• The upgrade to XenForo 2.3.7 has now been completed. Please report any issues to our administrators.

Daily Planet Redux: Man of Tomorrow News and Speculation Thread

Not to be a stickler, but the 3rd one was "color corrected" by fans. The actual colors look a little more vampire like.
I actually have a "fanedit" that corrects Man of Steel's color grading by upping the saturation a little bit and some other tweaks too technical for me to explain. It makes the whole thing more vibrant, and the suit really sticks out.

1757505938931.png

1757505968138.png
 
That doesn't make them all good...
What’s good or not is subjective; as a fan, you can disapprove of a different iteration of a character you love, but that version might resonate more with someone else than the one you gatekeep. Superman Earth One and New 52 got backlash from old-school purists, but overall received positive reviews. Each version has a different take through different lenses and shows how Superman evolves over time.
 
Trust me. In my nearly 50 years on this earth, I have been constipated more times than I can count.

--

This is the face of a man who is squeezing a belligerent deuce.

If he's indeed squeezing a belligerent turd, it appears to me that he's enjoying it a bit too much.

--When I need to release the Kraken and it's stuck--

That’s me when my astronauts have achieved splashdown and I realize that I’m out of Charmin.

Really learnin' some terms today.
 
What’s good or not is subjective; as a fan, you can disapprove of a different iteration of a character you love, but that version might resonate more with someone else than the one you gatekeep. Superman Earth One and New 52 got backlash from old-school purists, but overall received positive reviews. Each version has a different take through different lenses and shows how Superman evolves over time.
You dont know which versions of Superman I like so how about you check yourself.
 
Bring it on.

The Midnight Boys said something about this being James Gunn’s Dark Knight and it kinda sounds that way in terms of structure. I look at Superman as being influenced by The Batman, not in terms of tone or pacing but in terms of structure (the story starts with the hero a little way into his career, he is forced to reconsider his mission and his legacy with his family, etc., and public opinion on the hero changes over the course of the movie). Now with the sequel, the focus appears to shift from the hero to multiple characters. In TDK, it was mostly Batman and Dent (not really the Joker; it’s just that Heath was so electric that his role feels bigger than it actually was). In Man of Tomorrow, it’s Superman, Lex and (likely) Lois. And a big role for Brainiac (hopefully) though he doesn’t need to be a “main” character, if that makes sense.
 
I listened to the Stern interview. Some good stuff in there. I’m very glad Gunn is drawing the line and the Superhorse and Supergirl story. I had never heard of this before but I’m SO glad it won’t be making its way to the DCU.
 
Gunn should just say that its Superman 2. Lex working with Superman doesn't mean that it isn't a sequel.
 
I have no problem with that. Man of Tomorrow can still be Superman 2. Gunn just said this when someone asked:



My interpretation of this is that it's not Superman 2 because Superman is a main character but not THE main character. I could see them doing an actual Superman 2 at some point that's fully focused on the Man of Steel.
 
Yeah I mean he straight up called it a sequel on Stern. He just doesn’t want people to view it as strictly another Superman movie.
 
What’s good or not is subjective; as a fan, you can disapprove of a different iteration of a character you love, but that version might resonate more with someone else than the one you gatekeep. Superman Earth One and New 52 got backlash from old-school purists, but overall received positive reviews. Each version has a different take through different lenses and shows how Superman evolves over time.
You can also think something is bad. That’s perfectly allowed, and not “gatekeeping.”
 
Yeah I mean he straight up called it a sequel on Stern. He just doesn’t want people to view it as strictly another Superman movie.

Well done, that's exactly it IMO! He wants to give the sequel an air of importance, a uniqueness if you will, as if saying "this isn't just a sequel but rather....an evolution of the original story" and you (the audience) better not miss it when it comes out in (god willing) 2027. Personally I could careless for these kinds of semantics but I am hyped to see one of my favourite versions of Superman (David's) and Lex (Hoult's) on the screen again.
Not sure why Gunn is playing pointless semantics with "its not technically a sequel".

As I said in a previous post, it's what he does! He tends to deny or obfuscate things unnecessarily to the point where he gets himself tangled up in his own web of semantics and then he doubles down on the whole thing! That's why it rubs so many people online the wrong way. I honestly don't think he does it on purpose (not most of the time atleast).
My recommendation is not to get hung up on his words and waste precious time trying to decipher them, it's a waste of time and a waste of life and life is too short.
 
Well done, that's exactly it IMO! He wants to give the sequel an air of importance, a uniqueness if you will, as if saying "this isn't just a sequel but rather....an evolution of the original story" and you (the audience) better not miss it when it comes out in (god willing) 2027. Personally I could careless for these kinds of semantics but I am hyped to see one of my favourite versions of Superman (David's) and Lex (Hoult's) on the screen again.


As I said in a previous post, it's what he does! He tends to deny or obfuscate things unnecessarily to the point where he gets himself tangled up in his own web of semantics and then he doubles down on the whole thing! That's why it rubs so many people online the wrong way. I honestly don't think he does it on purpose (not most of the time atleast).
My recommendation is not to get hung up on his words and waste precious time trying to decipher them, it's a waste of time and a waste of life and life is too short.

Bingo! Gunn strikes me as one of those quirky creatives that occasionally overexplains things or, conversely, plays too coy with key details to add to the mystery around them, and both can frustrate and confuse fans. It’s best not to read too much into any of it because at the end of the day, the guy just makes good stuff. He made the most well-received and profitable Superman movie in over 4 decades, he made an epic trilogy for Marvel and he made a critically acclaimed and wildly popular TV series about a superhero NO ONE cared about before. Even Creature Commadoes (which I admit I didn’t really care for) was very well received. The Suicide Squad was a financial flop but it was still a great movie. I trust Gunn.
 
I am old enough to remember when the sequel to Spiderman: Homecoming was called Spiderman: Far From Home...
 
I don't see the confusion....

team ups aren't direct sequels

was Avengers considered Iron Man 3?

its an event that takes place in the same universe involving some of the same characters, but isn't a direct continuation of the Superman solo movies story...

he's just reserving the right to continue that story in a different movie

they probably want the solo movies to be watchable on there own as stand alone trilogies/sagas even if you didn't watch any of the spin offs/ team ups, but, still work with those movies... if that makes sense?
 
was Avengers considered Iron Man 3?
Loki wasn't the main villain of Iron Man, but he teamed up with Thor in The Dark World, which is the sequel to Thor 1.

Man of Tomorrow is the follow-up to Superman; the director/writer is returning, the main cast and supporting roles are returning, and the same cinematographer is returning. It's technically a sequel; it will just shift the POV from Superman to Lex's perspective.

We all know that at the end of the day, we will all refer to it as Superman 2.
 
okay then is Avengers considered Thor 2, then...?

but, like if in 20 years from now, someone wants to seat and watch the these Superman movies (not the DCU movies as a whole just Superman) what will the chopping order be??? Superman, Man of Tomorrow, Superman 2*, Superman 3*....

or Superman, Superman 2*, Superman 3*

or will whatever they call Superman 2 just default to being Superman 3? (in the eye's of the viewers)

can one watch the next solo Superman sequel without having seen Man of Tomorrow??? is what will determine rather it is a true squeal or not
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"