Sequels Legendary Pictures & Thomas Tull Think Superman Sequel

[afan]

Exactly, like STM transitioned to Superman 2. I mean, what's so complicated about it. Most general audiences already know that Superman fought Zod, who was a supervillain, they know it Has to happen, that Superman Has to face more powerful foes. I think that's what they are waiting to see.

In the case of S:TM and S II it was not complicated at all, but in the case of those films Zod was introduced in the opening moments of S:TM and was from the get go the intended villian of S II. There was an outline and a plan for the two films before beginning production and they were in fact shot for the most part at the same time.

No such organization that I am aware of is present here, and the whole idea that MOS would be a Wrath of Khan like resurrection was born from the less than impressive reactions to SR, and not by prior planning or thoughtful design.

So illustrating the success of S:TM's transition into S II and using that as proof of a possibly successful transition of SR to a super-villian laden MOS is not very valid.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

In the case of S:TM and S II it was not complicated at all, but in the case of those films Zod was introduced in the opening moments of S:TM and was from the get go the intended villian of S II. There was an outline and a plan for the two films before beginning production and they were in fact shot for the most part at the same time.

No such organization that I am aware of is present here, and the whole idea that MOS would be a Wrath of Khan like resurrection was born from the less than impressive reactions to SR, and not by prior planning or thoughtful design.

So illustrating the success of S:TM's transition into S II and using that as proof of a possibly successful transition of SR to a super-villian laden MOS is not very valid.

Yes! I remember Zod at the first part of Superman: The Movie.

 

[BMM]

Exactly!

Though, I like the serious tone in SR, I think it will be more compelling when Superman finally has to duke it out with a superbaddie in order to defend the world, at least to me. I will be rooting for him so bad, since I care very deeply for him and others in SR.

Right. I don't see the problem of introducing a supervillain. There have been plenty of plausible and reasonable suggestions made by posters on these very boards. Granted, introducing a supervillain doesn't remove some of the issues people have with the movie, such as Superman's son. Regardless, that doesn't hinder the ability to effectively introduce another superpowered being in a world that already allows for the possibility of one to exist. The only thing that hinders the possibility of a supervillain in the sequel is a lack of creativity and imagination on someone's part or utter laziness.

 

[solidsnake86]

They're well aware of the problems with the first movie, mostly action, but things like the suit design and shade of red are more of a preference than a problem.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

The suit complaints have always struck me as nit-picking. Looked like the Superman costume to me. Hell I'm shocked he stayed so close to the original design. Complaining about Supes attire in SR is like complaining about the Silver webbing on Spidey's suit in the Spider-Man movies, it's just nit-picking. If the suit was my only problem with SR, I would be waiting with baited breath for the sequel.

 

[nintendo nerd]

In the case of S:TM and S II it was not complicated at all, but in the case of those films Zod was introduced in the opening moments of S:TM and was from the get go the intended villian of S II. There was an outline and a plan for the two films before beginning production and they were in fact shot for the most part at the same time.

No such organization that I am aware of is present here, and the whole idea that MOS would be a Wrath of Khan like resurrection was born from the less than impressive reactions to SR, and not by prior planning or thoughtful design.

So illustrating the success of S:TM's transition into S II and using that as proof of a possibly successful transition of SR to a super-villian laden MOS is not very valid.

But we can use the success from other movies bringing other villians without introducing them on the previous films:

- Doctor Octopus.
- Venom
- Sandman
- Penguin
- Catwoman

It won't be a problem to bring a new villian to the SR franchise if its written well.

 

[nintendo nerd]

The suit complaints have always struck me as nit-picking.

People had bigger issues with the movie. Most people didn't care about the suit, he looked like Superman.

 

[solidsnake86]

I agree with that, I don't even think it is the suit, but more how some of the earlier released pictures were taken. There are a few pictures that the costume looks amazing but that first promo pic is what is stuck on most peoples minds. I would post pictures of where it looks good but I don't know how.

 

[BMM]

Yeah, the first official promo. pic. was weak in my opinion.

 

[nintendo nerd]

I agree with that, I don't even think it is the suit, but more how some of the earlier released pictures were taken. There are a few pictures that the costume looks amazing but that first promo pic is what is stuck on most peoples minds. I would post pictures of where it looks good but I don't know how.

Exactly. There were bigger reasons why the movie failed at the BO.

 

[GL's Light]

Yeah, the first official promo. pic. was weak in my opinion.

Most of the stills used in the publicity campaign were poor. They need to do much better in that regard next time around.

 

[Super Kal]

IMO, everything in the SR campaign was weak..

 

[The Batman]

Are some of you serious when you say you can't see a super villain in the sequel because the first movie didnt allow it, or the world created was too realistic. Thank God you guys aren't in charge of things. When things are grounded in reality it doesn't mean they can't be fantastical at the same time. Spider-man was grounded in reality and he had super villains.

Fanboys will make up any stupid excuse to justifuy their argument...in this case...fanboys are trying to discredit the idea of a a supervillain because the mere presence of a supervillain would mean without a doubt that singers sequel will have more tension and action...and they want to convince everyone that singer will make anohter "bad" movie...much like how anti singer fanboys will claim its too late for lexcorp luthor, because then they couldnt complain about singer's luthor when lexcorp luthor is the one they like

 

[Super Kal]

Are some of you serious when you say you can't see a super villain in the sequel because the first movie didnt allow it, or the world created was too realistic. Thank God you guys aren't in charge of things. When things are grounded in reality it doesn't mean they can't be fantastical at the same time. Spider-man was grounded in reality and he had super villains.

because the tone of the movie was still set in a foundation of fantasy...

some people don't seem to understand that.

 

[bosef982]

Exactly. There were bigger reasons why the movie failed at the BO.

Let me ask you a question: was Batman Begins a box office failure?

No?

Okay, well then, neither was Superman, who made more.

Any expectation of box office performance is an expectation, subject to human flaw and exaggeration -- not reality.

 

[Super Kal]

Fanboys will make up any stupid excuse to justifuy their argument...

same thing can be said for those who support the film.

 

[The Batman]

same thing can be said for those who support the film.

no one said otherwise...but claiming that having a supervillain would be a leap is freaking ******ed when in the first donner films we went from a guy with a real estate scheme and a rocket to THREE PEOPLE WITH SUPERMANS POWERS

The mere fact that we have a protagonist whos an alien with superhuman abilities is proof enough that this universe isnt all that realistic

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Batman said my opinion was ******ed, I'm going to change it now!

 

[X-Maniac]

Let me ask you a question: was Batman Begins a box office failure?

No?

Okay, well then, neither was Superman, who made more.

Any expectation of box office performance is an expectation, subject to human flaw and exaggeration -- not reality.

But you yourself were surprised, perhaps disheartened, at Superman's lukewarm box office.

What you need to ask yourself is why people weren't running through the streets to get to see this film, DESPITE the positive reviews. And why all those glowing reviews didn't mean the film picked up pace as a 'must see' movie.

I wasn't on this part of the board prior to the movie so I am not sure what the general feeling was on here but I do recall that many people elsewhere on the Hype said SR would blow X3 out of the water. They ate crow for their meal, and were sat at the table with egg on their face.

So what was it? Crap marketing? Or a film that could not be marketed as an exciting summer superhero adventure because it just wasn't one.

 

[stargazer]

Fanboys will make up any stupid excuse to justifuy their argument...in this case...fanboys are trying to discredit the idea of a a supervillain because the mere presence of a supervillain would mean without a doubt that singers sequel will have more tension and action...and they want to convince everyone that singer will make anohter "bad" movie...much like how anti singer fanboys will claim its too late for lexcorp luthor, because then they couldnt complain about singer's luthor when lexcorp luthor is the one they like

Exactly! ding, ding, ding

 

[X-Maniac]

why not? i want a long post please. because i just can not see it. do we have to see flying pigs for a supervillain?

I think because he focused on the 'human factor' not the 'sci-fi factor.' He even cut out the Krypton sequence because he felt it didn't sit right with the rest of the movie.

I'm not saying it's not possible to have a supervillain but that the focus in SR wasn't on fantasy elements, but on human soap opera. Superman's battle was with finding a place in the world and with his own heart, soul and feelings, not with external sci-fi beings.

 

[stargazer]

I bet what Singer comes up with will be no where near as good as this. Brainiac does seem the logical way to go but then why were Singer and his original writers proposing Darskeid? I just can't help but think Singer is lost when it comes to this world.

I strongly disagree.

 

[stargazer]

She.

You hit the nail on the head, thats exactly why I'm here. If a sequel is greenlit I probably won't be posting here as much, but right now I want to see if a sequel will be made. I want to see if I should give up on the Superman movie-verse. Because I will, if a Singer directed sequel is made. I want to see if I'll ever see a fun but serious when it needs to be Superman movie come out, a movie that will take full advantage of the current technogies and have Superman finally have a great looking battle in the Metropolisis sky, a movie with the updated LexCorp non-jokey badass Luthor, a spunky but non annoying Lois Lane, a movie that leaves you feeling wowed and uplifted when you walk out of the theater.

And I like the people on here.

fair enough, but do you think you need to repeat over and over how much you hated SR and Singer's direction? I mean, We All know it by now, you've been very clear about it. I guess, we just can't have any type of constructive discussion then, sadly.

 

[FlawlessVictory]

Fanboys will make up any stupid excuse to justifuy their argument...in this case...fanboys are trying to discredit the idea of a a supervillain because the mere presence of a supervillain would mean without a doubt that singers sequel will have more tension and action...and they want to convince everyone that singer will make anohter "bad" movie...much like how anti singer fanboys will claim its too late for lexcorp luthor, because then they couldnt complain about singer's luthor when lexcorp luthor is the one they like

I do believe superpowered villains can work in Singer's world. But I don't see how there can be any tension when the first movie didn't make me care enough about any of the characters.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

If they make a sequel ofcourse they well put a Supervillain in it, (Zod probably) but that doesn't mean that they adequately set up a fantastical enough Universe for one. And I think that he would have to be dulled down. I can't imagine a villain like DarkSeid appearing in these films because there is a whole other planet and race of people ect..ect. They are damn sure going to have to change the tone. And a huge tonal shift can be rather jarring.