Defining Superman's Powers In A Reboot

[SatEL]

Nice post but I gave him time to grow with the X-films and still didn't care for them, consider him all out of chances in my book. Doesn't mean he won't direct a sequel, I'm just saying that even if I won free tickets to it I still probably wouldn't go. I usually don't say that about any movie.

Yes the Xmen movies are the most overrated comic book films ever.

 

[SatEL]

Superman Returns was in the same mindset of the X-films. I think the point of the topic is that these recent blockbuster successes are creating a new period.

Who really cares if you see the next Superman movie?

WB certainly cares.

 

[Matt]

Yes the Xmen movies are the most overrated comic book films ever.

I like them for what they are, but they go to show Singer's arrogance in regards to the source material. He said from the very beginning that he was changing the characters, the settings, etc to make it more "Realistic and more in line with his vision." Singer has ALWAYS looked down upon the source material where as directors like Leterrier and Favreau embrace it.

 

[SatEL]

I like them for what they are, but they go to show Singer's arrogance in regards to the source material. He said from the very beginning that he was changing the characters, the settings, etc to make it more "Realistic and more in line with his vision." Singer has ALWAYS looked down upon the source material where as directors like Leterrier and Favreau embrace it.

Yes it seems more directors are catching on that the source Material might actually not be a bad thing, a trend I believe was started by Nolan. Marvel are kings at the moment, I just pray TDK is all I hope and more.

 

[VenomsMom]

Well, for one thing its nice to leave the audience wanting and expecting more. In Iron Man it was great to see foreshadowing of War Machine and in Hulk we see the setup of The Leader. Its simply amazing what Marvel is accomplishing with its projects and they are learning from past mistakes. What did Superman leave us with, a son and rock floating in space.

 

[BMM]

Yes it seems more directors are catching on that the source Material might actually not be a bad thing, a trend I believe was started by Nolan. Marvel are kings at the moment, I just pray TDK is all I hope and more.

Gross.

 

[ant3ros]

^Who really cares about your opinion? See, I can be childish too.

I'm not sure. The difference between us is that I don't assume anyone does. I don't see how I was being childish. I was making a point about your statement. Your comments are directed at yourself and how you personally react to SR, which I think is off topic. The poster said he didn't want a SR bashing or praising thread, but I won't call you childish.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

I'm not sure. The difference between us is that I don't assume anyone does. I don't see how I was being childish. I was making a point about your statement. You're comments are directed at yourself and how you personally react to SR, which I think is off topic. The poster said he didn't want a SR bashing or praising thread.

No he didn't. And I responded to the topic of the thread. I'm not going to disscuss this anymore because I don't like arguing.

 

[VenomsMom]

Yes it seems more directors are catching on that the source Material might actually not be a bad thing, a trend I believe was started by Nolan. Marvel are kings at the moment, I just pray TDK is all I hope and more.

Damn right they are kings. They have a slate of movies in line for the next 3 to 4 years. They know what direction they want to take their chacters. They are intertwining the universe for everyone into one. They are setting up sequels as well as an ensemble flick. They are waiting to get the rights back to heroes like Daredevil. The villains are already being setup like Madarin and Leader. All this while Superman languishes in a cloud of uncertainty.

 

[Obi Wan Kenobi]

This is not a SR bashing or praising thread. This is a serious question.

Two years ago, Superman Returns was released with some of the most subpar action of the modern comic book era. This is the character who can move planets. The character who can do basically anything, and his action sequences are him lifting heavy objects. Now, we have since seen movies such as Transformers, Iron Man, The Incredible Hulk, and it looks like we are going to see it again in Hancock. Regardless of the quality of these movies, they all have one thing in common: Their action sequences are what Superman's should have been. The technology was there. Why wasn't it used? What was the break down? Why have we yet to see Superman realized to his fullest potential on screen? Discuss.

I asked this question a few months ago on this board!

One of the problems with Superman is the Lois Lane stuff. I've been a fan of Superman since I could walk & we all know about his affection for Lois. But it was done wrong for SR. Instead of Singer pouring tons of action in the film, he went overboard with the Lois, Richard Clark love triangle with the birth of Jason. Practically boring the audience to death. Even though the plane sequence was awesome it wasn't set up properly. Superman needs to be conflicted & to have problems but that wasn't the right way to do it. Lois being totally in love with Richard on the verge of marrying him would have been good enough, there was no need for Jason. I saw the Hulk last night & the romantic stuff between Bruce & Betty was kept to a minimum & it was PERFECT for the film!! They can establish more of a relationship in the next film.

As to why Superman is being left behind? Well as I've often said here so many times. WB is being run by chimps. They are CLUELESS!!! If it wasn't for Batman, Marvel would be totally handing DC their asses on a silver platter. The folks at Marvel simply know how to make a movie. WB simply doesn't know how to make a Superman film with action. They are CLUELESS as to what the fans want to see.

 

[bunk]

This is not a SR bashing or praising thread. This is a serious question.

Two years ago, Superman Returns was released with some of the most subpar action of the modern comic book era. This is the character who can move planets. The character who can do basically anything, and his action sequences are him lifting heavy objects. Now, we have since seen movies such as Transformers, Iron Man, The Incredible Hulk, and it looks like we are going to see it again in Hancock. Regardless of the quality of these movies, they all have one thing in common: Their action sequences are what Superman's should have been. The technology was there. Why wasn't it used? What was the break down? Why have we yet to see Superman realized to his fullest potential on screen? Discuss.

Because the script didn't call for it? Because the studio and creative team went in a different direction instead? This thread is rather pointless, isn't it?

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

^It's not pointless.

 

[matthooper]

You can blame the suits for agreeing to Singer's vision, but he held the power with his past success. I have heard that the film we unfortunately got, was not the film that was promised.

Singer chooses films with characters he can identify with. Each one of his films has a character who feels out of place in the world, isolated and alone. Singer speaks about having those very same feelings. He tried to attach his own feelings and emotions to Superman and failed miserably. He committed he cardinal sin by giving us his version of Superman that was quantified and reinvented through his own feelings, instead of giving us the Superman that he world has embraced for 70 years. Supeman is not Bryan Singer. He can't turn every main character into his own personal catharsis.

No action didn't help though. The film is almost completly forgotten save for a few on this board. WB wants this film forgotten so they can start over, that's pretty obvious. WB will not make the same mistake twice.

 

[nintendo nerd]

This is not a SR bashing or praising thread. This is a serious question.

Two years ago, Superman Returns was released with some of the most subpar action of the modern comic book era. This is the character who can move planets. The character who can do basically anything, and his action sequences are him lifting heavy objects. Now, we have since seen movies such as Transformers, Iron Man, The Incredible Hulk, and it looks like we are going to see it again in Hancock. Regardless of the quality of these movies, they all have one thing in common: Their action sequences are what Superman's should have been. The technology was there. Why wasn't it used? What was the break down? Why have we yet to see Superman realized to his fullest potential on screen? Discuss.

You are bashing the movie.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Because he's saying that the action wasn't up to par? Complaining about the action is inherently bashing the film. There are plenty of people who liked SR but didn't think that the action scenes were up to snuff.

 

[SatEL]

Because he's saying that the action wasn't up to par? Complaining about the action is inherently bashing the film. There are plenty of people who liked SR but didn't think that the action scenes were up to snuff.

Some people on this board just cant accept that not everyone enjoyed the same crap fest horrible excuse of a movie that they did, Oh and nintendo nerd if you wasnt aware what bashing was well now you know.

 

[The Guard]

Because punching is so innovative.

 

[SatEL]

Because punching is so innovative.

A hell of a lot better than lifting things (visually at least), its sad that your trying to play it of like the only thing we want in this film is brute action. Heck we just want a fun movie with fun elements and something that the public will love much like Iron Man and its certainly something Superman deserves.

 

[The Guard]

I like how the first poster states "This is a character who can move planets" and then *****es when SUPERMAN RETURNS shows him lifting/moving things.

It's obvious that all that most of you want is fun. We get it. It's been duly noted. The statement "How did Superman get left behind" is just ridiculous at this point, given the context of the situation. They chose not to go in a certain direction, and they didn't, and they obviously want to in MAN OF STEEL.

 

[bunk]

^It's not pointless.

It is unless the people responsible are willing to come here and explain their intentions. For us, it's an unanswerable question.

I figured a mod would know better than to start a thread not directly related to the SR sequel. Especially when there are already countless threads devoted to analyzing "what went wrong", so to speak.

 

[nogap87]

One answer friend one answer and the true kryptonite to Superman .........................Singer.

Agreed. Singer is not very talented at directing action. Out of three high profile comic book movies the only action worth remembering is the Nightcrawler intro. And even that has been blown away in the last few years.

 

[SatEL]

I like how the first poster states "This is a character who can move planets" and then *****es when SUPERMAN RETURNS shows him lifting/moving things.

It's obvious that all that most of you want is fun. We get it. It's been duly noted. The statement "How did Superman get left behind" is just ridiculous at this point, given the context of the situation. They chose not to go in a certain direction, and they didn't, and they obviously want to in MAN OF STEEL.

Well in all fairness to the thread starter it was more a question than a statement, he simply pointed out a few home truths in his initial post, sadly the only thing I find "ridiculous" is the people who cant stand any negativity towards Singerman Returns.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Here's then deal, I love watching movies and I take them relatively seriously. I like comicbook movies but they aren't high art. Not one of them and I never pretend that they are. I expect the material to be taken mosty seriously, but I want my jokes and punching in there. Hulk took it's subject too seriously, so did Superman Returns and to a certain degree Batman Begins, although I did enjoy the film.

You damn f**king skippy that I want punching and fun. Lets look at what we are talking about: We are talking about a story about and Alien, who strangely looks like a human, from another planet that blows up. An alien who hides he's secret idenity with classes. M f'in classes! Do you know how ridiculous that is? Will Smith still looks like Will Smith with classes. That plot point shows just how silly the whole thing is. None of these Superheros are serious, even my beloved Batman.

Give me punching in my silly Superhero movie please.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

It is unless the people responsible are willing to come here and explain their intentions. For us, it's an unanswerable question.

I figured a mod would know better than to start a thread not directly related to the SR sequel. Especially when there are already countless threads devoted to analyzing "what went wrong", so to speak.

And there goes that I'm jealous because an SR hater is a mod speak. Maybe it technically should be in the SR thread but no one visit those.

Your first paragraph doesn't make any sense. By that logic alot of threads and disscussions should have never been started.

I will never agree with the Matt bashing that some SR fans engage in. I haven't seen any abuse of power.

 

[FlawlessVictory]

Singer took all the fun out of a Superman movie. Instead of exhilarating, upbeat and inspirational he gave us depressing, muted and a boring film. Throw in the Maury Povich who's your daddy storyline and it's no wonder why "Superman got left behind".