Reintroducing Superman: An Open Discussion

[FilmNerdJamie]

Another reason this is going to be a long journey.

To which I'm frankly baffled by the lack of coverage of the Japanese Toyota Prius ads with Bomer as Supes - especially with the lawsuit(s) and current limbo/hibernation of the film franchise.

No, instead BS "news" (i.e. filler for slow days) gets passed in heavy rotation like Megan Fox's fake PSA for Jennifer's Body or Tarantino revealing his Top 20 films that have been made since 1992. Seriously, what the ****?

 

[The Guard]

Wait a tic...Matthew Bomer as Superman? Are these online?

 

[Showtime]

Yes.

Matthew Bomer Superman Commercials

 

[KalMart]

He's not inept when it comes to action/adventure, but he's certainly not up to the higher standards that others have set in terms of audience involvement. Also not helped by fewer/lesser sequences interspersed amongst slow, morose, domestic drama. Just being Superman doesn't elevate that. But it's tough for some Superman fans to separate defending their fandom from fairly assessing the movie for what it was...and wasn't.

 

[KalMart]

Wait a tic...Matthew Bomer as Superman? Are these online?

The Toyota Prius.


A truly Supermanly car if there ever was one. t:

 

[SuperDaniel]

My guess is that we're NOT going to see another Superman movie until this court thing is settled and done.

 

[Cosmic]

Re: If the secret to Star Trek's success was cutting ties with the past...

There was no "secret" to Trek's success. It was a solid, fast-paced, funny, sexy, big-budget action movie with good acting and special effects. Having the decades long-lasting brand name and huge fanbase also helped.

 

[FlawlessVictory]

^Yup, that's how I feel. Why would WB start work on something as massive as Superman when something that important and potentially game changing is hanging over their heads. And who knows how many years this will be dragged out in the courts. I understand IESB reported a movie was being fast tracked but that was before the latest court ruling.

 

[GreenKToo]

^Yup, that's how I feel. Why would WB start work on something as massive as Superman when something that important and potentially game changing is hanging over their heads. And who knows how many years this will be dragged out in the courts. I understand IESB reported a movie was being fast tracked but that was before the latest court ruling.

I sadly agree.

 

[KalMart]

Isn't there something in that case that says they have to go into production by 2011, or risk losing more or what have you.

 

[FlawlessVictory]

Isn't there something in that case that says they have to go into production by 2011, or risk losing more or what have you.

Which doesn't make sense to me. So the ruling was that WB lost some of the rights to Superman(including I think the ability to use the name Superman) but then the court turns around and says, ok, now go make a movie! LOL What if WB wants to make a movie where you know he gets to be called Superman or if they want the next movie to include the origin? How can they be told to do something when certain elements are compromised. All that stuff needs to be worked out and a deal be agreed upon by WB and the family before they can move forward and not be hampered in any manner. And that stuff, I imagine, will take time. As in years.

 

[FilmNerdJamie]

There was no "secret" to Trek's success. It was a solid, fast-paced, funny, sexy, big-budget action movie with good acting and special effects. Having the decades long-lasting brand name and huge fanbase also helped.

Before Abrams' reboot, Star Trek was about as dead as a franchise can get and a complete joke at that. It was a monster hit b/c of its marketing (starting with the trailer that premiered in front of Quantum of Solace). They also sold it as a straight-forward sci-fi action/adventure film to the masses instead of just slapping on a logo with a release date for a one-sheet and leaving it at that.

The glowing reviews and word-of-mouth made Trek have its amazing staying power this summer. But it was marketing that got asses in the seats for its near $80 million opening weekend.

Also the fan-base had absolutely nothing to do with its success. If they actually mattered, then Insurrection and Nemesis would have done $150-$200 million stateside and Enterprise would be one of the most-watched shows on television.

 

[KalMart]

Before Abrams' reboot, Star Trek was about as dead as a franchise can get and a complete joke at that. It was a monster hit b/c of its marketing (starting with the trailer that premiered in front of Quantum of Solace). They also sold it as a straight-forward sci-fi action/adventure film to the masses instead of just slapping on a logo with a release date for a one-sheet and leaving it at that.

The glowing reviews and word-of-mouth made Trek have its amazing staying power this summer. But it was marketing that got asses in the seats for its near $80 million opening weekend.

Good thing they actually had a product to work off of, no?

 

[FilmNerdJamie]

Good thing they actually had a product to work off of, no?

Warner Brothers pushed the Hell outta both Batman Begins and Superman Returns. They were confident in both, but merely went the foolish route of just slapping on a logo with a release date for their one-sheet. That had zero to do with product to work off of. No?

 

[KalMart]

Warner Brothers pushed the Hell outta both Batman Begins and Superman Returns. They were confident in both, but merely went the foolish route of just slapping on a logo with a release date for their one-sheet. That had zero to do with product to work off of. No?

You mean like trailers? Let's say WB actually wanted to push the 'action and adventure' in SR and go all-out, like you said. Where would they get that from? And say there was a bigger opening....because people were somehow fooled into thinking they were going to get some big-time 'action and adventure'....and what they saw instead was SR. What would that do for word-of-mouth, and sustaining good theater legs, etc?

If you're saying that SR's marketing approach basically amounted to a big 'S' logo...sure....but so did the movie, if even that. So I'd say the marketing was at least appropriate, and maybe even overstating the matter......no?

 

[FilmNerdJamie]

They already did that. The third (and final) trailer was the one that pushed it more in the action area. And we saw that happened.

 

[Nightwing1983]

Warner Brothers pushed the Hell outta both Batman Begins and Superman Returns. They were confident in both, but merely went the foolish route of just slapping on a logo with a release date for their one-sheet. That had zero to do with product to work off of. No?

This is an interesting point, as one had a great story and the other had one that was poor, but could be seen as ambitious. It might have helped each movie to focus on the story in their advertising and if that's your point, I agree with you.

To that end... I'm glad they didn't with Superman Returns.

 

[KalMart]

They already did that. The third (and final) trailer was the one that pushed it more in the action area. And we saw that happened.

The third SR trailer? Yeah....they used up all the 'action' that was in the movie. What was left for others trailers without making it the same as that one?

Plane...bullet-in-the-eye...

next trailer...plane, and bullet-in-the-eye

next trailer....pl....um...bullet-in-the-eye and then plane?

next trailer.......bullet-plane?

Now....if they wanted to target the soap opera crowd....NOOOOW we're talking!

 

[solidsnake86]

The court stuff is confusing, to say the least. Basically, WB payed DC 12.5 million for the rights in order to make the superman film (not sure how long its for but i remeber reading 20 years). Now this whole thing of production by 2011 is because the siegels can sue for damages if WB doesnt make another movie (I.e. the profits they arent getting because they arent making another one). From my understanding it seems like 2 separate issues, one being DC comics and the other being the film division. The article on think mcfly think was really good and laid out the basics of what you need to know.

 

[FilmNerdJamie]

 

[KalMart]

Surveillance camera footage from SR marketing dept. screening.

 

[FilmNerdJamie]

Surveillance camera footage from SR marketing dept. screening.

The smart person in this conversation (i.e. me) walking away actually. Happens to you all the time.

 

[KalMart]

The smart person in this conversation (i.e. me) walking away actually. Happens to you all the time.

Alrighty. Don't trip over your own ego (i.e. again) on the way out. It's got enough bruises as it is.


Seriously...with that movie that was SR, how much more of a difference do you really think the best marketing campaign ever would have made? And how would people not feel deceived...within the opening weekend...after seeing what they thought was going to be a wild ride? Think of how much more would have been spent on marketing for this movie. Were Speed Racer and Watchmen victims of their own marketing?

Remember the whole The Professional/The Specialist fiasco?

 

[FlawlessVictory]

I'm sorry but I really can't buy into this whole marketing is part of what doomed SR. Like Kalmart has pointed out, there really was nothing that exciting to market. Superman doesn't even physically fight anyone in the movie. And in the commercials and trailers I saw, I always saw the plane and bullet scenes("big"/"exciting" moments in the film) . What was left out that could have been marketed? More scenes of Lex staring at the crystals?

 

[FlawlessVictory]

^Ah, I see, kind of. LOL Yea, all this legal talk definitely leaves me scratching my head.