All Things Superman: An Open Discussion - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Part 34

[Mysteryman]

When I saw all of the new pages to the thread, I thought there had been something new released.
Sigh.

 

[ConnorKon-El]

hahaha....nice one Dawson! Go hug Pacey or Joey and cry me a river....


see what I did there?!?!

 

[DarthSkywalker]

When I saw all of the new pages to the thread, I thought there had been something new released.
Sigh.

You do know where you are right?

 

[Kal-El.9859]

When I saw all of the new pages to the thread, I thought there had been something new released.
Sigh.

you thought wrong

 

[Kal-El.9859]

You do know where you are right?

I wouldn't say it's exactly NEW...but something was released

 

[Mysteryman]

Sadly, yes.
But,as I often say ,Hope Springs Eternal.

 

[mad-sci]

Not sure if serious. Skyfall was not only very standalone, but there is little continuity to Bond.

And yes, you embrace the character. The comics, the movies, the television shows, the awesomeness of Timm's Superman in all its incarnations.

This character is Superman. If it is a complete restart, why is it a Superman movie?

By the end of Skyfall, we had Bond at his most refined and recognised, a new MI6 HQ, a Q, Miss Moneypenny, a Male M (and identical office as Bernard Lees's) and the return of Bonds iconic car - with Goldfinger gadget! If it was standalone, how come there were references to all the previous Bond films. The Aston Martin was from the films, NOT the book.

As for embracing Superman's character, he's in flux right now for 2 reasons - the new 52 (hence the 'loss' of classic stories), and the lawsuit (which WBs won, but could still be contested. The Bond producers own the character 100% now, they can do what they want.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I wouldn't say it's exactly NEW...but something was released

I would say it is most definitely not new.

 

[ConnorKon-El]

I thought it was funny...

 

[DarthSkywalker]

By the end of Skyfall, we had Bond at his most refined and recognised, a new MI6 HQ, a Q, Miss Moneypenny, a Male M (and identical office as Bernard Lees's) and the return of Bonds iconic car - with Goldfinger gadget! If it was standalone, how come there were references to all the previous Bond films. The Aston Martin was from the films, NOT the book.

As for embracing Superman's character, he's in flux right now for 2 reasons - the new 52 (hence the 'loss' of classic stories), and the lawsuit (which WBs won, but could still be contested. The Bond producers own the character 100% now, they can do what they want.

It is very simple. For the "continuty" to make sense, Bond has to really, really old or be capable of time travel. The whole point is that Skyfall can pick and choose what to play with outside of one thing. It comes after CR and QoS.

And they are bringing back classic Superman stories in the comics in GN form. They are not ignoring there.

 

[Kal-El.9859]

I thought it was funny...

I chuckled....

 

[mad-sci]

Itis very simple. For the "continuty" to make sense, Bond has to really, really old or be capable of time travel. The whole point is that Skyfall can pick and choose what to play with outside of one thing. It comes after CR and QoS.

I'm not talking about continuity, it's nostalgia. The Bond films can reference old films and props and not have to worry about continuity issues, even though EVERYONE knows what film is being referenced.

Superman cannot do that, sadly. For a start, there is No John Williams soundtrack. No Lex Luthor. No crystal planet Krypton. Like BB, MOS can be true to the comics but NEEDS to be its own thing.

 

[Wheels]

hahaha....nice one Dawson! Go hug Pacey or Joey and cry me a river....


see what I did there?!?!

I think it's sad that we both know the names of characters on Dawson's Creek.

 

[gomez147]

Have you seen this new image?

Spoiler

They're really obsessed with that scene

 

[Kal-El.9859]

I think it's sad that we both know the names of characters on Dawson's Creek.

yeah, it's pretty sad

 

[ThePhantasm]

I don't think it is as mind-blowing a scene as WB thinks it is, though maybe I'm missing something.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I'm not talking about continuity, it's nostalgia. The Bond films can reference old films and props and not have to worry about continuity issues, even though EVERYONE knows what film is being referenced.

Superman cannot do that, sadly. For a start, there is No John Williams soundtrack. No Lex Luthor. No crystal planet Krypton. Like BB, MOS can be true to the comics but NEEDS to be its own thing.

There is Zod. There is this Superman guy. There is Lois Lane. There is everyone in this film that isn't an original character, which is almost every single character, if not everyone of them. They could have already done features on the characters and their histories on film and in the comics.

I don't think it is as mind-blowing a scene as WB thinks it is, though maybe I'm missing something.

It has lost all its effect now that they have used it and abused it.

 

[Kal-El.9859]

Have you seen this new image?

Spoiler

They're really obsessed with that scene

wow...I never seen that pic!!!!

 

[TheIrishAvenger]

Just to compare...

WB released the second theatrical Green Lantern trailer on April 4th, and it was a June 17 release. No action movies where released that week before or after so WB just released it without attaching it to anything.

Could the same happen with MOS?

 

[ConnorKon-El]

awww I hope Henry smiles in the film.

 

[mad-sci]

There is Zod. There is this Superman guy. There is Lois Lane. There is everyone in this film that isn't an original character, which is almost every single character, if not everyone of them.

TDK had the Joker and Harvey Dent, as did Batman 1989. But TDK is completely different.

MOS has Zod, an origin, Krypton, Death of family, a trip North for a FOS. BUT don't expect a rehash of Superman 1/2, expect something completely different. Same parts, different roles.

 

[Kal-El.9859]

awww I hope Henry smiles in the film.

once again....

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Just to compare...

WB released the second theatrical Green Lantern trailer on April 4th, and it was a June 17 release. No action movies where released that week before or after so WB just released it without attaching it to anything.

Could the same happen with MOS?

That is the plan we should be following. Green Lantern showed us how it is done.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

TDK had the Joker and Harvey Dent, as did Batman 1989. But TDK is completely different.

MOS has Zod, an origin, Krypton, Death of family, a trip North for a FOS. BUT don't expect a rehash of Superman 1/2, expect something completely different. Same parts, different roles.

Are you comparing he promotion for TDK to that of MoS? You keep changing the yard stick, but it doesn't change the truth.

 

[Kal-El.9859]

I just would like to see a few character posters and some stills that we HAVEN'T seen....