative) have instilled little confidence in his acting talent. As a result, these latest reports seem to confirm a lot of earlier suspicions and concerns.

Since Man of Steel is supposed to be a modern reinvention of Superman that revitalizes the public's interest in the character, Cavill's interpretation of the character is arguably integral to its success. Even isolated criticisms like this carry lots of weight given how little WB is showing of Man of Steel. I have to admit, I'm a little apprehensive because I found the early negative reviews and criticisms of TDKR that others bashed and dismissed to be incredibly reflectively of my own appraisal of the movie.

However, as you said Showtime, we shouldn't put too much weight in such little information. Personally, after all the criticism Brandon Routh got as being a bland and wooden Superman who was nothing more than Christopher Reeve lookalike, I have a hard time believing that Warner Bros. didn't test the hell out of Cavill and make sure they had the right man for the job.

I don't personally think Routh, Cavill, or Welling are what you would call good actors. I also didn't think Reeve was all that great, but by default he drinks all three of their milkshakes...so to speak. My opinion.

I think the thing we have to realize is we aren't really considered "the public interest". WB/DC already has us in their pockets. They know that. They need the general public to care about Superman, while although the logo is still everywhere, the general public is more in tune with Wolverine, Iron Man, Spider-Man, and Batman on screen.

So I think where the general public starts really becoming aware is the TV Spots. Superman Returns didn't air the first TV Spot until May 12th, film came out on June 28th right? Jack The Giant Slayer's first tv spot aired on or around January 23rd. My guess is that Warner Bros starts television spots the first or second week of April, although like others said, could be March.

[ConnorKon-El]

Originally Posted by Showtime

I don't personally think Routh, Cavill, or Welling are what you would call good actors. I also didn't think Reeve was all that great, but by default he drinks all three of their milkshakes...so to speak. My opinion.

I think the thing we have to realize is we aren't really considered "the public interest". WB/DC already has us in their pockets. They know that. They need the general public to care about Superman, while although the logo is still everywhere, the general public is more in tune with Wolverine, Iron Man, Spider-Man, and Batman on screen.

So I think where the general public starts really becoming aware is the TV Spots. Superman Returns didn't air the first TV Spot until May 12th, film came out on June 28th right? Jack The Giant Slayer's first tv spot aired on or around January 23rd. My guess is that Warner Bros starts television spots the first or second week of April, although like others said, could be March.

Bingo. And all reports of the film indicate that there will be plentiful action. As long as marketing is decently good April-June, the film will be fine. I am very hopeful that the 3rd trailer will have alot of money shots to appeal to the average moviegoer.

[Greeneyes]

Originally Posted by ConnorKon-El

Why confused?,it's instead of saying s**t

[ConnorKon-El]

Originally Posted by Greeneyes

Why confused?,it's instead of saying s**t

Lol, i'm well aware

[Greeneyes]

Originally Posted by ConnorKon-El

Lol, i'm well aware

cool man,I'm half asleep and couldn't understand why you didn't get it

[ConnorKon-El]

Originally Posted by Greeneyes

cool man,I'm half asleep and couldn't understand why you didn't get it

Lol, go to bed ? You could say something you regret on here half asleep

[Greeneyes]

Originally Posted by ConnorKon-El

Lol, go to bed ? You could say something you regret on here half asleep

Too true,too true,anyway goodnight babes,sweet dreams

[HankTheTurtle]

Originally Posted by Showtime

Right I agree. You seem to have your head on straight.

I just have seen other forums where posters wait for every negative review and then spend so much time trying to discredit the writer that it becomes so sickening. I'm hoping we're all better than that, including myself.

I won't lie. There have been reviews I get annoyed at after the fact. That's because I've formed my own opinion of the film, and then disagree with what's being said, though. So it's not really the same.

Originally Posted by Showtime

I don't personally think Routh, Cavill, or Welling are what you would call good actors. I also didn't think Reeve was all that great, but by default he drinks all three of their milkshakes...so to speak. My opinion.

I'd love for Cavill to hit it out of the park, but it's not necessary for the film to be good and/or a success. Other aspects just need to be able to take up the slack. I wouldn't really say Chris Evans' or Chris Hemsworth's performances in their respective movies were anything spectacular, but their films worked for the most part. If anything, with Snyder, the supporting cast, and stellar effects houses, I'd say MOS has even more that could potentially make up for anything that isn't quite up to snuff.

[TDK elbowstrike]

Unless Cavill has zero chemistry with his co-stars, i doubt his performance can truly be deemed bad. No one can say for sure until we see for ourselves, but i hope nobody sees this one critics opinion as a bad omen. I generally go by fan opinion and general audience reaction moreso than critics reviews. I venture to say that i hardly ever listen to a critics reviews as a way to gauge a movie i want to see. They just arent always a reliable way to tell if a movie is truly good or bad.

[Quasimod0]

Originally Posted by Kevin Smith

I would probably jump through the roof if I heard it build and catch my hands on fire in a blaze of clapping if it crept out of nowhere completely unexpectedly and was in the film lol.

lol this would be me too

[Bruce_Begins]

At the time of SR, many top critics gave the movie a favorable reviews, some even praised Routh as Superman, I don't remember anyone criticizing Routh's performance.

But the fan community was divided, many found Routh's acting as wooden and lacklusture, I think that this may have been due to script which did not give him enough lines and the story which required Superman to look sad and serious most of the time coupled with the fact that there was little action in the movie.

But, Superman community was divided even before the movie was released, there were few people who were in the Tom Welling camp, to them nobody but Welling was suited for the role, then few were in the Chris Reeve camp who thought that there should be no more Superman movies as there could be no one who can fill in Chris Reeve's shoes.


Contrast this with Marvel fans who are united and support all Marvel Studios movies, regardless of the changes made to the source material.

[Naite22]

Originally Posted by Showtime

It's mostly for cast, crew, studio, and sometimes critics or reporters to get together to watch something that has been worked on for many months in the case of Friends and Family Screening.

Don't mean to push my luck, but that's just it. Why reporters and critics? I can understand cast/crew/studio and such. But why the reporters/critics? Why do they get to see it 4 months in advance, if they can't talk about it at all until the movie opens anyways? Just curious.

[Naite22]

Originally Posted by Bruce_Begins

At the time of SR, many top critics gave the movie a favorable reviews, some even praised Routh as Superman, I don't remember anyone criticizing Routh's performance.

But the fan community was divided, many found Routh's acting as wooden and lacklusture, I think that this may have been due to script which did not give him enough lines and the story which required Superman to look sad and serious most of the time coupled with the fact that there was little action in the movie.

But, Superman community was divided even before the movie was released, there were few people who were in the Tom Welling camp, to them nobody but Welling was suited for the role, then few were in the Chris Reeve camp who thought that there should be no more Superman movies as there could be no one who can fill in Chris Reeve's shoes.


Contrast this with Marvel fans who are united and support all Marvel Studios movies, regardless of the changes made to the source material.

This is true. The first many critics out pretty much praised the film.

And no one criticized Rouths performance as I recall. The "worst" written I ever saw, was that: "Routh actually does a pretty decent job in the lead role!"... And from there on it was only better and better praise.

I for one know one thing. If ANYTHING. Routh was one of the few things that really did work in SR! He was really good. Just sad that he wasn't given too much to do, OR to say! He was kinda poor directed too. But he was NEVER the problem. The story and lack of action was the problem. Among with pacing problems and other small factors. I really hoped that he got the chance to don the suit ones again for MOS. I felt really bad for him that he didn't get the chance. At first I couldn't understand why they would waste time re-casting Clark/Superman. But when all was explained and things started falling in to place, and that MOS was proving to be a whooole new ball-game, starting from a totally clean slate. Well. Than it began to make sense to me, and why they kinda felt the need to cast a completely new superman, that they found in Cavill.

[Bruce_Begins]

WB's decision to make a Justice League : Mortal movie after SR with a new actor playing Superman (DJ Cotrona) was really mind-boggling decision, at that time Routh was the Superman, they should have cast him as Superman and started the shared DC Universe.

But the JL:M project was a disaster from start, I am glad that it was abandoned.

Now, there is a talk (again) of making a JL movie after MOS, it's like history repeating itself.

[Showtime]

Originally Posted by Naite22

Don't mean to push my luck, but that's just it. Why reporters and critics? I can understand cast/crew/studio and such. But why the reporters/critics? Why do they get to see it 4 months in advance, if they can't talk about it at all until the movie opens anyways? Just curious.

To create a buzz within the industry, maybe the reporter(s) or critic(s) are in the studio's pocket, or the studio's think they are. There is a large number of reasons why a studio or might or might not do this. Even the advanced screenings for press are sometimes over a month in advance. The Les Mis screening was in late November for me and you couldn't talk about the film until Christmas. They put embargo's on it, as I mentioned previously. For Dark Knight rises the original email said you could not bring a guest and if you brought a phone it would be confiscated.

[titansupes]

Originally Posted by Naite22

And no one criticized Rouths performance as I recall. The "worst" written I ever saw, was that: "Routh actually does a pretty decent job in the lead role!"... And from there on it was only better and better praise.

I thought Routh was a bit wooden in areas, good in others and showed potential for the future.

I remember the week before SR, I saw that weeks episode of At The Movies with David and Margaret (kind of Australia's Ebert and Siskel). I'll never forget when David said "Leading man Brandon Routh seems to have undergone some sort of charisma bypass surgery". Then called the film a 'joyless' experience.

I do not want history repeating itself.

[Mysteryman]

Originally Posted by STARMAN

It's a good thing I didn't go to a screening. I'd be on here revealing everything.

Well then,
We need to get you to a screening of MOS PRONTO!

[Bruce_Begins]

Originally Posted by titansupes

I thought Routh was a bit wooden in areas, good in others and showed potential for the future.

I remember the week before SR, I saw that weeks episode of At The Movies with David and Margaret (kind of Australia's Ebert and Siskel). I'll never forget when David said "Leading man Brandon Routh seems to have undergone some sort of charisma bypass surgery". Then called the film a 'joyless' experience.

I do not want history repeating itself.

I thought that Routh did fairly well as Superman and Clark Kent, in one or two scenes his dialogue delivery was flat, otherwise he was a good choice.

[mclay18]

I'm wondering with the positive buzz with WB being happy with the finished product... why haven't they secured a writer to pen a sequel yet? I know they had a shortlist of writers they planned on offering around November 2011 (which included Travis Beacham, Lawrence Kasdan and Steve Kloves)... but no deal?

Usually, WB usually gets a screenwriter to start writing a few months prior to the film's release in the case it's a hit. That way they can get moving on a sequel asap, and get production moving more quickly.

[Astrodust]

Originally Posted by Bruce_Begins

At the time of SR, many top critics gave the movie a favorable reviews, some even praised Routh as Superman, I don't remember anyone criticizing Routh's performance.

But the fan community was divided, many found Routh's acting as wooden and lacklusture, I think that this may have been due to script which did not give him enough lines and the story which required Superman to look sad and serious most of the time coupled with the fact that there was little action in the movie.

But, Superman community was divided even before the movie was released, there were few people who were in the Tom Welling camp, to them nobody but Welling was suited for the role, then few were in the Chris Reeve camp who thought that there should be no more Superman movies as there could be no one who can fill in Chris Reeve's shoes.


Contrast this with Marvel fans who are united and support all Marvel Studios movies, regardless of the changes made to the source material.

Roger Ebert criticized the casting of Routh and said he lacked charisma. Ebert may be old but he is still one of the most influential critics.