As: a fan <<<VS>>> As: a business decision

[\S/JcDc\S/]

I thought Routh was great. I thought Singer brought a lot of passion to the project. As a fan, I would probably consider a sequel (with much needed action).

If I were making a business decision however, in all honesty I would go with a reboot.

Unfortunately because it is a new start, I don't think I would be able to cast Routh again I know many fans see this as doable, but again from the business pov it just wouldn't fly with me (no pun intended). It would cause some confusion, and distance will be needed from previous efforts (including Donner).

A nice coinciding thought now...

As a fan, I would want an origin story. As a business decision I would want an origin story.
I think it worked out great for Spidey, Batman, and IM in particular

I think it would work out just as well for Superman.

As a fan I would want to see a younger Jor-el and what happened on Krypton. I still would do that as a business decision, but cut out certain story elements I may love, knowing the pacing must have enough action setting up heroics of Jor-el to parallel Kal-el.

-- Feel free to do your own VS analysis regarding Superman movie decisions

 

[Nightwing1983]

As a fan, I'd like them to carry on from earlier films but exclude Returns. As a business decision, I think either a sequel to SR or an origin is an easier sell all things being equal; but I do think it comes down to the script. That may not sound like a business-ey way to look at things, but when it comes down to what's on screen, it starts with the script. And whether it's a question of more action, a deeper exploration of theme, or whatever; that's really paramount.

As far as business decisions go, I think he should be wearing a suit of armor and fight Kryptonite-powered villain at the end. He should wear something similar enough tothe classic costume to keep people like me pacified, but more often, wear a rough variant of the costume from Return to Krypton. Also, they should keep Routh but ignore the fact of the kid existing whether or not it's marketed as a sequel. They should have Lois played by someone else, though. Well, Katie Holmes was Bat-shafted, so her, depending on whether or not she and Cruise get divorced. And he needs to die at the hands of Doomsday even if it is a reboot and the origin.

YEAH GIVE ME MONEY (THAT'S WHAT I WANT)!!!

 

[rocco2216]

As a fan, I'd like them to carry on from earlier films but exclude Returns. As a business decision, I think either a sequel to SR or an origin is an easier sell all things being equal; but I do think it comes down to the script. That may not sound like a business-ey way to look at things, but when it comes down to what's on screen, it starts with the script. And whether it's a question of more action, a deeper exploration of theme, or whatever; that's really paramount.

As far as business decisions go, I think he should be wearing a suit of armor and fight Kryptonite-powered villain at the end. He should wear something similar enough tothe classic costume to keep people like me pacified, but more often, wear a rough variant of the costume from Return to Krypton. Also, they should keep Routh but ignore the fact of the kid existing whether or not it's marketed as a sequel. They should have Lois played by someone else, though. Well, Katie Holmes was Bat-shafted, so her, depending on whether or not she and Cruise get divorced. And he needs to die at the hands of Doomsday even if it is a reboot and the origin.

YEAH GIVE ME MONEY (THAT'S WHAT I WANT)!!!

Well after this court ruling, they can't do an origin story now.

 

[Showtime]

Heh Heh.

 

[rocco2216]

Heh Heh.

What's funny, Show?

 

[Octoberist]

that means no origin story that we have to suffer through!

 

[rocco2216]

that means no origin story that we have to suffer through!

Well, true ha ha.

 

[Nightwing1983]

Well after this court ruling, they can't do an origin story now.

I believe they could still license it from the Siegels just as is the case with the character himself.

 

[Showtime]

What's funny, Show?

That you think they won't do an origin story. If they want to, they will do it.

 

[rocco2216]

I believe they could still license it from the Siegels just as is the case with the character himself.

You mean buy it from them? I don't think WB wants to pay them any money at all.

 

[Showtime]

...

 

[rocco2216]

That you think they won't do an origin story. If they want to, they will do it.

Well, I just didn't think they could unless they bought that right from the Siegels. But yeah, you're right if they really want to do an origin story they will, but they'll have to get permission from the Seigels and probably pay them, right?

 

[rocco2216]

...

What now? Dude, I don't understand any of this court ruling as much as you do apparently. So please explain it to me.

 

[Nightwing1983]

You mean buy it from them? I don't think WB wants to pay them any money at all.

I think it depends on how much, but it's no different from if they option a book or something.

 

[rocco2216]

I think it depends on how much, but it's no different from if they option a book or something.

Either way, I hope they get a movie out in 2012.

 

[Sam]

Well after this court ruling, they can't do an origin story now.

They can. They just need to have an agreement with Siegels and pay for it.

 

[solidsnake86]

That you think they won't do an origin story. If they want to, they will do it.

It's nice to see that some people on this board are thinking clearly. This ruling basically gives the siegles a right to get money if the property is used. I don't see where people get the notion that marvel might get superman or any other company for that matter.

Not to mention WB still has key elements that i'm definate they would not be willing to separate with, without hefty compensation and even then I don't think any company in there right mind would pay for it.

 

[Webhead2006]

Business wise yea i wonder what the heck will wb/dc comics do. Will they try to do another film, will they not do a film. Could they use the origins if its a reboot, if not and they do a reboot will they just offhand mention he is an alien but not get into the whole krypton/jorel/lara by name........ Things dont look good for wb.

 

[stargazer]

I thought Routh was great. I thought Singer brought a lot of passion to the project. As a fan, I would probably consider a sequel (with much needed action).

If I were making a business decision however, in all honesty I would go with a reboot.

Unfortunately because it is a new start, I don't think I would be able to cast Routh again I know many fans see this as doable, but again from the business pov it just wouldn't fly with me (no pun intended). It would cause some confusion, and distance will be needed from previous efforts (including Donner).

I would! It's MY money, my company so yeah. I want the absolute best people involved in my movie, and Brandon did an excellent job, was well-received by most plus it took so many years to find him so it makes lots of sense to me. I'm sure the GP would have no problem with it, maybe some fans would but who cares; I'm looking at the big picture here. If the movie is entertaining enough, I'm sure it'd be just fine.

 

[Timstuff]

I would! It's MY money, my company so yeah. I want the absolute best people involved in my movie, and Brandon did an excellent job, was well-received by most plus it took so many years to find him so it makes lots of sense to me. I'm sure the GP would have no problem with it, maybe some fans would but who cares; I'm looking at the big picture here. If the movie is entertaining enough, I'm sure it'd be just fine.

That's why you can't run a studio, though. You're not willing to make the tough decisions that are necessary to build a franchise. If they use Routh again, it will confuse people, because they'll either think the movie is a prequel or sequel to SR, and they'll be confused if stuff is different but the actor is the same. They need a blank slate so that the audience won't have preconceived notions about where the story is going, and to have a blank slate they need a new actor.

 

[stargazer]

That's why you can't run a studio, though. You're not willing to make the tough decisions that are necessary to build a franchise. If they use Routh again, it will confuse people, because they'll either think the movie is a prequel or sequel to SR, and they'll be confused if stuff is different but the actor is the same. They need a blank slate so that the audience won't have preconceived notions about where the story is going, and to have a blank slate they need a new actor.

And neither can you. And I doubt you'll ever get the chance to show us.. thankfully.

You also give the GP too little credit.

 

[Crook]

The math isn't hard here. A complete blank slate (read: entirely new cast/crew) carries with it zero contingencies on the public's ability to discern it as a new and separate franchise. Routh is baggage from the get-go, and relies on a myriad of factors that may or may not erase any SR connections from people's minds.

 

[Raiden]

The math isn't hard here. A complete blank slate (read: entirely new cast/crew) carries with it zero contingencies on the public's ability to discern it as a new and separate franchise. Routh is baggage from the get-go, and relies on a myriad of factors that may or may not erase any SR connections from people's minds.

Exactly. This is also the reason why when Marvel reboots Hulk with TIH, they didn't use any of the actors from Ang Lee's Hulk movie, like Bana, Connelly, etc.

 

[stargazer]

Judy Dench/Casino Royale

 

[Crook]

A supporting role that has had all of 5 minutes (or less) per film. Not exactly an ideal comparison.