Superman Returns Is singer messing with us?

[Showtime]

I mean at this point I have to go with what they say. But if this sort of damage control continues? Well my opinion may change. I'm not going to lean either way but I will be skeptical. Honestly if they are just trying to control the information well then after we see the film we will know the truth one way or another. That means all of the reputations will be on the line. I'll make my final choice when I see the film. Untill then....people are being shady.

It's a very tough call. There is agendas involved on both sides of the fence. Do you question the timing of Moriarty's and UGO's "reviews"? Or are they right on time with reviews per any other movie? Is Bluetights and WB trying to protect a fallout of their product or are they merely telling us the truth because they are in the know?

 

[Kane]

Whats the point of leaving threads about innacurate reviews up. It will just spread confusion and make them seem official...despite them being debunked by the actual writers.

 

[Showtime]

No rough cut? That's horse****. The editor has to work from something, something has to be put together for studio approval. Test screenings are standard operating procedure for a super-hero franchise movie.

Negative reviews are being deleted faster than a speeding bullet to preserve the almighty opening weekend, because we're not going to have to wait another year for Hulk 2.

Sorry Showtimes, the bile isn't meant to be directed at you. Apologies if it seems that way.

Something strange is going on and it's happening from all directions. Why are a large amount of threads getting deleted from the Hype without explanation, never mind Bluetights.

We're always cool man. I don't take it personally. I know you are passionate about your views and about the character of Superman.

Just passing along information. Thanks for not shooting the messenger.

 

[TheVileOne]

Ugo review is a fake.
Moriarty has wrote only his opinion (of a non-fan) based on a so-called leaked script. I respect his opinion. If he thinks that the JJ Abrams script was great, it's not my problem.

Was Moriarty NOT the one that trashed the Abrams script?

Because he did. He trashed it a lot. It was a big deal.

 

[wobbly]

Whats the point of leaving threads about innacurate reviews up. It will just spread confusion and make them seem official...despite them being debunked by the actual writers.

True, but I hope the mods at least give an explanation for the deletions (a sticky thread would do the trick). As it is though Oldguy, Desk & Micheal Corleone have every right to voice their suspicions.

 

[Cinemaman]

But they also said BB will be bad movie, but it became the BEST Batman movie.

So I think SR will be also great. Moriarty read very old draft, Dougherty confirmed it in his e-mail letter to me.

 

[Hunter Rider]

It's all getting confizzling

 

[Bad Superman]

Whoa. . . a few threads have been deleted.

 

[Oldguy]

It's all getting confizzling

Bottem line, bad reviews are coming forth, and damage control is on high alert to preserve opening weekend. If SR isn't guilty of being a bad movie, then it shouldn't be afraid of some bad reviews.

Yet SR employees assure us that all bad reviews are unfounded, without offering any proof to substantiate their claims other than, they said so,(please pay no attention to the conflict of interest behind the curtain.)
Dougherty, would even have us believe there is no rough draft of this movie, appearantly everyone at WB has so much faith in Ottoman to edit it right, they don't need a rough draft. They're even forgoing the test screenings that summer blockbusters are famous for.

Internet Buzz isn't as insignificant as we were lead to believe after all.

 

[Matt]

Bottem line, bad reviews are coming forth, and damage control is on high alert to preserve opening weekend. If SR isn't guilty of being a bad movie, then it shouldn't be afraid of some bad reviews.

Yet SR employees assure us that all bad reviews are unfounded, without offering any proof to substantiate their claims other than, they said so,(please pay no attention to the conflict of interest behind the curtain.)
Dougherty, would even have us believe there is no rough draft of this movie, appearantly everyone at WB has so much faith in Ottoman to edit it right, they don't need a rough draft. They're even forgoing the test screenings that summer blockbusters are famous for.

Internet Buzz isn't as insignificant as we were lead to believe after all.

...sigh

 

[Fatboy Roberts]

double post, sorry.

 

[Hunter Rider]

Bottem line, bad reviews are coming forth, and damage control is on high alert to preserve opening weekend. If SR isn't guilty of being a bad movie, then it shouldn't be afraid of some bad reviews.

Yet SR employees assure us that all bad reviews are unfounded, without offering any proof to substantiate their claims other than, they said so,(please pay no attention to the conflict of interest behind the curtain.)
Dougherty, would even have us believe there is no rough draft of this movie, appearantly everyone at WB has so much faith in Ottoman to edit it right, they don't need a rough draft. They're even forgoing the test screenings that summer blockbusters are famous for.

Internet Buzz isn't as insignificant as we were lead to believe after all.

It certainly seems that anything negative coming forth post-trailer is being heavily silenced without an explanation

 

[Cinemaman]

Bottem line, bad reviews are coming forth, and damage control is on high alert to preserve opening weekend. If SR isn't guilty of being a bad movie, then it shouldn't be afraid of some bad reviews.

Yet SR employees assure us that all bad reviews are unfounded, without offering any proof to substantiate their claims other than, they said so,(please pay no attention to the conflict of interest behind the curtain.)
Dougherty, would even have us believe there is no rough draft of this movie, appearantly everyone at WB has so much faith in Ottoman to edit it right, they don't need a rough draft. They're even forgoing the test screenings that summer blockbusters are famous for.

Internet Buzz isn't as insignificant as we were lead to believe after all.

Look, I cant see SR having only 2 action sequences. Because there are: ocean sequencse, a bank robbery, New Krypton and train sequence.

So I don't think Moriarty read final script and UGO have already seen this movie.

 

[TimDrakeRobin45]

The review and all topics were pulled because it was BULL****

Bottom Line! The review was fake. There is a rough cut, however there were things mentioned in that review that were NEVER filmed for this movie, but were in a second draft script of the movie. That script is FAR from the shooting script. Execs at WB got a copy of the old script in the mail a few weeks ago and now this Bull**** review pops up.

I am not saying this will be the best movie of the year, but there have been no screenings of the rough cut, save for Singer, the writers, the actors and a few of the execs, so unless one of them wants to see this movie bomb, dont believe what you read.

Save opinions for when you see the movie yourself. Don't let some biased Hate Monger who doesnt even give sources ruin a movie for you.

 

[Matt]

All I know is BT has pretty much lost all credibility.

 

[Super Adw]

Dougherty, would even have us believe there is no rough draft of this movie, appearantly everyone at WB has so much faith in Ottoman to edit it right, they don't need a rough draft. They're even forgoing the test screenings that summer blockbusters are famous for.

Internet Buzz isn't as insignificant as we were lead to believe after all.

Well so far UGO is the only one that posted a rough cut review,where are all the other people who have seen this rough cut? This kinda stuff usually hits sites quickly.I'm not saying their isnt a rough cut,but its odd that UGO is the only site that posted a review about one and it turns out to be fake.

 

[Fatboy Roberts]

(peeks in)

This is the "Plausible Deniability" Thread, right? Is that correct?

Let the handwringing continue, just wanted to make sure what was going on.

Now, here's MY question: If mentioning a tie between Legendary Films/Warner Bros and BlueTights is delete worthy, then WHY? It's pretty damned obvious. Instead of trying to cover up the link between the two (I know Wingnut/New Line didn't with Kong is King or The OneRing.net) why not use that to your advantage when making your arguments? You can then speak from a position of authority because you've been co-opted by the majors, right? Isn't that the smart move as opposed to deleting threads and mentions that simply shine a light on the obvious?

Really no reason to it. counterproductive, actually. bad place, if I'm on the production team, watching the fanboys stumble around aimlessly bumping into each other confused and questioning is great stuff. It's mystery. It's countermanding the spoiler brigade's raw need to know, and ensuring that they REALLY don't know what's gonna happen when they get in there.

And they're going in there. It's not a question--these reviews aren't REALLY turning anyone off buying a ticket, and even if it were, the percentage of people NOT going is so small, in a subset (internet fanboys) that is so small as to not even make a sizable dent in the box office

Right?

So why the cloak and dagger rigmarole concerning these thread deletions? Let the obfuscation run rampant, kids. It's doing you a favor, even if the questions center around possible negatives. You're going to get those anyway, look where you are: THE INTERNET.

But this is handling it in completely the wrong way. Daugherty weighed in. Igle weighed in. Harry weighed in. Meanwhile, you've got Drew's script review and the very shady UGO.com review that seems based on Drew's review. bad place, let the chips fall where they may. You're trying to put out a fire that's not gonna start, at least not this close to release. And in the effort, you're going to end up drawing MORE ATTENTION TO YOURSELVES. Which is the exact opposite of what you want, right?

 

[ohmshalone]

are we his buddy??? messing with us??? fool!

(sigh) I could get annoyed with something like this and say "fool" back, but I'll show I've matured somewhat on the boards, grit my teeth and say "yes, like how he messed with the x-men fans on several occasions "

 

[Michael Corleone]

(peeks in)

This is the "Plausible Deniability" Thread, right? Is that correct?

Let the handwringing continue, just wanted to make sure what was going on.

Now, here's MY question: If mentioning a tie between Legendary Films/Warner Bros and BlueTights is delete worthy, then WHY? It's pretty damned obvious. Instead of trying to cover up the link between the two (I know Wingnut/New Line didn't with Kong is King or The OneRing.net) why not use that to your advantage when making your arguments? You can then speak from a position of authority because you've been co-opted by the majors, right? Isn't that the smart move as opposed to deleting threads and mentions that simply shine a light on the obvious?

Really no reason to it. counterproductive, actually. bad place, if I'm on the production team, watching the fanboys stumble around aimlessly bumping into each other confused and questioning is great stuff. It's mystery. It's countermanding the spoiler brigade's raw need to know, and ensuring that they REALLY don't know what's gonna happen when they get in there.

And they're going in there. It's not a question--these reviews aren't REALLY turning anyone off buying a ticket, and even if it were, the percentage of people NOT going is so small, in a subset (internet fanboys) that is so small as to not even make a sizable dent in the box office

Right?

So why the cloak and dagger rigmarole concerning these thread deletions? Let the obfuscation run rampant, kids. It's doing you a favor, even if the questions center around possible negatives. You're going to get those anyway, look where you are: THE INTERNET.

But this is handling it in completely the wrong way. Daugherty weighed in. Igle weighed in. Harry weighed in. Meanwhile, you've got Drew's script review and the very shady UGO.com review that seems based on Drew's review. bad place, let the chips fall where they may. You're trying to put out a fire that's not gonna start, at least not this close to release. And in the effort, you're going to end up drawing MORE ATTENTION TO YOURSELVES. Which is the exact opposite of what you want, right?

I think you're on to something.

 

[Oldguy]

(peeks in)

This is the "Plausible Deniability" Thread, right? Is that correct?

Let the handwringing continue, just wanted to make sure what was going on.

Now, here's MY question: If mentioning a tie between Legendary Films/Warner Bros and BlueTights is delete worthy, then WHY? It's pretty damned obvious. Instead of trying to cover up the link between the two (I know Wingnut/New Line didn't with Kong is King or The OneRing.net) why not use that to your advantage when making your arguments? You can then speak from a position of authority because you've been co-opted by the majors, right? Isn't that the smart move as opposed to deleting threads and mentions that simply shine a light on the obvious?

Really no reason to it. counterproductive, actually. bad place, if I'm on the production team, watching the fanboys stumble around aimlessly bumping into each other confused and questioning is great stuff. It's mystery. It's countermanding the spoiler brigade's raw need to know, and ensuring that they REALLY don't know what's gonna happen when they get in there.

And they're going in there. It's not a question--these reviews aren't REALLY turning anyone off buying a ticket, and even if it were, the percentage of people NOT going is so small, in a subset (internet fanboys) that is so small as to not even make a sizable dent in the box office

Right?

So why the cloak and dagger rigmarole concerning these thread deletions? Let the obfuscation run rampant, kids. It's doing you a favor, even if the questions center around possible negatives. You're going to get those anyway, look where you are: THE INTERNET.

But this is handling it in completely the wrong way. Daugherty weighed in. Igle weighed in. Harry weighed in. Meanwhile, you've got Drew's script review and the very shady UGO.com review that seems based on Drew's review. bad place, let the chips fall where they may. You're trying to put out a fire that's not gonna start, at least not this close to release. And in the effort, you're going to end up drawing MORE ATTENTION TO YOURSELVES. Which is the exact opposite of what you want, right?

A lot of people are going to a bad place of an extent to silence unfounded internet rumours that indeed, have little or no effect on the B.O. big picture, as you pointed out.

bad place, after reading the reviews, I'm even more stoked to see SR, to get a chance to finally see what's what.

 

[ultimatefan]

Well, this is the reply that Dougherty gave to my e-mail. He emphasized again that it was an old draft and a lot changed. He addressed my biggest concern, that Supes would come off angsty and mopey in the movie:

It was a very very VERY early draft of the script, filled with a lot
> of ideas that were abandoned ages ago.
>Superman is not angsty or mopey. We tried to show an emotional side
>of him that no one has seen
>before, but he is not mopey.

Now I ask, why would the guy respond to my e-mail to BS me? He didn´t have to answer, I would guess he´s too busy, he could send me a standard response e-mail saying he couldn´t answer due to busy working schedule or something. He knows I´m gonna be pissed if he´s lying, He knows the Internet geeks he responded to will not leave him alone. Someone will tell the press that filmmakers are responding fan e-mails with total BS, the movie press would LOVE that...

 

[TimDrakeRobin45]

No rough cut? That's horse****. The editor has to work from something, something has to be put together for studio approval. Test screenings are standard operating procedure for a super-hero franchise movie.

When Mike says "theres No rough cut" he means no rough cut available to anyone outside of the studio. It has not been screened and no one has seen it aside from Bryan, the writers the actors and a few execcs. Not to mention the editor. He is not stating that there is No rough cut at all and the movie will magically appear.

 

[Hunter Rider]

In the reply i got He told me that the Lex we see in the FOS has more screentime than the ranting one later but there is a balance between the two

 

[ultimatefan]

A lot of people are going to a bad place of an extent to silence unfounded internet rumours that indeed, have little or no effect on the B.O. big picture, as you pointed out.

bad place, after reading the reviews, I'm even more stoked to see SR, to get a chance to finally see what's what.

shutting down fake or unfounded reviews and related Internet threads is common practice, it happened to a fake review of X3 as well, there´s no "major conspiracy" behind this.

 

[Cinemaman]

Well, this is the reply that Dougherty gave to my e-mail. He emphasized again that it was an old draft and a lot changed. He addressed my biggest concern, that Supes would come off angsty and mopey in the movie:

It was a very very VERY early draft of the script, filled with a lot
> of ideas that were abandoned ages ago.
>Superman is not angsty or mopey. We tried to show an emotional side
>of him that no one has seen
>before, but he is not mopey.

Now I ask, why would the guy respond to my e-mail to BS me? He didn´t have to answer, I would guess he´s too busy, he could send me a standard response e-mail saying he couldn´t answer due to busy working schedule or something. He knows I´m gonna be pissed if he´s lying, He knows the Internet geeks he responded to will not leave him alone. Someone will tell the press that filmmakers are responding fan e-mails with total BS, the movie press would LOVE that...

What is mopey???