Superman Returns Ratner talks Superman!

[skruloos]

It's a movie, or a "drama". And its based on a melodramatic mythology, so of course it's going to be melodramatic in places. But I digress. Some examples, please. And then, if you could, explain how SUPERMAN RETURNS, or for that matter, SUPERMAN: THE MOVIE doesn't go into melodrama in the same vein. Oh. It does.

"REMEMBER, SON! ALWAYS REMEMBER".

Hey, an impression is an impression. I used to be a script reader. Somethings come off as melodramatic while others don't. Spider-man? Melodramatic. Abram's script? Melodramatic.

Not only exposition, but fairly worthless exposition, because the concept never gets touched on again. And speaking of...when did exposition become a bad thing? Abrams' SUPERMAN also "showed" plenty without just "telling".

I found the entire civil war and Jor-El's brother crap needless exposition.

So you want Superman stories to be...unlike what has always made Superman mythology work in part. Well, THAT makes sense.

Yes, actually. I have different expectations for a film than I do of a comic book.

I asked you WHAT was cheesy and melodramatic, and why it was bad as it was presented in the script.

Hey, that's the impression I got. I've read the thing three times. If it didn't convince me otherwise, you certainly are not.

So it was contrived. Most films are these days. SUPERMAN RETURNS is no exception, really. BATMAN BEGINS was pretty contrived, too. Did you enjoy that film?

As I stated, I thought that Begins was poorly written as well and yet I enjoyed it. I also stated there would probably be a good chance that I might like Abram's script if it was produced.

Which parts of it?



How so? Which scenes?

Everything. The WHOLE script came off as melodramatic and contrived.

That's SPIDER-MAN 2, which has girls in wedding dresses and completely pointless plot devices to breed "emotion". Abrams SUPERMAN had none of this type of thing. It bred intrigue. It's "emotion" came from perfectly acceptable moments that flowed from a cohesive story (At least as much as SUPERMAN RETURNS). If you can have Superman risking his life to save the world in SUPERMAN RETURNS to be emotional, why can't you have Superman risking his life to save Lois Lane in Abrams version?)

Superman and Lois's relationship, for instance, was fairly subtle, fairly realistic, and very well done. At least as much so as it was in SUPERMAN RETURNS.

Then we agree to disagree.

Yes...but you aren't describing any script elements. You're simply using the words, and when I ask you to clarify, you're simply using more buzz words. "Trite" means ****-all to me if you can't tell me what was trite, and why it's any different than say, a similar moment in SUPERMAN RETURNS.

True. I'm not describing specific script elements because I'm referring to the entire script. I pointed out plot devices of the civil war and the way CIA Luthor was portrayed as contrived. You disagree. Good for you. I stand by my assessment of the script.

I mean, I can say that SUPERMAN RETURNS was "shallow and pedantic", but unless I can point out WHY, my argument makes no sense.

No. If you told me that was the impression you got off a read, I'd respect that. I don't need to know why you thought the read was shallow and pedantic.

 

[BOYWONDR77]

Wow the guard strikes again, I see years go by and he still has a hard on for fighting with people but hey we all have our first loves.lol But hey just one persons opinion on the whole Ratner thing; I thought X3 was insulting and offensive as a fan of both cinema and the comics. Not that Ratner was to blame for the script but he didnt stop it or even try to correct horrible mistakes made by the screenwriters. Ratner is to blame for horrible direction i.e. Multiple man's great characterization and line delivery " I'm in." as if someone asked him if he was down to go to Del taco for a late night meal. And in the interview he does come off smug and kind of an ass, especially when he makes excuses for his sequels that fall short of their predecessors. I like Ratner, but much like "The Lost World", "Dead man's chest" and "Superman III" X3 is a sequel people went to see because they loved the film that came before it. After said type of sequels have the biggest opening weekend ever (and turnsout to be horrible but has great fx) no one goes to see the following sequel and it tanks; and sadly the following much like Jurassic 3 is far superior but gets labeled a flop. So Brett (sorry to say being a fellow MJ fan and that we share some of the same friends) you are not responsible for the hit X3 was- the first two films and Bryan Singer are. As for Singer and "Returns" I feel it was the best way to make a sequel to the Donner films and have a fresh, modern take on supes. I enjoyed it incredibly and hope for the "Wrath of Khan" type sequel Singer speaks of. Superman is difficult to bring back but I think Singer did it well and if X2 by any means is an indication to what is coming next I will be there at midnight the night before Superman VI comes out with ticket in hand. PEACE!

 

[Retroman]

Remember this?

Reported By Premiere - Feb 10, 2003:

Moviegoers can stop speculating about who director Brett Ratner will cast to play Superman. Why? The director has already cast himself. At least that was his holiday wish according to the most recent issue of Premiere Magazine.

According to Premiere, the director sent out special holiday cards trumpeting his prime gig as the director of steel. The card, a photograph of which appeared in the mag, had Ratner soaring as Superman.

Looks like Supes could use a shave.

Greeting cards aside, the role of Superman in the upcoming movie remains uncast.

Source: http://www.comics2film.com/ProjectFrame.php?f_id=52&f_page=135

 

[SolidSnakeMGS]

Why is this such a bad thing? Oh. I forgot. "New" equals "bad".

Yeah, the "one" concept is sooooo new and original.

You're definitely in the minority here. There's a reason the script is so widely despised.

And yes, Ratner is very smug. Maybe not here, but elsewhere. I love how he talks about having the model girlfriend, the big house, and the gold rolex in most of his interviews. The guy seems more interested in being famous than actually being a good filmmaker.

 

[BULLITT]

A movie studio is going to give you millions $ to make a movie, you knew what the movie was going to be about before you signed a contract, you then don't do the movie, but you talk about how it wasn't a good idea?

WTF??!!

Sounds like a director who didn't have an ounce of creativity to get it done.

Sounds like a whinner.

 

[I Am The Knight]

Ratner really comes off as a jerk. His ''comments'' are very annoying to me, for some reason. I can't stand the guy.

 

[FanboyX_Returns]

All of a sudden..i like Ratner.

**** harry knowles..guys a prick!

I have never hated Ratner, and don't know why others do I mean I havent seen a movie of his that I dont like!
Harry Knowles is a fat joke!

 

[SolidSnakeMGS]

I have never hated Ratner, and don't know why others do I mean I havent seen a movie of his that I dont like!
Harry Knowles is a fat joke!

It's pretty obvious why people hate Ratner. More obvious than some people's hatred of Singer.

Ratner's really just a hack who acts bigger than the quality of his filmography. His comedies were alright, but that's more of the cast than anything. Red Dragon is infinitely inferior to Manhunter, and that After the Sunset was a cinematic holocaust. It's hard to blame Ratner for all of X3 (give some blame where it's due : 20CF and Rothman), but that was still a bad decision and Ratner certainly didn't help. He needs to stay with dumb action comedies and his ego needs to take a few hundred notches down as well. Maybe once he gets some style, originality, and humility, he can work on making a movie where he actually matters in the process.

 

[Sardaukar]

I find it amusing how now that Ratner's told his side of the story, everyone is accepting his words as the golden truth. For all we know, Ratner did something to piss off Harry that he's conveniently not mentioning. I'm not saying Harry's right either. It's just that in such a situation, it's often difficult to say who's in the right because usually neither party is completely innocent.

 

[LostSon88]

Ratner doesn't bother me one bit...hell even Sir Ian McKellan prefers Ratner to Singer: http://movies.about.com/od/xmen3/a/xmen3051806.htm

In regards to Abram, he lost me the moment his Krypon DIDN'T explode.

And Harry, well...he's fat.

 

[ChrisBaleBatman]

Of course Ian will say something like that, I mean.....why bad mouth Ratner when Singer's gone?

I dunno, Ratner just isn't athat good a director. I've enjoyed some of his films.....but c'mon....he's a journeyman at best.

Btw, he curses alot. More than me. ****, that's saying something.\

And, am I the only one who found his "Building a ****ing planet" thing kinda dumb? I mean, they were going to spend 40 minutes on Krypton with Jor-El and his brother? Wtf?

 

[Kirk Langstrom]

I don't see how Ratner can be so smug about X3. It wasn't as if he set up the franchise. He's riding off the success of the previous two movies which Singer made, ironically enough. It would have been more impressive had he started the X-Men movie franchise instead of Singer.
QUOTE]

Ok, but couldnt the same arguement be made in regards to Singer riding off the success of the Donner stuff?

And yet, he still failed.

 

[ChrisBaleBatman]

No, b/c Donner's film was made over 25 years ago.

Lester, and whoever directed the other 2, rode and killed the Donner wave.

I mean, what kind of a movie wave lasts that long? Star Wars is the only one I can think of, and even that one needed a reminder with the Special Edition re-releases.

 

[Emrys]

surely they wouldnt have hung around the same spot for the thousands of years between the end of krypton and the start of SR? (and hes only been gone 5 yrs. 2 1/2 there, 2 1/2 back, especially with no sun to hold them in place.

surely, yes it could have hung around the same spot for a thousand years.

 

[Casius--J]

I disagree. Where is this "smugness" you speak of?

I thought his points carried a lot of validity. Truth is, there is a somewhat "played out" stigma attached to the Superman franchise. Brett merely put it in perspective. X-Men--for the time being--has a more raw, fresh appeal that broader audiences can identify with. In other words, it's the concept of racial and social equality along with other principles that sells X-Men. It's bigger than any one director's prowess.

As far as Brett's treatment of X3: It wasn't perfect. But at least those characters finally got to do what the X-Men are beloved for: waging war. My instincts tell me that that would have never happened under Bryan's care...he always plays it too safe by heading for romanticized treatments.

And that's what he did with SR.

couldnt of said it better myself.

I thought superman returns was borin myself and i hope singer stays away from comic book movies from now on.

anyways there were some funny moments in that interview, ratner was a bit harsh with harrys dad, geeze!! He's just basically confirmed what we already knew and that is harry's credibilty is worth nothing.

 

[ChrisBaleBatman]

I pray Ratner stays away from ALL Comic Book films at all costs.

For you to say you want Singer to do the same.....have you ever seen his X-films????

But, "played out" stigma?.......I dunno man. That's something I'd associate more with Batman. But, how man years was SUPERMAN IV?? I don't buy that "played out" idea. Doesn't hold much weight, when you consider it's been so many years since there was a Superman movie.

 

[The Kid]

I won't count Ratner out yet. X3 in anyone's hands with that rushed decision-by-comitee production probably wouldn't be very great.... actually...I wouldn't mind seeing him handle the Flash since he likes to make his films fast paced.




















*rimshot*

 

[Comic Book Boy]

I disagree. Where is this "smugness" you speak of?

I thought his points carried a lot of validity. Truth is, there is a somewhat "played out" stigma attached to the Superman franchise. Brett merely put it in perspective. X-Men--for the time being--has a more raw, fresh appeal that broader audiences can identify with. In other words, it's the concept of racial and social equality along with other principles that sells X-Men. It's bigger than any one director's prowess.

As far as Brett's treatment of X3: It wasn't perfect. But at least those characters finally got to do what the X-Men are beloved for: waging war. My instincts tell me that that would have never happened under Bryan's care...he always plays it too safe by heading for romanticized treatments.

And that's what he did with SR.

True.

 

[PSU442]

ratner = most uprofessional (not to mention pompous) director ever

 

[Casius--J]

Yeah i saw singers x films and they never got me excited when watching them. Only part i really loved was the nightcrawler scene at the start but thats the coolest thing he did all movie. I found them to be too realistic and i dont think xmen should ever be too grounded.

Also i preferred the way the characters were in x3 than in previous movies, i felt that these were the xmen i knew as a child. never got that so much from x1 or 2. only really from wolverine, prof x and nightcrawler.

 

[CapBeerCino]

All I can say is BLAHHHH! :

I don't know (or care) what happened between Ratner and Harry (but as they say- "tell me who your friends are, I’ll tell you who you are...") but can't he be the bigger man? Harry being unprofessional doesn't mean Ratner has to stoop to his level.

And for him to analyze the SR box office? Show some modesty, your sucky x-men movie only did well because Singer passed the franchise to you on a silver plate.

 

[Armand Z Trip]

All I can say is BLAHHHH! :

I don't know (or care) what happened between Ratner and Harry (but as they say- "tell me who your friends are, I’ll tell you who you are...") but can't he be the bigger man? Harry being unprofessional doesn't mean Ratner has to stoop to his level.

And for him to analyze the SR box office? Show some modesty, your sucky x-men movie only did well because Singer passed the franchise to you on a silver plate.

Absolutely, you nailed it.

I thought the article would be about Singer, but he just bashes Harry Knowles, WTF?

 

[explode7]

I'd prefer superman had a brother than a son in a new superman movie.

 

[ChrisBaleBatman]

Your kidding right? I mean, c'mon.......

 

[FanboyX_Returns]

Ratner really comes off as a jerk. His ''comments'' are very annoying to me, for some reason. I can't stand the guy.

I guess bro but to me he seems like a real straight up dude!
Like you can tell that he doesn't fake out, and not say the truth even if it pisses people off.

He doesn't seem to really be one of these hollywood fakes... Like he to me seems more real as a person then half of the industry cus most of the people in Hollywood are butt kissers, and Brett Ratner doesn't seem to be some butt much so he doesnt get alot of top projects from studios.. But I don't care, and not only that he is hated for some real stupid by the fans for reason I have no clue off... I mean Peter Jackson, Bryan Singer, Speilberg, Lucas have all had their proplems in there careers where they looked like total jerks, and nobody calls them out for it! lol I mean maybe one time when Ratner said something, and looked a Jerk maybe he was having a bad day that day I mean I just don't get all the Ratner hatred! lol

Ratner just gets a bad wrap for some strange reason... But I have loved every movie he's made, and I DONT own X1 or X2, and believe me X3 I will own, and it will join my Brett Ratner collection... It's the only one of his movies I need to buy!