Sequels Superman 2-who do you want to direct?

[skruloos]

did you actualy like Hannibal.

I thought it was crap

Many critics also thought it was awful

I did actually and much more than Red Dragon. Hannibal was better shot, better designed, and better acted. It was a beautiful movie that really set itself apart from Silence of the Lambs, which IMO could not be topped.

The only thing lacking was the script. Not even Ted Tally could have saved that book though.

 

[Weadazoid]

wow I geuss you really like Gore for the sake of Gore.


Personaly I found myself laughing at the general ridiculousness of most of it

Feeding Ray Liota his own brains was soooooooooooo far over the top didn't like it not a bit.

 

[explode7]

^ I prefer saw or maybe hostel?

 

[Superman \S/]

Red Dragon was great also.

 

[Superman \S/]

^ I prefer saw or maybe hostel?

Saw and Saw 2.

 

[explode7]

^ Or how about Kill BIll Vol2. MUHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!Top that will ya.

 

[skruloos]

wow I geuss you really like Gore for the sake of Gore.


Personaly I found myself laughing at the general ridiculousness of most of it

Feeding Ray Liota his own brains was soooooooooooo far over the top didn't like it not a bit.

Yes. That was the point. It was grand guignol. It was gothic romanticism at it's best. I mean, the script is already a twisted love story encompassing grisly murders. Scott juxtaposed the beauty of the love story and Italy with the carnage and Lecter's almost complacent treatment of the subject. I'd much rather have that then something by-the-numbers and pedestrian.

Also, if I like Gore for the sake of Gore then Hannibal wouldn't be at the top of my list. Movies like Saw, Saw II, House of 1000 corpses, and Hostel would be up there. Hannibal treated the subject matter like a dark comedy and crafted a strange love affair. It certainly wasn't gore for the sake of gore. Silence of the Lambs had its fair share of gore too. Feeding a guy his own brain or stripping off someone else's face and wearing it. Both seem pretty disgusting to me.

 

[Mr. Socko]

We start out with who should direct the next Superman movie to our favorite gore movies.







L.........O............L

 

[Superman \S/]

^ Or how about Kill BIll Vol2. MUHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!Top that will ya.

I like the first Kill Bill alot more.

 

[BrollySupersj]

First Kill Bill sucks BUT the second is good. Know lets back on topic with Superman and leave Ninja chicks who wear crappy yellow suites for later shall we?

 

[Mr. Socko]

Yes, I just hate Kill Bill in general.

That gives me an idea, Quentin for director of Superman 2 lol

 

[SolidSnakeMGS]

You know what they call a whopper on Krypton?

 

[Superman \S/]

Um no?

 

[That-Guy]

A Whopper would simply be a Whopper... but they wouldn't have a Quarter Pounder with Cheese because a society as advanced as Krypton would most deifnitely use the metric system. Therefore, they'd call it something like "Soy/Ground Beef Composite With Cheese."

 

[Cinemaman]

luckly i saved it so i can show people the horror!


1. Krypton doesn’t explode. Instead it’s a Naboo rip-off overrun
by robot soldiers, walking war machines, and civil war (can you say,
Star Wars: Episode I?). Jor-El is literally
the king of Krypton and leader of the Kryptonian Senate (thus Superman
is a prince), and he and Lara send Kal-El to Earth because he is "the One"
whom a prophecy states will save
Krypton from destruction (rip-off of The Matrix). The villains, Jor-El’s
evil brother and nephew Kata-Zor and Ty-Zor, take Jor-El prisoner and send
probe pods out to find and kill the
baby Kal-El. 14 years later, Lara and her shell-less turtle servant Taga
(shades of Jar Jar Binks) are found by Ty-Zor, and Lara gets tortured to death.
2. Superman’s costume is a living entity housed in a can, and it climbs onto
him when he needs it. He first discovers it in a closet when he’s 14 (Jor-El
visited Earth and picked the Kents
out to be Kal-El’s new parents, leaving them his picture, some S-shield metal
pieces signifying the virtues Kal-El must represent, and the costume), and the
costume rips his clothes off and
stuffs him into itself. So teen Clark is flying around in a suit that’s way
too big for him.
3. Lex Luthor is an evil CIA agent obsessed with UFO phenomena.
When Superman reveals himself to the world, Luthor demands that the
government allow him to hunt
Superman down and kill him.
The government refuses, so Luthor allies himself with the evil
Kryptonians out to kill Kal-El…because Luthor himself is an evil
Kryptonian, working undercover as a
human to set up an invasion of Earth!
4. All the Kryptonians get into airborne kung-fu fights straight out of
The Matrix. Even Luthor gets in on the act at the end of the script.
5. An aerial kung-fu fight between Superman and Ty-Zor results in Superman
being lured into a trap: Lois is drowning in a tank filled with
kryptonite. (This begs the question of how there can be kryptonite when
Krypton didn’t even explode, but….) Superman is given a choice: save
her and die from radiation poisoning in the act, or stand by and watch her
drown. So he goes in, saves her, and dies. Jor-El magically senses Superman’s
death from across the galaxy, commits hara-kiri
with a rock he sharpens in his prison cell, goes to Heaven, and talks Superman
into coming back to life so he can fulfill the prophecy of saving Krypton from
its civil war. So Superman’s soul returns to
his body, and he proceeds to trash Ty-Zor and his cronies. And at the end of
the film, Superman flies off in a rocket to save Krypton (which is where the second
film is planned to take place).
6. A dialogue scene at The Daily Planet implies that Jimmy Olsen—a horny skirt-chaser
in the comic books—is gay, as Abrams describes him as "effeminate" and Perry White rags
on him for having a boyfriend.

I read that all these ideas (also the last idea) had John Peters.

And McG also wanted kung-fu fight for Superman.

Ratner wanted Krypton to stay alive.

Other ideas were also from Abrams.

 

[Weadazoid]

I think a large part of the problem with alot of the new superman ideas from the late 90's was they felt for whatever misguided reason there was need to reinvent Superman.


We should all be gald that Singer vision really didn' reinvent him in anyway so much and that he decided what was really neededwas to go back to the first 2 films and draw from them

I think part of the reinvent idea came out of what Burton did for batman, but really Superman is oh so different. He needs to have the classic unfirom, with no armor no wierd suit in a can, I mean all of that was for the reinvent and thank god the WB never actualy green lighted any of it.

DC fans may hate to hear this but I think Marvel films had alot to do with this recent idea that the character doesn't need to be that reinvented, I mean Spiderman doesn't have Armor, and his gear is an exact replication of the comics so why shouldn't Superman have that same feel.

 

[That-Guy]

Yeah, those Abrams/McG/Peters/Ratner/Burton Superman ideas were HORRIBLE, whether you're talking about the Superman Lives project of the 90's or the "reinvention" of Superman from a few years back. I feel bad for Kevin Smith because apparently, in his original "Superman Lives" draft, he stayed very faithful to the comic books before Peters went medieval on it and forced him to add giant spiders and polar bears and such. Does anyone know if a copy of Smith's pre-Peters script exist online somewhere? I'd be interested in reading it and seeing what could have been.

I think the biggest problem right now with adaptations right now is this... Hollywood has such a complete lack of originality these days that they're going back and remaking everything, only they don't want to be accused of rehashing the past, so they feel a need to "reinvent" everything. That can work some of the time if it is a story that isn't all that particularly memorable or iconic. But Superman? You can't GET anymore iconic than that. EVERYONE knows Krypton is supposed to be destroyed. EVERYONE knows Lex Luthor is 100% human.

While it may have been interesting to see a new origin style Superman movie, I think we all can agree that there's also a good chance that it would have felt old and tired. I mean, Donner already nailed this perfectly, and whether you're talking about pre-Crisis or post-Crisis Superman, let's face it... the origins are similar enough that they really wouldn't have felt that different. The only reason Nolan's reboot of Batman worked was because Burton's original Batman film didn't delve nearly as deep into his origins as it should have. It still left a lot of things up to speculation. What kind of mental anguish did his childhood trauma cause him? Did he make the decision to fight crime right then and there, or did it take years of wandering aimlessly until he found his purpose? Where did he get all of his training? How did he gain such detective skills? Where did he learn to build all of these fantastic gadgets and vehicles? Those of us who read the comics know, obviously... and I suppose anyone with a brain could figure it out... but its still better to actually see these things take shape onscreen. It gives a sense of completion instead of sitting there wondering if all of these scenes were filmed but wound up on the cutting room floor just so Burton could give Nicholson maximum screentime.

 

[Weadazoid]

Yeah, those Abrams/McG/Peters/Ratner/Burton Superman ideas were HORRIBLE, whether you're talking about the Superman Lives project of the 90's or the "reinvention" of Superman from a few years back. I feel bad for Kevin Smith because apparently, in his original "Superman Lives" draft, he stayed very faithful to the comic books before Peters went medieval on it and forced him to add giant spiders and polar bears and such. Does anyone know if a copy of Smith's pre-Peters script exist online somewhere? I'd be interested in reading it and seeing what could have been.

I think the biggest problem right now with adaptations right now is this... Hollywood has such a complete lack of originality these days that they're going back and remaking everything, only they don't want to be accused of rehashing the past, so they feel a need to "reinvent" everything. That can work some of the time if it is a story that isn't all that particularly memorable or iconic. But Superman? You can't GET anymore iconic than that. EVERYONE knows Krypton is supposed to be destroyed. EVERYONE knows Lex Luthor is 100% human.

While it may have been interesting to see a new origin style Superman movie, I think we all can agree that there's also a good chance that it would have felt old and tired. I mean, Donner already nailed this perfectly, and whether you're talking about pre-Crisis or post-Crisis Superman, let's face it... the origins are similar enough that they really wouldn't have felt that different. The only reason Nolan's reboot of Batman worked was because Burton's original Batman film didn't delve nearly as deep into his origins as it should have. It still left a lot of things up to speculation. What kind of mental anguish did his childhood trauma cause him? Did he make the decision to fight crime right then and there, or did it take years of wandering aimlessly until he found his purpose? Where did he get all of his training? How did he gain such detective skills? Where did he learn to build all of these fantastic gadgets and vehicles? Those of us who read the comics know, obviously... and I suppose anyone with a brain could figure it out... but its still better to actually see these things take shape onscreen. It gives a sense of completion instead of sitting there wondering if all of these scenes were filmed but wound up on the cutting room floor just so Burton could give Nicholson maximum screentime.

I agree with you 100% that guy I feel bad for kevin as well, it seemed he had some pretty good ideas, and I liked the fact he wanted to bring in Brainack stragiht away.

I find it oh so hillarious that Peters didn't know who Kal El was.... nor did he know that Krypton blew up. Supermans robotic guards.. COME ON

 

[Dr. Fate]

I'd want this guy to direct

 

[That-Guy]

I agree with you 100% that guy I feel bad for kevin as well, it seemed he had some pretty good ideas, and I liked the fact he wanted to bring in Brainack stragiht away.

I find it oh so hillarious that Peters didn't know who Kal El was.... nor did he know that Krypton blew up. Supermans robotic guards.. COME ON

Yeah, well... Peters might be the biggest moron in Hollywood. And in a land populated by Michael Bay, Chris Columbus and Paul Walker, that's saying a lot.

 

[Showtime]

Yeah, well... Peters might be the biggest moron in Hollywood. And in a land populated by Michael Bay, Chris Columbus and Paul Walker, that's saying a lot.

Heh Heh...Paul Walker.

 

[Weadazoid]

Yeah, well... Peters might be the biggest moron in Hollywood. And in a land populated by Michael Bay, Chris Columbus and Paul Walker, that's saying a lot.

the thing that is hardest for me tobeleive is this guy Peters actualy had a big hand in Batman...

I mean... I guess that explains Jokers dance number

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

You couldn't resist it, could you? Unbreakable's realistic feel "put the supposed realism of the X-Men movies and Batman Begins to shame" because it was SUPPOSED to be more realistic. Shayamalan was making a movie about a regular guy in the real world who finds out that superhero myth isn't just a work of fiction. Batman Begins and X-Men were placed in a real world type setting as well, but both film franchises were attempting to adhere to a separate world that exists in comic books. There is no Gotham City in the real world. In the real world, the Government is not having debates about what to do with mutants (well, maybe George W. Bush is). Nolan and Singer, while taking some liberties, were attempting to adapt largely unrealistic comic book stories and make them as real and relatable as possible while still staying true to the source material (although I'm sure that you didn't feel they did that). Shayamalan was creating an original, human phenomenon drama based on comic book and superhero mythology but was not actually confined to the guidelines of a typical movie based on a comic book. They're two completely different things and all three films, in my opinion (and many other people's as well) are all very well-made pictures.

I felt that Batman Begins stayed pretty close to the source material and was a very good movie. X-Men is a completely different other story though! You'll be shocked to know that the biggest problem I had, with the first one especially, is the fact that half of the actors were miscast, the story was pure silliness (IMHO Spider-Man is a more simplistic character, and story so his storylines can be sillier) the action was very poorly directed, and (This is mostly the studio's fault but HellBoy and The Blade films had lower budgets than both X-films and still looked good) the movie looked cheap.

Let me be honest: Personally I don't want all comicbook movies to be realistic like some people do and I for one wanted the X-Men movies to be better and more fantasic movies than they are. That being said, I don't rate movies by how close they stay to the comics I rate them based on how good they are to me, period. To me some of Singers idea's just screamed, I DON'T HAVE AN IMAGENATION!!! thats why I think that this new Superman movie is doomed to be slightly above adverage like X-Men or FF, or still not good enough, like X2. So I guess I don't totally agree with "many people"

I hope that I am sorely mistaken about Superman Returns. I hope that the film rocks the casbah and that I have to come into a Superman review thread and bow before it's movie greatness.

Yes That-Guy! I couldn't resist coming into this thread and saying that Bryan Singer and Christopher Nolan are less than perfect directors! You really nailed it

BTW I think that Nolan is a very fine director and I liked most of the X-Men movies. Excuse me if I have different standards than you.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

First Kill Bill sucks BUT the second is good. Know lets back on topic with Superman and leave Ninja chicks who wear crappy yellow suites for later shall we?

I liked both movies.

 

[SolidSnakeMGS]

I liked them both, but the second one was so much better, which was a surprise.

I was completely wrong about both KB movies beforehand. I had about a million reasons why they would fail, but they certainly didn't.