The SuperHeroHype Forums  

Go Back   The SuperHeroHype Forums > Superman > Superman Sequels

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-25-2007, 08:13 PM   #251
Super Kal
Proud Conservative
 
Super Kal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: a liberal state
Posts: 47,905
Default Re: Kurtzman & Orci Writing Man of Steel?

and if it was so bad, then why is it rumored that those same writers are supposedly the next writers for MOS?

__________________
"For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and His commandments are not burdensome."
Proud Texan
Super Kal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2007, 08:27 PM   #252
Mikelus
Intellectualis
 
Mikelus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Earth
Posts: 3,641
Default Re: Kurtzman & Orci Writing Man of Steel?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Super Kal View Post
and if it was so bad, then why is it rumored that those same writers are supposedly the next writers for MOS?
That's very ironic for SR fans, the writers from a movie they hate could be the ones writing for their beloved sequel, LOL!!!

Mikelus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2007, 08:31 PM   #253
I Am The Knight
Infinity
 
I Am The Knight's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Multiverse
Posts: 20,825
Default Re: Kurtzman & Orci Writing Man of Steel?

Quote:
Originally Posted by buggs0268 View Post
It's funny how you guys like a film that did bad at the box office and even split the superman base, calling it genius. When at the same time, a film that did a crap load at the box office and is generally loved by people as a fun film you guys think is junk. I mean, across the board most people who love and defend SR don't like the films that the GA love. Hmmm. Seems like a big disconnect from the way the GA view things.
What? I love SR, and I love Transformers (I've watched it pretty much every day since I got the DVD) ... It is possible to like plot driven movies and lighter movies, for us "SR lovers". I don't think we are disconnected from the GA. Not everyone loved Transformers, just like not everyone loved SR. Simple as that.

Quote:
If it was so great, then why are the writers off the project. Oh yeah, they walked. Yeah right. Why is the film not greenlit. I mean Transformers came out not 6 months ago and it already has a sequel being worked on set to release in summer 2009. Batman Begins had a sequel greenlit, but waiting for Nolan to sign on the dotted line, but from the WB's end it was a go. Comes out this summer. Spiderman 4 is pretty much greenlit now. Yet SR, the soooooooooo loved film, had to scratch to 200 mill domestic. Only made a measly 390 WW. And it's sequel is up in the air. Oh it was really a loved movie. I mean, Rotten Tomatoes can't be wrong. I mean everyone knows it speaks for everyone. I love how you guys cling now to the one site that gives the movie a favorable rating.
Don't exaggerate now. I don't think anyone here has said that the movie was inmensely loved all over the world. Wich is what this guy

Quote:
Mikelus
Is saying we have done. I haven't seen anyone who liked the movie say that.

__________________
Before SHH, your miserable, insignificant little life was laughable. Now that you've found SHH, have you noticed you've become more popular? Suddenly EVERYONE wants to hang out with you.

SHH. You owe us your livelihood. / Avvy by SkullDevil! / ?
I Am The Knight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2007, 08:51 PM   #254
El Payaso
Banned User
 
El Payaso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Rubbing your rhubarb.
Posts: 15,263
Default Re: Kurtzman & Orci Writing Man of Steel?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Super Kal View Post
and if it was so bad, then why is it rumored that those same writers are supposedly the next writers for MOS?
Because Hollywood work on the money making and repetition (formula) base. So if two writers wrote a big BO hit movie, they naturally think everything they'll write will have the same effect. The same they think that if one-liners did good in a movie, they repeat that in every movie thinking it's equally appropiate.

This working guideline has nothing to do with them being good or bad. They're there merely because they're believed to be money-making movie makers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikelus View Post
That's very ironic for SR fans, the writers from a movie they hate could be the ones writing for their beloved sequel, LOL!!!
More than ironic is Hollywood natural. That's how they think that if they make money with a one hero franchise, if they put 5 heroes in one movie, it should be 5 times more successful and they make JL.

So, more than ironic is moronic.

El Payaso is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2007, 08:53 PM   #255
Super Kal
Proud Conservative
 
Super Kal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: a liberal state
Posts: 47,905
Default Re: Kurtzman & Orci Writing Man of Steel?

the true test of these writers will be December 25th, 2008

__________________
"For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and His commandments are not burdensome."
Proud Texan
Super Kal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2007, 08:56 PM   #256
El Payaso
Banned User
 
El Payaso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Rubbing your rhubarb.
Posts: 15,263
Default Re: Kurtzman & Orci Writing Man of Steel?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikelus View Post
Aveitwithjamon, get your facts straight, it didn't fulfill WB expectations either and a lot of people didn't like it, why do you think the fanbase is so divided? Millions of people watched the movie around the world, if you think all of them like it, that's your problem. Why do you think the sequel is up in the air? X-Men, Spiderman or Batman Begins didn't have any problems getting a sequel quick, those are the facts.
Simply because executives made the amount the money they wanted out of those. If for numbers SR did more money than BB.

But BB cost less and THAT is the reeason of its sequel. Or do you think WB gives two ****s about what the fanbase think?

El Payaso is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2007, 08:59 PM   #257
I Am The Knight
Infinity
 
I Am The Knight's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Multiverse
Posts: 20,825
Default Re: Kurtzman & Orci Writing Man of Steel?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Super Kal View Post
the true test of these writers will be December 25th, 2008
And march 2009, when Watchmen opens. Sure they didn't write the script, but they did a "polish" on it if I'm not mistaken.

__________________
Before SHH, your miserable, insignificant little life was laughable. Now that you've found SHH, have you noticed you've become more popular? Suddenly EVERYONE wants to hang out with you.

SHH. You owe us your livelihood. / Avvy by SkullDevil! / ?
I Am The Knight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2007, 11:06 PM   #258
Dan
Banned User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 62
Default Re: Kurtzman & Orci Writing Man of Steel?

Quote:
Originally Posted by buggs0268
It's funny how you guys like a film that did bad at the box office and even split the superman base, calling it genius. When at the same time, a film that did a crap load at the box office and is generally loved by people as a fun film you guys think is junk. I mean, across the board most people who love and defend SR don't like the films that the GA love. Hmmm. Seems like a big disconnect from the way the GA view things.
Yes, and the American public also elected a monkey into the White House two elections in a row. And, yes, general audiences have terrible taste in movies. There, I said it. Seriously, hate SUPERMAN RETURNS as much as you want, but I cannot believe that some of you actually think TRANSFORMERS is a better-constructed, more innovative movie than SUPERMAN RETURNS is. It just boggles me. And don't say, like most of you usually do, "Well, it entertained me more, therefore it's a better movie." I mean, if that's the case, if all a movie has to do to be considered good is entertain you, then you have seriously low standards.

"But ZOMG the TRANSFORMERS HAD THE BIG GIANT FREAKING ROBSTOZ ZOMG AND HAD THE ACTIONS AND THE XPLOSIONS zomg was THE MOST EPIC EPICEST MOVIE ALL TIME. SIAH LABEOF FOR BEST ACOTR XZOMG MICHAEL BAY BEST DIREFTOSZOMNG."

Quote:
Originally Posted by buggs0268
If it was so great, then why are the writers off the project.
I don't know, but I think it's because WB wasn't impressed with their pitches for the sequel and the fact that SUPERMAN RETURNS underperformed at the box office. This doesn't mean SUPERMAN RETURNS was a bad film, though. Hell, if a movie's quality were determined solely on how it performed at the box office, then the majority of independent Oscar films that come out every year would be considered terrible films.

Quote:
Originally Posted by buggs0268
Yet SR, the soooooooooo loved film, had to scratch to 200 mill domestic.
...which most movies rarely make.

Quote:
Originally Posted by buggs0268
Only made a measly 390 WW.
...which most movies also rarely make.

Quote:
Originally Posted by buggs0268
Oh it was really a loved movie.
No, I don't think it was at all. General audiences saw it, either just liked it or just didn't, then moved on and forgot about it until the inevitable sequel, like they do with 99.99% of movies. It wasn't extremely loved like a small percentage of movies are and it certainly wasn't "ZOMG, IT WUZ TEH HACKZ MOVEI" as most fanboys, like yourself, make it out to be. It was just a decent film.

Quote:
Originally Posted by buggs0268
I mean, Rotten Tomatoes can't be wrong. I mean everyone knows it speaks for everyone.
No, it just speaks for the few people (i.e. Cream Of The Crop critics) who actually went to school to STUDY the medium of film and who understand and see different tricks directors use, which ones recycle old, rehashed trash (i.e. Michael Bay) and which ones use new, somewhat innovative techniques (i.e. Spielberg).

Quote:
Originally Posted by buggs0268
It even ticked off two senior execs at the WB, and the main exec.
Provide a source or you lose all your remaining credibility; and I want to see a quote that illustrates that it actually they're actually "ticked off."

Quote:
Originally Posted by buggs0268
It failed.
No, stop being a blind, biased fanboy and look at this from a different perspective: the movie made almost 400 million dollars altogether. It isn't considered a failure at all; it just underperformed.

Because fanboys are so upset and aggravated that SUPERMAN RETURNS isn't exactly what they expected it to be, instead of assessing the situation and forming a valid, level-headed opinion, they blow things out of proportion and exaggerate things to the extreme extent that their opinions aren't valid or credible anymore. The same thing happened with SPIDER-MAN 3, though the difference in this situation is that SUPERMAN RETURNS was, for the most part, critically acclaimed.


Last edited by Dan; 11-25-2007 at 11:24 PM.
Dan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2007, 11:18 PM   #259
Dan
Banned User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 62
Default Re: Kurtzman & Orci Writing Man of Steel?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Super Kal
and if it was so bad, then why is it rumored that those same writers are supposedly the next writers for MOS?
I cannot believe that I actually have to answer this question.

It's quite simple: they delivered a script that studio execs love. It was cheap; it recycled old, familiar, redundant formulas; it was easily accessible and digestible; it had a convenient, artificial, happy ending, wrapped up, all nice and tightly, in a big bow; the characters are literally cardboard cutouts of the "roles" they were supposed to play in the story; and, most importantly, it didn't make anyone (i.e. the audience) too uneasy. If you honestly think the TRANSFORMERS script was innovative, original, and better than the SUPERMAN RETURNS script, and if you honestly enjoy watching the same formula that is used in every other Hollywood alien invasion movie over and over again, then so be it.

I fear for the future of cinema.

Dan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2007, 11:31 PM   #260
Super Kal
Proud Conservative
 
Super Kal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: a liberal state
Posts: 47,905
Default Re: Kurtzman & Orci Writing Man of Steel?

Transformers did something SR did not and can never do:

it kept me entertained.

and the truth of the matter is this: it was original. Besides Richard, Jason, and a few other tidbits, everything about SR was a rehash of a 20 yr. old movie.

It's time for WB to think outside the box and get with the flow of making good superhero movies... keep wannabes like Singer out of the comic book world. Their view, especially his view, does not work in the DC world, plain and simple, IMO. A story plagued with un-originality, plot holes, unneeded changes and dull moments does not make a successful comic book movie.

I applaud you, WB, for going with these writers... for once you are doing something for the better of the Superman franchise.

__________________
"For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and His commandments are not burdensome."
Proud Texan
Super Kal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2007, 12:50 AM   #261
Dan
Banned User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 62
Default Re: Kurtzman & Orci Writing Man of Steel?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Super Kal
and the truth of the matter is this: it was original.
How the hell was TRANSFORMERS even REMOTELY original? It recycles old, familiar, redundant formulas; it was easily accessible and digestible; it had a convenient, artificial, happy ending, wrapped up, all nice and tightly, in a big bow; the characters are literally cardboard cutouts of the "roles" they're supposed to play in the story; and it rehashes the same formula that is used in every other Hollywood alien invasion movie over and over again.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Super Kal
Besides Richard, Jason, and a few other tidbits, everything about SR was a rehash of a 20 yr. old movie.
WOOHOO! More fanboy hyperbole...

No, the aspects of Donner's SUPERMAN that are rehashed in SUPERMAN RETURNS are mostly specific lines. Other than these lines, SUPERMAN RETURNS, for the most part, is fairly original, especially the ENTIRE emotionally captivating third act.

I mean, despite the fact that the SUPERMAN RETURNS score even uses the same John Williams Superman Theme from Donner's SUPERMAN, the score of SUPERMAN RETURNS is STILL more original, fresh, and complex and less of a rehash than the score of TRANSFORMERS is. Yes, if you look at things simplistically, the score of SUPERMAN RETURNS appears to be more of a rehash, but with an understanding of music theory and basic chord progressions, you'll find that Ottman's score is, for the most part, an original idea (save for William's triumphant Superman theme, but I don't think anyone's complained about it being in the film). Hans Zimmer's TRANSFORMERS score (please don't correct me) uses the exact same, God-damned, synthesized, pulsating, rhythmic drum-beat that he uses as a basis for ALL OF HIS SCORES. Seriously, like Michael Bay, Zimmer, and his various "collaborators", are more one-trick ponies than even Bay is! The atrocious TRANSFORMERS score recycles the EXACT same chord-progressions, and therefore themes, that the scores for PIRATES OF THE CARRBIEAN, THE DA VINCO CODE, NATIONAL TREASURE, and countless other forgettable Zimmer-scored movies use. And like film critics do with Michael Bay, film score critics treat Hans Zimmer like a joke, and don't even acknowledge his "collaborators" as legitimate composers (i.e. Klaus Badelt, and now Steven Jabloaksndsky).

And yet fanboys rave and drool over TRANSFORMERS and its synthesized score like sheep, the same fanboys who then turn around and lambaste Singer and Ottman for being unoriginal and recycling old material. Does anyone else, besides me, find the irony in this extremely amusing?

Dan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2007, 01:11 AM   #262
dark_b
Side-Kick
 
dark_b's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 46,545
Default Re: Kurtzman & Orci Writing Man of Steel?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Super Kal View Post
Transformers did something SR did not and can never do:

it kept me entertained.

and the truth of the matter is this: it was original. Besides Richard, Jason, and a few other tidbits, everything about SR was a rehash of a 20 yr. old movie.

It's time for WB to think outside the box and get with the flow of making good superhero movies... keep wannabes like Singer out of the comic book world. Their view, especially his view, does not work in the DC world, plain and simple, IMO. A story plagued with un-originality, plot holes, unneeded changes and dull moments does not make a successful comic book movie.

I applaud you, WB, for going with these writers... for once you are doing something for the better of the Superman franchise.
one of the best entertaining and fun movies that i saw in the last 10 years.

it had sexy girls,cool cars,groudnbreaking action,groudnbreaking CGI,aliens that acted like cliche soldiers,shia,shia and of course teh parents.

if the money was not thrown away with SR we wouldnt have now a problem. SR could be made for 150 milions.

-budget 150 milions
-supervillain(screentime 10 minutes)
-one superfight

and we would have a sequel IMO. yeah thats what i think. since it would cost 150 milions it would automatic make a bigger profit. but with a sueprvillain it would make IMO even more money.a supervillain that would be in the movie only for 10 minutes only for a superfight would IMO make more money. so we would have a similar profit like BB had. now at this time the script would be finished. then the casting for the villain would start.
some people would still hate teh suit ,the story ....but we would IMO get a sequel.

dark_b is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2007, 01:23 AM   #263
manofsteel4life
Side-Kick
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 2,514
Default Re: Kurtzman & Orci Writing Man of Steel?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan View Post
Yes, and the American public also elected a monkey into the White House two elections in a row. And, yes, general audiences have terrible taste in movies. There, I said it. Seriously, hate SUPERMAN RETURNS as much as you want, but I cannot believe that some of you actually think TRANSFORMERS is a better-constructed, more innovative movie than SUPERMAN RETURNS is. It just boggles me. And don't say, like most of you usually do, "Well, it entertained me more, therefore it's a better movie." I mean, if that's the case, if all a movie has to do to be considered good is entertain you, then you have seriously low standards.

"But ZOMG the TRANSFORMERS HAD THE BIG GIANT FREAKING ROBSTOZ ZOMG AND HAD THE ACTIONS AND THE XPLOSIONS zomg was THE MOST EPIC EPICEST MOVIE ALL TIME. SIAH LABEOF FOR BEST ACOTR XZOMG MICHAEL BAY BEST DIREFTOSZOMNG."



I don't know, but I think it's because WB wasn't impressed with their pitches for the sequel and the fact that SUPERMAN RETURNS underperformed at the box office. This doesn't mean SUPERMAN RETURNS was a bad film, though. Hell, if a movie's quality were determined solely on how it performed at the box office, then the majority of independent Oscar films that come out every year would be considered terrible films.



...which most movies rarely make.



...which most movies also rarely make.



No, I don't think it was at all. General audiences saw it, either just liked it or just didn't, then moved on and forgot about it until the inevitable sequel, like they do with 99.99% of movies. It wasn't extremely loved like a small percentage of movies are and it certainly wasn't "ZOMG, IT WUZ TEH HACKZ MOVEI" as most fanboys, like yourself, make it out to be. It was just a decent film.



No, it just speaks for the few people (i.e. Cream Of The Crop critics) who actually went to school to STUDY the medium of film and who understand and see different tricks directors use, which ones recycle old, rehashed trash (i.e. Michael Bay) and which ones use new, somewhat innovative techniques (i.e. Spielberg).



Provide a source or you lose all your remaining credibility; and I want to see a quote that illustrates that it actually they're actually "ticked off."



No, stop being a blind, biased fanboy and look at this from a different perspective: the movie made almost 400 million dollars altogether. It isn't considered a failure at all; it just underperformed.

Because fanboys are so upset and aggravated that SUPERMAN RETURNS isn't exactly what they expected it to be, instead of assessing the situation and forming a valid, level-headed opinion, they blow things out of proportion and exaggerate things to the extreme extent that their opinions aren't valid or credible anymore. The same thing happened with SPIDER-MAN 3, though the difference in this situation is that SUPERMAN RETURNS was, for the most part, critically acclaimed.
go on tell em Dan.........

__________________
Quote:

If I thought I could only make the world believe that God is love, I would only take that text and go up and down the earth, trying to counteract what Satan has been telling them.

D. L. Moody
manofsteel4life is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2007, 02:39 AM   #264
Nightwing1977
Want to see my mask??
 
Nightwing1977's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: NC
Posts: 5,851
Default Re: Kurtzman & Orci Writing Man of Steel?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan View Post

No, stop being a blind, biased fanboy and look at this from a different perspective: the movie made almost 400 million dollars altogether. It isn't considered a failure at all; it just underperformed.
Yep. SR wasn't a failure, but it wasn't a giant smash at the box office. Don't forget SR get money from other things beside movie theaters. Like DVD sales, merchandise, etc. Also, does the success of the IMAX version help?

And you should see buggs mention he is happy Spider-Man 3 made more at the box office than SR one time. I think it was SM3 forum, of course. So funny with that kind of comments.

__________________
~AP's a pedophilia who love posting pics of little boys in Superman costumes O_o
Nightwing1977 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2007, 03:46 AM   #265
Dotten
Side-Kick
 
Dotten's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Norway
Posts: 783
Default Re: Kurtzman & Orci Writing Man of Steel?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan View Post
No, it just speaks for the few people (i.e. Cream Of The Crop critics) who actually went to school to STUDY the medium of film and who understand and see different tricks directors use, which ones recycle old, rehashed trash (i.e. Michael Bay) and which ones use new, somewhat innovative techniques (i.e. Spielberg).

That's quite funny, since the Transformers producer (Spielberg) is a fan of Bays work. To quote Spielberg himself: "Bay was born to make this movie"

Now, Spielberg I believe, knows far more then the average movie-critics (even cream of the crop). So why does he like Bay? Does he not know his ass from his head? Or maybe Bay-haters need to learn something from Spielberg and learn why Spielberg likes Bays work.

Not to mention Spielbergs Indiana Jones movie was one of the biggest inspirations of Bay. He read the script as a teenager and thought it was crap, then saw the movie and fell in love. So Bay probably knows that a movie can be good even with a script that looks like crap.

Dotten is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2007, 04:18 AM   #266
Dan
Banned User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 62
Default Re: Kurtzman & Orci Writing Man of Steel?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightwing1977
And you should see buggs mention he is happy Spider-Man 3 made more at the box office than SR one time. I think it was SM3 forum, of course. So funny with that kind of comments.
Well, it is his opinion and he's certainly entitled to it. SPIDER-MAN 3, in my opinion, wasn't the extreme mess that most fanboys consider it to be, but I definitely think that intelligent critics have a lot of true, valid points when it comes to evaluating it. SUPERMAN RETURNS is, in my opinion, vastly superior to SPIDER-MAN 3, and both films are light-years ahead of TRANSFORMERS.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dotten
That's quite funny, since the Transformers producer (Spielberg) is a fan of Bays work. To quote Spielberg himself: "Bay was born to make this movie"
How does this quote illustrate that Spielberg is a fan of Bay's work? He's merely stating what is true: that Bay's directing style is perfectly suited for a concept like Transformers, which I agree with.

And just because Spielberg likes Bay, doesn't mean he isn't a vastly superior, more talented director than Bay will ever hope to be.

Dan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2007, 08:09 AM   #267
Showtime
Your Friend In Time
 
Showtime's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Hill Valley
Posts: 41,473
Default Re: Kurtzman & Orci Writing Man of Steel?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan View Post
How the hell was TRANSFORMERS even REMOTELY original? It recycles old, familiar, redundant formulas; it was easily accessible and digestible; it had a convenient, artificial, happy ending, wrapped up, all nice and tightly, in a big bow; the characters are literally cardboard cutouts of the "roles" they're supposed to play in the story; and it rehashes the same formula that is used in every other Hollywood alien invasion movie over and over again.



WOOHOO! More fanboy hyperbole...

No, the aspects of Donner's SUPERMAN that are rehashed in SUPERMAN RETURNS are mostly specific lines. Other than these lines, SUPERMAN RETURNS, for the most part, is fairly original, especially the ENTIRE emotionally captivating third act.

I mean, despite the fact that the SUPERMAN RETURNS score even uses the same John Williams Superman Theme from Donner's SUPERMAN, the score of SUPERMAN RETURNS is STILL more original, fresh, and complex and less of a rehash than the score of TRANSFORMERS is. Yes, if you look at things simplistically, the score of SUPERMAN RETURNS appears to be more of a rehash, but with an understanding of music theory and basic chord progressions, you'll find that Ottman's score is, for the most part, an original idea (save for William's triumphant Superman theme, but I don't think anyone's complained about it being in the film). Hans Zimmer's TRANSFORMERS score (please don't correct me) uses the exact same, God-damned, synthesized, pulsating, rhythmic drum-beat that he uses as a basis for ALL OF HIS SCORES. Seriously, like Michael Bay, Zimmer, and his various "collaborators", are more one-trick ponies than even Bay is! The atrocious TRANSFORMERS score recycles the EXACT same chord-progressions, and therefore themes, that the scores for PIRATES OF THE CARRBIEAN, THE DA VINCO CODE, NATIONAL TREASURE, and countless other forgettable Zimmer-scored movies use. And like film critics do with Michael Bay, film score critics treat Hans Zimmer like a joke, and don't even acknowledge his "collaborators" as legitimate composers (i.e. Klaus Badelt, and now Steven Jabloaksndsky).

And yet fanboys rave and drool over TRANSFORMERS and its synthesized score like sheep, the same fanboys who then turn around and lambaste Singer and Ottman for being unoriginal and recycling old material. Does anyone else, besides me, find the irony in this extremely amusing?
Dan Harris?

__________________

Showtime is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2007, 08:47 AM   #268
Matt
IKYN Guy Groupie
 
Matt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 80,997
Default Re: Kurtzman & Orci Writing Man of Steel?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan View Post
Yes, and the American public also elected a monkey into the White House two elections in a row. And, yes, general audiences have terrible taste in movies. There, I said it. Seriously, hate SUPERMAN RETURNS as much as you want, but I cannot believe that some of you actually think TRANSFORMERS is a better-constructed, more innovative movie than SUPERMAN RETURNS is. It just boggles me. And don't say, like most of you usually do, "Well, it entertained me more, therefore it's a better movie." I mean, if that's the case, if all a movie has to do to be considered good is entertain you, then you have seriously low standards.

"But ZOMG the TRANSFORMERS HAD THE BIG GIANT FREAKING ROBSTOZ ZOMG AND HAD THE ACTIONS AND THE XPLOSIONS zomg was THE MOST EPIC EPICEST MOVIE ALL TIME. SIAH LABEOF FOR BEST ACOTR XZOMG MICHAEL BAY BEST DIREFTOSZOMNG."



I don't know, but I think it's because WB wasn't impressed with their pitches for the sequel and the fact that SUPERMAN RETURNS underperformed at the box office. This doesn't mean SUPERMAN RETURNS was a bad film, though. Hell, if a movie's quality were determined solely on how it performed at the box office, then the majority of independent Oscar films that come out every year would be considered terrible films.



...which most movies rarely make.



...which most movies also rarely make.



No, I don't think it was at all. General audiences saw it, either just liked it or just didn't, then moved on and forgot about it until the inevitable sequel, like they do with 99.99% of movies. It wasn't extremely loved like a small percentage of movies are and it certainly wasn't "ZOMG, IT WUZ TEH HACKZ MOVEI" as most fanboys, like yourself, make it out to be. It was just a decent film.



No, it just speaks for the few people (i.e. Cream Of The Crop critics) who actually went to school to STUDY the medium of film and who understand and see different tricks directors use, which ones recycle old, rehashed trash (i.e. Michael Bay) and which ones use new, somewhat innovative techniques (i.e. Spielberg).



Provide a source or you lose all your remaining credibility; and I want to see a quote that illustrates that it actually they're actually "ticked off."



No, stop being a blind, biased fanboy and look at this from a different perspective: the movie made almost 400 million dollars altogether. It isn't considered a failure at all; it just underperformed.

Because fanboys are so upset and aggravated that SUPERMAN RETURNS isn't exactly what they expected it to be, instead of assessing the situation and forming a valid, level-headed opinion, they blow things out of proportion and exaggerate things to the extreme extent that their opinions aren't valid or credible anymore. The same thing happened with SPIDER-MAN 3, though the difference in this situation is that SUPERMAN RETURNS was, for the most part, critically acclaimed.
No need to insult people or bring politics into the discussion, Dan.

Matt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2007, 09:35 AM   #269
X-Maniac
High Evolutionary
 
X-Maniac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Genosha
Posts: 14,820
Default Re: Kurtzman & Orci Writing Man of Steel?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan View Post
Yes, and the American public also elected a monkey into the White House two elections in a row. And, yes, general audiences have terrible taste in movies. There, I said it. Seriously, hate SUPERMAN RETURNS as much as you want, but I cannot believe that some of you actually think TRANSFORMERS is a better-constructed, more innovative movie than SUPERMAN RETURNS is. It just boggles me. And don't say, like most of you usually do, "Well, it entertained me more, therefore it's a better movie." I mean, if that's the case, if all a movie has to do to be considered good is entertain you, then you have seriously low standards.

"But ZOMG the TRANSFORMERS HAD THE BIG GIANT FREAKING ROBSTOZ ZOMG AND HAD THE ACTIONS AND THE XPLOSIONS zomg was THE MOST EPIC EPICEST MOVIE ALL TIME. SIAH LABEOF FOR BEST ACOTR XZOMG MICHAEL BAY BEST DIREFTOSZOMNG."



I don't know, but I think it's because WB wasn't impressed with their pitches for the sequel and the fact that SUPERMAN RETURNS underperformed at the box office. This doesn't mean SUPERMAN RETURNS was a bad film, though. Hell, if a movie's quality were determined solely on how it performed at the box office, then the majority of independent Oscar films that come out every year would be considered terrible films.



...which most movies rarely make.



...which most movies also rarely make.



No, I don't think it was at all. General audiences saw it, either just liked it or just didn't, then moved on and forgot about it until the inevitable sequel, like they do with 99.99% of movies. It wasn't extremely loved like a small percentage of movies are and it certainly wasn't "ZOMG, IT WUZ TEH HACKZ MOVEI" as most fanboys, like yourself, make it out to be. It was just a decent film.



No, it just speaks for the few people (i.e. Cream Of The Crop critics) who actually went to school to STUDY the medium of film and who understand and see different tricks directors use, which ones recycle old, rehashed trash (i.e. Michael Bay) and which ones use new, somewhat innovative techniques (i.e. Spielberg).



Provide a source or you lose all your remaining credibility; and I want to see a quote that illustrates that it actually they're actually "ticked off."



No, stop being a blind, biased fanboy and look at this from a different perspective: the movie made almost 400 million dollars altogether. It isn't considered a failure at all; it just underperformed.

Because fanboys are so upset and aggravated that SUPERMAN RETURNS isn't exactly what they expected it to be, instead of assessing the situation and forming a valid, level-headed opinion, they blow things out of proportion and exaggerate things to the extreme extent that their opinions aren't valid or credible anymore. The same thing happened with SPIDER-MAN 3, though the difference in this situation is that SUPERMAN RETURNS was, for the most part, critically acclaimed.
But is it enough that a Singer movie about Superman returning (to earth and to the big screen after a 20-year gap) should be a 'decent film' that 'underperformed.'? Is that sufficient?

And surely entertainment value and financial returns have to be part of the consideration? Investors providing millions or hundreds of millions into a movie will expect their money back and some return on it too.

I don't think SR was intended to be some cult, indie, arty movie that lurked below the radar and was only for the intelligentsia of the movie world.

I also don't think people necessarily wanted SR to be like Transformers. I haven't even seen Transformers - I've heard good and bad about it but the basic premise doesn't entice me. Put giant robots in an X-Men movie and I'd be there, put them in Sky Captain and I'm there, but on their own I don't find them appealing. But what people are saying is that Transformers does show energetic and exciting action on a smaller budget.

Intelligently crafted movies don't always succeed or become huge successes, just as the best music doesn't always get to the top of the mainstream music charts (most of the best stuff is probably way off the mainstream radar). But it is possible to have artistic quality and commercial success, like Lord of the Rings did or Titanic. Something stopped SR going into those realms.

__________________
Show me an X-Men comic where Mystique is the leader and walks round all day as a bored blonde
X-Maniac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2007, 09:55 AM   #270
Super Kal
Proud Conservative
 
Super Kal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: a liberal state
Posts: 47,905
Default Re: Kurtzman & Orci Writing Man of Steel?

I feel it underperformed because it wasn't what people were expecting to see, and that's what hurt it in the long run.

You don't need to make it artsy, dark, and deco to make a good movie... stick to what works. I'm afraid though that it may be too far gone for this franchise.

__________________
"For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and His commandments are not burdensome."
Proud Texan
Super Kal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2007, 10:07 AM   #271
Super Kal
Proud Conservative
 
Super Kal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: a liberal state
Posts: 47,905
Default Re: Kurtzman & Orci Writing Man of Steel?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan View Post
How the hell was TRANSFORMERS even REMOTELY original? It recycles old, familiar, redundant formulas; it was easily accessible and digestible; it had a convenient, artificial, happy ending, wrapped up, all nice and tightly, in a big bow; the characters are literally cardboard cutouts of the "roles" they're supposed to play in the story; and it rehashes the same formula that is used in every other Hollywood alien invasion movie over and over again.
and that's what people expected to see... remember, this is transformers. Yes, the script coud of been better (every movie has it's flaws) but what it lacked in story, it made up for in action. SR was like S:TMP... it desperately wanted to be epic, and yes, it made money, but it wasn't what people wanted to see.




Quote:
No, the aspects of Donner's SUPERMAN that are rehashed in SUPERMAN RETURNS are mostly specific lines. Other than these lines, SUPERMAN RETURNS, for the most part, is fairly original, especially the ENTIRE emotionally captivating third act.
that's where you're wrong... Lex still using his real estate scheme, the flight with Lois at night, lifting the kryptonite continent... there are so many rehashes, it's not even funny.

Quote:
I mean, despite the fact that the SUPERMAN RETURNS score even uses the same John Williams Superman Theme from Donner's SUPERMAN, the score of SUPERMAN RETURNS is STILL more original, fresh, and complex and less of a rehash than the score of TRANSFORMERS is. Yes, if you look at things simplistically, the score of SUPERMAN RETURNS appears to be more of a rehash, but with an understanding of music theory and basic chord progressions, you'll find that Ottman's score is, for the most part, an original idea (save for William's triumphant Superman theme, but I don't think anyone's complained about it being in the film). Hans Zimmer's TRANSFORMERS score (please don't correct me) uses the exact same, God-damned, synthesized, pulsating, rhythmic drum-beat that he uses as a basis for ALL OF HIS SCORES. Seriously, like Michael Bay, Zimmer, and his various "collaborators", are more one-trick ponies than even Bay is! The atrocious TRANSFORMERS score recycles the EXACT same chord-progressions, and therefore themes, that the scores for PIRATES OF THE CARRBIEAN, THE DA VINCO CODE, NATIONAL TREASURE, and countless other forgettable Zimmer-scored movies use. And like film critics do with Michael Bay, film score critics treat Hans Zimmer like a joke, and don't even acknowledge his "collaborators" as legitimate composers (i.e. Klaus Badelt, and now Steven Jablonsky).
Jablonsky did what Ottman could never do for the TF movie:
he made a soundtrack worth remembering.

Ottman's complete composure of the Superman theme is, IMO, a joke compared to the original... JW's original piece has a resounding boom around it, and captured your very essence when it first plays in the movie with the credits. It has a "tympanic warmth" to it that they utilize with the tympani drums in the background and leave you lost in a world of sound and Superman...

Ottman does nothing of the sorts in SR. His composure is dry and contains no resounding boom that the Superman theme needs. It is more like a soft clang in your ear, and he tries it make up for it with confusing musical pieces and unneeded orchestra.


Quote:
And yet fanboys rave and drool over TRANSFORMERS and its synthesized score like sheep, the same fanboys who then turn around and lambaste Singer and Ottman for being unoriginal and recycling old material. Does anyone else, besides me, find the irony in this extremely amusing?
I don't see any irony whatsoever because TF was original... SR was not. That's the truth. It may be sad, but it is the truth.

__________________
"For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and His commandments are not burdensome."
Proud Texan
Super Kal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2007, 10:23 AM   #272
TheComicbookKid
Swing n Miss
 
TheComicbookKid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Virginia
Posts: 12,389
Default Re: Kurtzman & Orci Writing Man of Steel?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Showtime View Post
As many of you know, Routh was married recently and both Singer and Horn were in attendance. Wonder if there were any conversations about a sequel or only icy glares across the room.

Gossip Girl XOXO
Oh God, Showtime, you watch that show, too.

Horn is the one man that's still behind Singer and SR so I'm sure it was all hugs.

__________________
Make America Great Again is to 2016
as
The South Shall Rise Again was to 1868
TheComicbookKid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2007, 11:25 AM   #273
I SEE SPIDEY
Banned User
 
I SEE SPIDEY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: In Superman's arms
Posts: 54,628
Default Re: Kurtzman & Orci Writing Man of Steel?

Ottman always makes forgetable and generic music, always. I'll take Zimmer's and Zimmer wannabes exciting scores any day of the week. Seriously I'd rather stab myself in the ear than hear another score from Blandoman.

I SEE SPIDEY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2007, 11:51 AM   #274
Showtime
Your Friend In Time
 
Showtime's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Hill Valley
Posts: 41,473
Default Re: Kurtzman & Orci Writing Man of Steel?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt View Post
No need to insult people or bring politics into the discussion, Dan.
When the Superman Forums need a Moderator...Matt Returns.

Now showing in RED.

__________________

Showtime is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2007, 11:54 AM   #275
I SEE SPIDEY
Banned User
 
I SEE SPIDEY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: In Superman's arms
Posts: 54,628
Default Re: Kurtzman & Orci Writing Man of Steel?

Matt's a mod now?

I SEE SPIDEY is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:29 AM.

monitoring_string = "dee460792f24517621e3ca080805de7e"



Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SuperHeroHype.com is a property of Mandatory Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2018 All Rights Reserved.