All Things Superman: An Open Discussion

[Llama_Shepherd]

Simple.I knew it wld suck b/c It wasnt a reboot.They relied on the audience previous knowledge on a 30 year old franchise to get them true.A 30 year old fRANCHISE.If that wasnt stupid I dont know what else is.I knew it would be to outdated for this time and I was proven right.What I underestimated was how crappy it would be and God how the Crap smells.

You mean like Star Wars?

 

[Zack Snyder]

I think the premise was flawed for a new Superman movie. Many people thought that before seeing it. SR worked as a good superhero film, but not at all as a Superman film, if that makes sense. Give the characters different name and call him Ultimate Man or something.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

I think the premise was flawed for a new Superman movie. Many people thought that before seeing it. SR worked as a good superhero film, but not at all as a Superman film, if that makes sense. Give the characters different name and call him Ultimate Man or something.

Huh?

 

[Zack Snyder]

The SW prequels worked in that they actually got into the story of how/why things happened. In SR he leaves. We don't go on the journey for why he leaves or what happens when he is in space and discovers the place is a graveyard. We don't see what Lex was doing while he was away, but we just find out he got out of prison because Superman couldn't meet a court date. Blah. We don't see how Lois moved on to a new man, while Superman is exploring space, when she got pregnant, etc... It's just a lot of story to pass over, and then make us accept that we know it with simple exposition.

 

[Zack Snyder]

Huh?

I was saying as a superhero film it was decent, but as a Superman story it didn't work. The bit about Ultimate Man and changing character names was sarcastic spewing.

 

[FilmNerdJamie]

I think the premise was flawed for a new Superman movie. Many people thought that before seeing it. SR worked as a good superhero film, but not at all as a Superman film, if that makes sense. Give the characters different name and call him Ultimate Man or something.

Revisionist history. General public didn't care. They were just going into a new Superman movie, and fandom (nerds/geeks/fan*****es) loved that Singer was sequelizing the Donner films and ignoring 3 and 4.

 

[Superman2007]

Revisionist history. General public didn't care. They were just going into a new Superman movie, and fandom (nerds/geeks/fan*****es) loved that Singer was sequelizing the Donner films and ignoring 3 and 4.

True. The only time I remember there was some questioning of Singer and what he was doing, was when the first costume pic was released and when the kid was announced. Other than that most were on board.

 

[Zack Snyder]

Revisionist history. General public didn't care. They were just going into a new Superman movie, and fandom (nerds/geeks/fan*****es) loved that Singer was sequelizing the Donner films and ignoring 3 and 4.

I guess. But the general public must have thought the story didn't work that great, or the numbers would have been greater like MOS will be. They didn't end up caring for the characters, and I suppose lack of action was a contributor but underlying was the premise imo.

 

[FilmNerdJamie]

I guess. But the general public must have thought the story didn't work that great, or the numbers would have been greater like MOS will be. They didn't end up caring for the characters, and I suppose lack of action was a contributor but underlying was the premise imo.

Opening right before the Pirates 2 juggernaut didn't help - same thing that's going to kill The Amazing Spider-Man following up literally days after Star Trek 2 next summer. Also the marketing for Returns sucked; save for that teaser and first trailer.

 

[Llama_Shepherd]

Considering the circumstances Returns did really well.

 

[Zack Snyder]

I think those are excuses for SR. If a restart that had people excited was happening, such as current MOS that's about to start production, the only competition would have been a new SW movie. Other than that? Superman should have it on Pirates easily.

 

[Motown Marvel]

I think the premise was flawed for a new Superman movie. Many people thought that before seeing it. SR worked as a good superhero film, but not at all as a Superman film, if that makes sense. Give the characters different name and call him Ultimate Man or something.

i dont think that was quite the problem. rather, it was a good superman movie, but we were needing a great superman movie.

 

[Zack Snyder]

Maybe a good Superman movie if they bothered to show what happened leading up to the Returns story in a film before it. The little bits of exposition were not enough to make it believable.

 

[JAK®]

Considering the circumstances Returns did really well.

Yeah, it annoys me when people bring up SR and BB made the same amount of money, but then people go "Well SR cost 250 Million and BB cost 180 Million, so that doesn't count"

The people who went to see it didn't know that.

That's the reason why WB didn't make a sequel, but it isn't a reason to discount how the public rated it during it's original theatrical run, which was that it was just as good as Begins (Although DVD sales are a different matter)

 

[FilmNerdJamie]

I think those are excuses for SR. If a restart that had people excited was happening, such as current MOS that's about to start production, the only competition would have been a new SW movie. Other than that? Superman should have it on Pirates easily.

Non-sense.

Pirates was a huge hit back in July 2003 and people couldn't wait for the next one (...at the time; not so much anymore for Pirates 4). Every single tracking, poll, etc. going into 2006 had Pirates 2 as people's most anticipated film to see by a wide margin.

And I've seen nothing to suggest Man of Steel has general public or fandom any more or less excited at this stage of development before hand than Returns did. Any talk about "Fans weren't excited for Singer's film" or "Nobody liked the idea of doing a sequel to Donner's stuff" is revisionist crap.

 

[Zack Snyder]

That is your opinion. Don't throw it in my face as "revisionist crap"

You tell story B before telling story A, and expect the general public to just "get it" ????? There would have been multiple viewings from the general public, and increased box office numbers if it were a story that resonated (a restart) and even rejuvenated the character in a modern way.

 

[JAK®]

That is your opinion. Don't throw it in my face as "revisionist crap"

Well...

You tell story B before telling story A, and expect the general public to just "get it" ????? There would have been multiple viewings from the general public, and increased box office numbers if it were a story that resonated (a restart) and even rejuvenated the character in a modern way.

See this part? You're telling us what would have happened had things been done differently. That's revisionist.

And you have no proof for this. Which makes it crap.

 

[FilmNerdJamie]

Well...


See this part? You're telling us what would have happened had things been done differently. That's revisionist.

And you have no proof for this. Which makes it crap.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

 

[Zack Snyder]

I can say in my opinion "this would happen" and you can agree or disagree. The tone however adds nothing to the discussion but low class.

 

[Zack Snyder]

Had he stated "revisionist theory" or "revisionist outlook" that wouldn't have come off so blatantly disrespectful and as an insult to my intelligence. Just saying be a little more civil.

 

[FilmNerdJamie]

Had he stated "revisionist theory" or "revisionist outlook" that wouldn't have come off so blatantly disrespectful and as an insult to my intelligence. Just saying be a little more civil.

I said "revisionist history" the first time. So chill.

 

[Zack Snyder]

I said "revisionist history" the first time. So chill.

I might also be grumpy from no sleep. I'll probably feel silly for bringing it up later. I had to be up at 7am and went to sleep at 5:30am. Long day, blech. My eyes are so tired I would think they are bleeding. :-/

 

[Zack Snyder]

On that note, grumpy man is going to take nap. laterz

 

[Wheels]

I didn't post here back in the SR days, but I was on the outside looking in. Most people seemed fine with what Singer was doing. (I wanted a reboot.) For most the SR hate started after the release.

 

[Zionite]

You have hindsight greatly helping you.

It wasnt hindsight.It was Foresight.I mean come on did they expect everyone to remember everything from those movies 30 yrs ago.I didnt!all i remembered was that superman turned back time in one of them.Its that level of stupidity that made me know it would suck.If you are making a sequel to what is now a campy,outdated franchise you will get a campy outdated movie.No magic about it.
I went in with low expectations and wasnt disappionted.
At the time I watched it i was just an average movie goer.You can see why i wanted a reboot