Sequels If they make a sequel. . .SPEND LESS MONEY!

[Catman]

If WB approves a sequel, Singer, should spend less money. There's no reason for this movie to cost 200 million to make. They already have the sets and costumes. They really need to be resourceful cause if not this franchise is dead.

 

[casketmouth]

If WB approves a sequel, Singer, should spend less money. There's no reason for this movie to cost 200 million to make. They already have the sets and costumes. They really need to be resourceful cause if not this franchise is dead.

The franchise IS dead!!!! $200 mill would be a dream for any director to work with. Singer just botched it up.

 

[Catman]

Well, Alan Horn is still considering a sequel, so it ain't dead yet.

 

[retconned]

I agree 100%. Singer wasted about $75 million dollars making this film.

 

[BULLITT]

Well no sh_t.
Instead of renting out a farm in Canada, Singer goes to Oz, picks a remote area
and then f*%#'n plants crops to create a farm.
That's pretty asinine.
Now that didn't cost millions, but that is an example of stupidity in production costs.

 

[Catman]

Yeah, that was a waste of money. Especially since there aren't that many Smallville scenes.

 

[Freddy_Krueger]

I think it's hilarious that people say things like, "Singer should have spent less money." In the end, the studio and the producers are the ones who tell the director how much money he can spend. Singer spent what money was given to him. He wasn't just given a blank check and told, "Do what you want."

But, to address the topic more directly, yes I believe a more modest $150 million budget would work out better for the sequel.

 

[retconned]

It's not that Singer used $204 million to make the movie, it's that he spent it on a whole lot of nothing.

 

[KaptainKrypton]

It's not that Singer used $204 million to make the movie, it's that he spent it on a whole lot of nothing.

Obviously, he had to spend it on something. I don't know of many stores that sell nothing.

 

[PSU442]

you know, WB did approve his budget. They also approved of his additional reshoots (bullet to the eye.) So why attack Singer? he asked for the $$ and he got it. If you ask me, and alot of you will agree, the problem with SR isn't the movie itself..... it was the marketing. WB really dropped the ball... and I think they know they did (a cost not often added into a film's final budget.) I'm still under the impression that WB is happy with the movie (not the box-office, but the final product) as did most movie-goers. Besides fanboy message boards, you'll be hard pressed to find somebody who didn't enjoy the movie.

 

[BULLITT]

I think fans are generally miffed that the film hasn't been a financial hit, because that puts a sequel(s) in doubt. And yes, WB approved the budget, but that proves nothing. It's like a politician who's plan/campaign fouls-up - he blames others, or doesn't say anything directly but instead let's others twist-in-the-wind.
The truth may be that in our times the money paying movie public prefers their heros flawed, and morally opaque.
Superman's character is just fine, thank you very much, and I'd rather not see another film rather than have writers/execs take liberties with it.

 

[retconned]

Obviously, he had to spend it on something. I don't know of many stores that sell nothing.

lol