World SUPERMAN: Safe Haven for Those Who Demand More from

[Herr Logan]

Safe Haven for Those Who Demand More
From
SUPERMAN​

This thread is a spin-off of the original ‘Safe Haven for Those Who Demand More’ from the Misc. Comics Films forum. That thread was open to the discussion of all superhero properties, and I have branched out into several property-specific ones so we can better keep track of people’s posts and have more linear and organized discussions about each superhero property.

Listed below are several posts links from the original Haven that pertain to the subject of this particular thread. It is not a complete list, and anyone who wants to link or re-post something they thought was interesting is welcome to do so.
I recommend reading these posts before posting your own ideas, but it’s not a requirement.
I ask that while people can respectfully point it out, they not act harshly when a user makes a new post that contains material that is similar to what has already been posted in either the original Haven or this particular thread.

This thread, like its predecessor, is dedicated to the brainstorming and discussion of ideas pertaining to how faithful and optimally entertaining superhero movie adaptations could have, or still could, be made. This is also a place for analyzing what has come before and how that could be a basis for ideal film adaptations of the various superhero properties we know and love, more closely based on the source material. The topic of this thread is Superman.

I think certain movies already made could be taken as a basis for fully faithful adaptations, as in a large portion of a particular movie could be left mostly the way it is with specific alterations to what held that movie back from being better. Even some of the obvious changes to the various mythos could be used to enhance the story or execution of an adaptation that could still be considered faithful by discriminating, analytical and demanding fans. If there hasn’t been a movie made of the superhero(es) discussed in this thread, then ignore the last two sentences.
I want to discuss the theoretical possibilities present in both the original source material and the existing adaptations, and how those could be put into new productions that completely nail both the "spirit" and the essential details of these mythologies. Plots, script, character traits, costumes, even casting decisions are open for discussion. This is ultimately for the purpose of creative discussions for their own sake, although I would be delighted if it inspired high-quality, faithful fan scripts beings written (Dragon has written some excellent Spider-Man screenplays, for example).

All other non-comics media are valid topics as well (live action and animated TV series, video games, etc.). Again, it's fine to use ideas from existing products (casting, plot elements, dialogue, props/effects, etc.) as a basis or part of an idea for a "new" product if the new product would be significantly more faithful, even though it would be implausible for a rebooted franchise (a la "Batman Begins") to include these same elements in reality; reality is mostly irrelevant here.
It is unlikely that these ideas will lead to a better movie being made; not unless one of the thread participants ends up being a big-time producer or someone important in the business reads this thread. This is for us, the fans. We spend a good deal of time on the Hype, and it really doesn't accomplish much in terms of tangible results anyway. That's okay, since the point of this forum, presumably, is for the purpose of imparting information, critiquing superhero products, and discussing ideas. This is for people who are intelligent, imaginative, and passionate and have ideas to share conforming to the stated topic.


Ground Rules:

• If you believe that the movie adaptations already made are perfect or good enough and do not need revision or analysis, then you have nothing to contribute to this thread, so be on your way and don’t intrude where you have nothing to offer. Do not waste our time with conformist platitudes. Do not come in here and defend film decisions that are considered flaws by contributing posters, unless you have another aspect in mind that does need changing and post an equal or greater portion of text discussing a criticism or suggesting an idea for an existing or hypothetical product that is very faithful to the source material.

• We’re here to talk amongst ourselves, and anyone who disagrees with the spirit of this thread is in no way obligated to read any of the content herein or reply. Any of the behavior I described above that occurs here is trolling, pure and simple. This thread isn’t about argument and hostility. The only personal criticism that should occur is that which is directed toward the producers (meaning anyone involved in the production in any way) of preexisting superhero products, and even that should be kept reasonably limited, since everyone who truly belongs in this thread is assumed to have some level of disagreement with said producers, sometimes to the point of resentment. We need not spend excessive time on blaming them for their failings, but don’t hold back your true feelings on those screw-ups either. Disagreement between rule-abiding posters is fine. Just keep it civil and within the guidelines. Or else.
  
  
• Nobody is allowed to use terms like “fanboy,” “nerd,” “purist,” “hater,” or anything like that in a derogatory manner toward other posters or comic fans in general in this thread. The word "whining" and the like-- unless used with regard to a character in a movie, comic book or TV show (ex. “Spider-Man was quite the whiner...”)—is forbidden, as is “nitpicking,” and anything else intended to bully anyone into complacency and acceptance of existing products. The phrase “impossible standards” and anything to the effect of “movies and comics are different mediums, so there have to be changes,” “the general audience will not accept the same things comics fans will,” and “people want to see realism,” if not accompanied by a massive amount of faithful and potentially marketable ideas meant to compensate or work around these alleged “facts,” are also strictly forbidden.

• It is okay to suggest minor deviations from the source material for this topic, as long as the majority of the ideas you put forth—or are simply replying to and agree with—are consistent with the source material and/or significantly more faithful than previous existing adaptations.

• Do not belittle classic superhero or villain costumes. Do not use the word "panties" to describe those shorts that some heroes wear over their tights. It's fine to describe a costume as "tights" as long as they actually are and you aren't belittling anything. It's not okay to use the word "Spandex" to describe a costume from the comics that is not actually made of it, unless you're suggesting that Spandex, Lycra, etc. be used in the production of the movie, or maybe suggesting Neoprene or something else over it. Using the term "gay" in any derogatory sense whatsoever in this thread will result in an immediate report to a moderator, without warning, whether or not you've read this.

Again, it’s okay to disagree with a person’s criticism of a movie if you have another one to share, but do not post remarks about an existing or real-life upcoming film if you have no significant complaints about any of the productions being discussed.

I hope the guidelines are clear. Everyone is welcome to contribute or comment, as long as they follow the rules and don’t make any criticisms that are not relevant to the thread. You either belong here or you don’t, and that choice is up to you , so have respect enough to let the environment herein reflect the title of this thread.
Anyone who violates the rules or causes trouble will be promptly reported.

Thank you for your cooperation.


It is recommended, but not strictly required, that you supply a unique title at the beginning of each new post, especially when it isn’t a reply to another’s post. This will help in identifying the topic of each new post at a glance and finding specific posts with the Hype’s search engine. You can resend older posts in the appropriate thread and add titles to them.
Examples:

• “Hunter Rider’s Iron Man concept #1”
• “Herr Logan’s ‘Batman: Dark Knight Detective’ video game,”
• “Everyman’s Captain America movie series concept #1”
• “Zev’s Daredevil TV Show concept”
• “Logan & Zaphod’s Batman movie series concept.”

Welcome to the Safe Haven. Enjoy!


Here are a few posts from the original thread to check out. Make sure to check the quoted portions, as several of these posts are two-for-one deals (which is why so many of mine are here, because I almost always reply to people’s posts and frequently use quotes from other posts). Also, most of these links lead to single post pages, but if you open those pages and click on the thread title link in the upper right corner, it will take you to that post in the full thread, where you can see what came before and afterward. If I’ve confused you and you need help navigating the links, just ask.




Superman Haven Posts

http://www.superherohype.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6351732&postcount=178
http://www.superherohype.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6351853&postcount=180
http://www.superherohype.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6377455&postcount=219
http://www.superherohype.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6780283&postcount=306
http://www.superherohype.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6788244&postcount=321
http://www.superherohype.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6897737&postcount=428



"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man."

--George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman (1903) "Maxims for Revolutionists"

 

[Herr Logan]

In case anyone wants a good argument to use against people who automatically and thoughtlessly shoot down the idea of using a more faithful superhero costume than filmmakers are likely to use, read this post.

It's more or less air-tight, except for the fact that value judgements on these kinds of things are completely subjective. However, If an anti-source material studio apologist states a value judgement as if it has concrete value, then my argument is completely air-tight.

I'm proud of it because it's probably the first time I put that concept together in cogent words that didn't go on for pages and pages of sprawling, tangential text. I guess the secret to relatively succinct and logical posts for me is to be pissed off and succumbing to the effects of Tylenol PM. Weird...

 

[Hunter Rider]

To start off my Superman idea i just wanted to lay the basics
Metropolis in my version would be similar to Washington in Minority Report only with a bit more colour
Superman would be established in Metropolis and already be enemies with Lex Luthor who would be a successful businessman looking to get into politics
No one would know his identity and him and Lois would not be together in any fashion
Villain-wise i intend to use Metallo with Lex(I believe Lex always needs to be there in some fashion)

 

[Herr Logan]

To start off my Superman idea i just wanted to lay the basics
Metropolis in my version would be similar to Washington in Minority Report only with a bit more colour
Superman would be established in Metropolis and already be enemies with Lex Luthor who would be a successful businessman looking to get into politics

Sounds good.

No one would know his identity...

Except for Ma and Pa Kent, right? Out of curiosity, would there be any reference to Lana Lang (the real one, not that 'Smallville' bull$hit)?
Would you feature an origin story or just mention his origin in passing somewhere in the dialogue?

Would there be a Fortress of Solitude? If so, would you throw in that enormous key Superman uses to open up the Fortress?
I know I would.

...and him and Lois would not be together in any fashion

Would there at least be an attraction between them (Lois could be into Superman and not Clark, or both)?

As annoying as love interests usually are in superhero movies, I personally feel it's imperative to at least give a nod to the most iconic super-relationships and flirtations. A few examples include Superman & Lois, Batman & Catwoman (as a flirtation), Spider-Man & Gwen Stacy (& maybe Mary Jane, in a later sequel, if the franchise were to last that long, and Cyclops & Jean Grey (not Wolverine and Jean, ever!).

Also, I feel it's imperative that, again, as annoying as it is in superhero movies to see this as a rule, Lois Lane must be rescued from mortal danger by Superman at least twice in the first movie of a franchise. Why? Because she's the character who started the whole stupid trend. I say stick it with Superman and don't do it in any other superhero movie franchise unless it's essential to a decent plot.

Just my thoughts on the matter. Not trying to be critical, just searching for answers and spouting unwarranted thoughts whenever the opportunity arises.

Villain-wise i intend to use Metallo with Lex(I believe Lex always needs to be there in some fashion)

Well, it practically is his city, right? Unless he's already in the White House, there's no reason not to show Lex scheming against Superman in Metropolis. If he is in the White House, then he should be shown scheming from there. He schemes, Luthor does!


Thanks for posting, Hunter. I look forward to hearing more.

 

[Jakomus]

Okay, I know the rules state that I have no place here if I think the current film incarnation is doing a good job, and I completely agree with that rule, but really i'd only change a few things about Superman Returns. I mean, this is a thread for demanding more, not just wanting something better.

I think Superman needs a better costume. The one used in the film is alright I suppose, but it could easily be better. The neckline shouldn't be so tight. There should be a straight line above the shoulder, so his neck muscles are showing. The collar would be completely covered by the cape attatchment, so the collar doesn't look like a leotard. The trunks need to be a teency bit higher to get rid of Routh's hourglass figure. The boots need to resemble Reeve's in shape, and they need to be a little higher.

Routh's hair should be more like Jim Lee's Superman, the curl would look natural, and Routh's face will appear much more adult looking. His eyebrows could do with a trim.

This manip is pretty similar to what I have in my mind:

 

[Herr Logan]

Okay, I know the rules state that I have no place here if I think the current film incarnation is doing a good job, and I completely agree with that rule, but really i'd only change a few things about Superman Returns.

No, it's perfectly fine to post here if you're satisfied with what you know about a movie and make a suggestion for the improvement of a single aspect. You didn't challenge anyone's criticisms or actively defend the entirety of the production, so there's nothing objectionable about that. If you did challenge a criticism, that would still be okay as long as you supplied a significant criticism of your own.
You're acting inside the rules, and I thank you for observing them.

I mean, this is a thread for demanding more, not just wanting something better.

Well, I probably should have named it "Safe Haven for Those Who Demand Better," because that basically is what I meant by "... Demand More," but I don't think I'll change the titles of the various Safe Haven threads unless three or more people show they want that. I gotta bother a moderator and so forth...
Yeah, anyway, I want more and better, and above all, significantly more faithful adaptations.

I think Superman needs a better costume. The one used in the film is alright I suppose, but it could easily be better. The neckline shouldn't be so tight. There should be a straight line above the shoulder, so his neck muscles are showing. The collar would be completely covered by the cape attatchment, so the collar doesn't look like a leotard. The trunks need to be a teency bit higher to get rid of Routh's hourglass figure. The boots need to resemble Reeve's in shape, and they need to be a little higher.

Routh's hair should be more like Jim Lee's Superman, the curl would look natural, and Routh's face will appear much more adult looking. His eyebrows could do with a trim.

This manip is pretty similar to what I have in my mind:

That picture is much better than the actual movie costume (which I think looks like absolute crap, and Routh looks like he's modelling a bad costume in a Halloween catalogue).

I'd like the belt-line to be even higher. I don't want a Superman who looks like the one on the first season of the show, 'Justice League' (that figure was completely out of control), but I'd like an even more broad-chested look. If not the belt-line, than the chest emblem could be even bigger, or both.

Did you (or whomever did the manip) change the jaw/chin shape or anything else about the head, aside from the hair? If it is, it's definitely an improvement. I'm still not very happy about those eyes (it's right below the eyes, mainly, like he's got bags or something), but the face overall much better. He looks like a real man, and only a teency bit goofy.

Welcome to the Hype, welcome to the Haven, and thanks for posting, Jakomus.

 

[Jakomus]

I'd like the belt-line to be even higher. I don't want a Superman who looks like the one on the first season of the show, 'Justice League' (that figure was completely out of control), but I'd like an even more broad-chested look. If not the belt-line, than the chest emblem could be even bigger, or both.

IMO this belt-line is perfect. I think any higher would just look ridiculous. If the chest emblem was to get too much bigger, we'd have to get rid of it being raised, and I don't want that. I think it's the neckline that will get you the results that you want. It will make his shoulders wider, which would in turn widen the chest. The manip doesn't show that change.

Did you (or whomever did the manip) change the jaw/chin shape or anything else about the head, aside from the hair?

Supersebas morphed the expression and widened the neck.

I'm still not very happy about those eyes (it's right below the eyes, mainly, like he's got bags or something)

That's just the poor picture quality. Routh doesn't usually have bags under his eyes.

Welcome to the Hype, welcome to the Haven, and thanks for posting, Jakomus.

Thanks!

 

[Hunter Rider]

Sounds good.


Except for Ma and Pa Kent, right? Out of curiosity, would there be any reference to Lana Lang (the real one, not that 'Smallville' bull$hit)?
Would you feature an origin story or just mention his origin in passing somewhere in the dialogue?

oh yeah Ma and Pa would know but no one else should find out,i doubt i would use Lana or much of Smallville as the idea im brewing is set in metropolis for story purposes
The origin would be something i would try to use a brief flashback for

Would there be a Fortress of Solitude? If so, would you throw in that enormous key Superman uses to open up the Fortress?
I know I would.

Sorry,my story idea focuses around Lex,espionage and the corridors of power so i don't see the FOS fitting in

Would there at least be an attraction between them (Lois could be into Superman and not Clark, or both)?

As annoying as love interests usually are in superhero movies, I personally feel it's imperative to at least give a nod to the most iconic super-relationships and flirtations. A few examples include Superman & Lois, Batman & Catwoman (as a flirtation), Spider-Man & Gwen Stacy (& maybe Mary Jane, in a later sequel, if the franchise were to last that long, and Cyclops & Jean Grey (not Wolverine and Jean, ever!).

Definitely an attraction as their relationship is quintisential,but since this is a movie with an established Superman i think her fondness of Supes will have grown into admiration and she is starting to have feelings for Clark

Also, I feel it's imperative that, again, as annoying as it is in superhero movies to see this as a rule, Lois Lane must be rescued from mortal danger by Superman at least twice in the first movie of a franchise. Why? Because she's the character who started the whole stupid trend. I say stick it with Superman and don't do it in any other superhero movie franchise unless it's essential to a decent plot.

I agree,i already have an idea of where to fit one in,a sequence that see's Lois covering a "Luther running for Senate press conference" that is hijacked

Just my thoughts on the matter. Not trying to be critical, just searching for answers and spouting unwarranted thoughts whenever the opportunity arises.

Always interested in input

Well, it practically is his city, right? Unless he's already in the White House, there's no reason not to show Lex scheming against Superman in Metropolis. If he is in the White House, then he should be shown scheming from there. He schemes, Luthor does!

Indeed!the master manipulator

Thanks for posting, Hunter. I look forward to hearing more.

Sorry it took me so long to reply,more soon

 

[Herr Logan]

oh yeah Ma and Pa would know but no one else should find out,i doubt i would use Lana or much of Smallville as the idea im brewing is set in metropolis for story purposes
The origin would be something i would try to use a brief flashback for

Ah.

Just to make this perfectly clear, I wasn't in any way suggesting that any content or themes from the WB show 'Smallville' influence your story ideas. That show is trash and does not properly represent the Superman mythos.
I meant Smallville as in the town in the DC Universe, presented in the comics. You probably knew that, but I just want to make sure.

Sorry,my story idea focuses around Lex,espionage and the corridors of power so i don't see the FOS fitting in

The Fortress of Solitude has corridors of power. Lots of 'em.

Definitely an attraction as their relationship is quintisential,but since this is a movie with an established Superman i think her fondness of Supes will have grown into admiration and she is starting to have feelings for Clark

Sounds good.

I agree,i already have an idea of where to fit one in,a sequence that see's Lois covering a "Luther running for Senate press conference" that is hijacked

Excellent.

Always interested in input

Usually interested in giving it.

Indeed!the master manipulator

When he's done scheming for the day, he goes to sleep and dreams about scheming some more!

Dream schemes!!

Sorry it took me so long to reply,more soon

It's cool. Looking forward to it.

Thanks for posting, Hunter.

 

[Herr Logan]

I'd like to throw a "Yeah, that's right" out in reference to this post. This guy took the time to write an essay, the thesis of which is essentially that a movie representation of Superman should and could "realistically" look bigger and more muscular than the new Movie!Superman they cast in 'Superman Returns' actually is. What does he get in response? That Routh is signed on as Superman (because the orignal poster clearly obviously know that, right?) and one person telling him that if he had his way, the original poster wouldn't be allowed to see this movie (post #24). Priceless.

I likes my movie Supermen like I likes my comics Supermen-- looking like Superman, dammit!

 

[Jakomus]

I'd like to throw a "Yeah, that's right" out in reference to this post. This guy took the time to write an essay, the thesis of which is essentially that a movie representation of Superman should and could "realistically" look bigger and more muscular than the new Movie!Superman they cast in 'Superman Returns' actually is. What does he get in response? That Routh is signed on as Superman (because the orignal poster clearly obviously know that, right?) and one person telling him that if he had his way, the original poster wouldn't be allowed to see this movie (post #24). Priceless.

I likes my movie Supermen like I likes my comics Supermen-- looking like Superman, dammit!

Although I do believe Brandon Routh is large enough, that post is a very intelligent, thought out proposal. But, as usual, they do not agree so it is discounted.

 

[Jakomus]

I'm curious, Herr Logan. What do you think about Superman: The Movie?

 

[Herr Logan]

I'm curious, Herr Logan. What do you think about Superman: The Movie?

That's the wrong movie to ask me about, probably, since that has more nostalgic value for me than probably anything else in the world. I still tear up when I hear that theme song (this will not happen while watching 'Superman Returns' if they use that music, or at least not for the same reasons). That movie was what got me into superheroes in general.

I'd say it's very badly edited (in that it drags on far too long without anything happening in several places) and the deus ex machina ending (reversing the Earth's rotation) is an embarrassment to superhero fiction, but I think a large portion of the movie is well done and it does Superman justice.

Christopher Reeve was great in his role, and when I look at pictures of him, I see Superman. When I look at pictures of Brandon Routh in his costume, I see a goofy Halloween costume model trying valiantly just to keep a straight face.

 

[Jakomus]

That's the wrong movie to ask me about, probably, since that has more nostalgic value for me than probably anything else in the world. I still tear up when I hear that theme song (this will not happen while watching 'Superman Returns' if they use that music, or at least not for the same reasons). That movie was what got me into superheroes in general.

I'd say it's very badly edited (in that it drags on far too long without anything happening in several places) and the deus ex machina ending (reversing the Earth's rotation) is an embarrassment to superhero fiction, but I think a large portion of the movie is well done and it does Superman justice.

Christopher Reeve was great in his role, and when I look at pictures of him, I see Superman. When I look at pictures of Brandon Routh in his costume, I see a goofy Halloween costume model trying valiantly just to keep a straight face.

Have you seen the Superman Returns trailers?

 

[Herr Logan]

Have you seen the Superman Returns trailers?

I've seen a few, yes.

In the last one I saw, which prominently featured Lex Luthor in all his maniacal glory, they never gave a full body shot of Superman. We could see that pathetic, undersized "S"-shield, but not that skimpy, low-riding bathing suit; at least not a straight shot of it. Gee, I wonder why the trailer editors would want to hide that.

 

[AmbientFire]

I had this idea a long time ago about the Fortress of Solitude that maybe it wasn't a physical place that Superman travels to but kind of like a state of mind or a "place" of knowledge within him that he finds through tapping in to the deepest recess of his own mind - i realized it is very The Matrix-like - kind of like he opens up his mind and taps into the Matrix (and in this case the matrix would be the Fortress of Solitude and it's vast storage of Kryptonian history and knowledge) - and of course it conflicts with comics continuity heavily, but i've always been attracted by the spiritual potential of Superman.

I dunno if this is the right thread to discuss it but for me Brandon Routh's size - or lack thereof as it really is - is kind of appealing to me in the sense that it makes Superman so seemingly ordinary even though he contains all of these insane powers. I've always kind of liked the idea that there is infinitely more to a person than what you see, no matter how ordinary they seem on the outside. But again, that is only my personal opinion.

Ultimately, again, I would like to see more of Superman's mental and spiritual potential in movies and the comics than i have seen so far. Sure, Superman can block a bullet fired by a gunman with his chest, or dodge it if he wants to - But what i would LOVE to see is Superman just staring down the guy, and that would make the guy drop his gun even before he fires a single shot just because he feels the weight of Superman's nature upon him. I dunno if that makes any sense, but i would like to see more of that kind of thing.

 

[Herr Logan]

I had this idea a long time ago about the Fortress of Solitude that maybe it wasn't a physical place that Superman travels to but kind of like a state of mind or a "place" of knowledge within him that he finds through tapping in to the deepest recess of his own mind - i realized it is very The Matrix-like - kind of like he opens up his mind and taps into the Matrix (and in this case the matrix would be the Fortress of Solitude and it's vast storage of Kryptonian history and knowledge) - and of course it conflicts with comics continuity heavily, but i've always been attracted by the spiritual potential of Superman.

I dunno if this is the right thread to discuss it but for me Brandon Routh's size - or lack thereof as it really is - is kind of appealing to me in the sense that it makes Superman so seemingly ordinary even though he contains all of these insane powers. I've always kind of liked the idea that there is infinitely more to a person than what you see, no matter how ordinary they seem on the outside. But again, that is only my personal opinion.

Ultimately, again, I would like to see more of Superman's mental and spiritual potential in movies and the comics than i have seen so far. Sure, Superman can block a bullet fired by a gunman with his chest, or dodge it if he wants to - But what i would LOVE to see is Superman just staring down the guy, and that would make the guy drop his gun even before he fires a single shot just because he feels the weight of Superman's nature upon him. I dunno if that makes any sense, but i would like to see more of that kind of thing.

By definition, Superman does not resemble a normal man, physically or otherwise. Historically he's consistently been a very large, broad-shouldered man who should probably be portrayed as only being able to keep his secret identity through capable acting talent (as in the character himself, not just the actor playing him). The way Christopher Reeve played Superman, it was at least remotely believable that Lois and everyone else wouldn't suspect him, since he behaved completely differently. The secret identity thing is never going to be truly believable, though, so I only expect something at the level of 'Superman: The Movie' and its sequels. The people in those movies were portrayed as comically ignorant (not just in the latter two), and that's basically what people in the DC universe are like, from what I can tell.

You can share your ideas about a spiritual/mental Fortress of Solitude here, as long as you follow the rest of the rules (ex: don't defend against criticisms of 'Superman Returns' without supplying a significant one yourself; don't argue vehemently that Superman should look like an average person simply because they happened to cast an actor who isn't bulky enough; etc.) and try to keep the majority of your concepts' components faithful to the comics. When you think about it, Superman has a lot of room to work with in terms of what's "faithful to the comics," since there have been so many different incarnations over the years with so many different things happening. If you mixed it up between any Pre-Crisis version and the Post-Crisis version, for example, that would still count.
I never really collected Superman comics (though that character was the one who got me hooked on the superhero genre), so my personal knowledge of continuity is limited.

Anyway, I don't mean to come off as tyrannical or hostile when I mention the rules; I'm just suspicious and on edge of late because I've had two trolls show up in two other Safe Haven threads in the past week or so, one of them being a wolf in cat's clothing (the regular contributors in my threads can't be described as "sheep," since I reserve that word for a different kind of poster). If you're not that kind of person, try not take it personally. I just have to keep my guard up, because some people don't take the opening post seriously or just don't read it all the way through.

What you're saying with that last paragraph (a gunman dropping his weapon after merely looking at Superman glaring at him) sounds to me that Superman, when in costume, is be portrayed as a majestic being whose presence intimidates even hardened criminals at a mere glance. I really like that idea. I see Superman who scares criminals (not to the extent that the Batman does, obviously, since Batman is intentionally all about the fear and Superman isn't known for his brutality) and inspires everyone else.

As for the Mental Fortress thing, would this be a kind of Kryptonian meditation ritual or technique? If so, he'd have to learn about it through some means in the real world (fictional real world, I mean). On the other hand, he could find himself in that state by accident while sleeping, or something to that effect.
If I personally were to implement this idea, I'd have him learn about the meditation ritual through a psychic message recorded in one of the crystals in his spaceship. I'd also have the crystals allow the technique (as in he can't do it without one of them) and let him mentally enter another, smaller plane of existence where the history of Krypton is there for the learning, and Kryptonians have the limited ability to communicate with their departed loved ones. The landscape of this place would resemble the Fortress in the previous Superman films (all crystaline and icy).

That's just my vision of it. It's your idea, so you construct it however you wish.

Welcome to the Haven.

 

[Herr Logan]

Singer calls superman his first "Chick flick"


Un. Fecking. Forgivable.

Hunter Rider, while I don't believe in limiting choices to "either/or" or reinforcing the reaction formation defense mechanism (that's when a person takes a behavior they don't like and switch to the opposite extreme), I have no doubt when I say that if it was a binary choice between what you said about Superman and Lois "not being together in any fashion" and this love triangle, romance-focus bull$hit, I'd go with the former.


If I had to pick between Superman and Spider-Man and say which character's saga could potentially be described as a "love story," if one of them had to be labeled as such, I'd pick Superman, easily. This is only because Superman doesn't have as much going on between his ears as Spider-Man (in terms of uncertainty of himself and questions about morality... I'm not suggesting that Superman is stupid, I just think he warrants less thought bubbles, or in this case, voiceover monologue) and is somewhat more difficult to write an appealling, riveting story for. Even so, there's no excuse for boiling the Man of Steel down into something that could ever be called a "chick flick."
This is one of the things that is so horrible about the show 'Smallville' (a problem that is closely tied to the fact that the writing just being unspeakably bad, but even if it is was anywhere from mediocre to good, it's not an acceptable tone to use... yeah, let's spend years dwelling on the brewing relationship between Clark and Lana so he can just fly off and leave after high school!).

I would actually categorize 'Spider-Man 2' as a "chick flick." Yes, the choices made were that bad. Thanks for following Raimi's perfect example of how not to make a film based on a classic superhero story, Bryan. I know this wasn't a decision made to make money, since a movie about Superman will sell no matter what. This was a conscious, personal choice made by Singer or a screenwriter or someone else. This is someone's idea of pursuing an artistic aspiration. Great job, guys. You really know how to push the envelope when it comes to dissappointing discerning superhero fans who know the difference between sappy, maudlin dramas you can see on TV any day of the week and a big-budget movie about one of the most globally recognizable icons in human history.

 

[Jakomus]

Singer calls superman his first "Chick flick"


Un. Fecking. Forgivable.

Hunter Rider, while I don't believe in limiting choices to "either/or" or reinforcing the reaction formation defense mechanism (that's when a person takes a behavior they don't like and switch to the opposite extreme), I have no doubt when I say that if it was a binary choice between what you said about Superman and Lois "not being together in any fashion" and this love triangle, romance-focus bull$hit, I'd go with the latter.


If I had to pick between Superman and Spider-Man and say which character's saga could potentially be described as a "love story," if one of them had to be labeled as such, I'd pick Superman, easily. This is only because Superman doesn't have as much going on between his ears as Spider-Man (in terms of uncertainty of himself andquestions about morality... I'm not suggesting that Superman is stupid, I just think he warrants less thought bubbles, or in this case, voiceover monologue) and is somewhat more difficult to write an appealling, riveting story for. Even so, there's no excuse for boiling the Man of Steel down into something that could ever be called a "chick flick."
This is one of the things that is so horrible about the show 'Smallville' (a problem that is closely tied to the fact that the writing just being unspeakably bad, but even if it is was anywhere from mediocre to good, it's not an acceptable tone to use... yeah, let's spend years dwelling on the brewing relationship between Clark and Lana so he can just fly off and leave after high school!).

I would actually categorize 'Spider-Man 2' as a "chick flick." Yes, the choices made were that bad. Thanks for following Raimi's perfect example of how not to make a film based on a classic superhero story, Bryan. I know this wasn't a decision made to make money, since a movie about Superman will sell no matter what. This was a conscious, personal choice made by Singer or a screenwriter or someone else. This is someone's idea of pursuing an artistic aspiration. Great job, guys. You really know how to push the envelope when it comes to dissappointing discerning superhero fans who know the difference between sappy, maudlin dramas you can see on TV any day of the week and a big-budget movie about one of the most globally recognizable icons in human history.

I've actually read the entire interview where Singer said it was a chick flick. He doesn't mean it in the way you interpreted it.

 

[Herr Logan]

I've actually read the entire interview where Singer said it was a chick flick. He doesn't mean it in the way you interpreted it.

I just don't see how there's a "good" interpretation of that phrase when attributed to an iconic superhero.


NOTE: I made a mistake in the first post about this subject; I said "latter" when I meant to say "former." I've since edited it so it's correct.

 

[AmbientFire]

By definition, Superman does not resemble a normal man, physically or otherwise. Historically he's consistently been a very large, broad-shouldered man who should probably be portrayed as only being able to keep his secret identity through capable acting talent (as in the character himself, not just the actor playing him). The way Christopher Reeve played Superman, it was at least remotely believable that Lois and everyone else wouldn't suspect him, since he behaved completely differently. The secret identity thing is never going to be truly believable, though, so I only expect something at the level of 'Superman: The Movie' and its sequels. The people in those movies were portrayed as comically ignorant (not just in the latter two), and that's basically what people in the DC universe are like, from what I can tell.

You can share your ideas about a spiritual/mental Fortress of Solitude here, as long as you follow the rest of the rules (ex: don't defend against criticisms of 'Superman Returns' without supplying a significant one yourself; don't argue vehemently that Superman should look like an average person simply because they happened to cast an actor who isn't bulky enough; etc.) and try to keep the majority of your concepts' components faithful to the comics. When you think about it, Superman has a lot of room to work with in terms of what's "faithful to the comics," since there have been so many different incarnations over the years with so many different things happening. If you mixed it up between any Pre-Crisis version and the Post-Crisis version, for example, that would still count.
I never really collected Superman comics (though that character was the one who got me hooked on the superhero genre), so my personal knowledge of continuity is limited.

Anyway, I don't mean to come off as tyrannical or hostile when I mention the rules; I'm just suspicious and on edge of late because I've had two trolls show up in two other Safe Haven threads in the past week or so, one of them being a wolf in cat's clothing (the regular contributors in my threads can't be described as "sheep," since I reserve that word for a different kind of poster). If you're not that kind of person, try not take it personally. I just have to keep my guard up, because some people don't take the opening post seriously or just don't read it all the way through.

What you're saying with that last paragraph (a gunman dropping his weapon after merely looking at Superman glaring at him) sounds to me that Superman, when in costume, is be portrayed as a majestic being whose presence intimidates even hardened criminals at a mere glance. I really like that idea. I see Superman who scares criminals (not to the extent that the Batman does, obviously, since Batman is intentionally all about the fear and Superman isn't known for his brutality) and inspires everyone else.

As for the Mental Fortress thing, would this be a kind of Kryptonian meditation ritual or technique? If so, he'd have to learn about it through some means in the real world (fictional real world, I mean). On the other hand, he could find himself in that state by accident while sleeping, or something to that effect.
If I personally were to implement this idea, I'd have him learn about the meditation ritual through a psychic message recorded in one of the crystals in his spaceship. I'd also have the crystals allow the technique (as in he can't do it without one of them) and let him mentally enter another, smaller plane of existence where the history of Krypton is there for the learning, and Kryptonians have the limited ability to communicate with their departed loved ones. The landscape of this place would resemble the Fortress in the previous Superman films (all crystaline and icy).

That's just my vision of it. It's your idea, so you construct it however you wish.

Welcome to the Haven.

Oh, no offense taken at all about the 'to troll or not to troll' issue - i was just expressing my position on the subject (expressing a predominantly positive view towards the upcoming movie is not trolling by default i hope - and if it is, i will shut my mouth about the movie) BUT it may not have been the right place for it, this is a SAFE haven after all.

I REALLY like your idea about having the mental-FOS being activated by crystals, that sounds really 'comic-bookically' (is that a word?) plausible. Not to mention, it presents a device that could fall into the wrong hands heheh... I may be abusing the rules when i throw this question in the mix but, has anybody thought of making a Prequel movie somewhat a la Batman Begins?

- And i'm not talking about turning Smallville into a movie or anything like that - I was just thinking along the lines of a movie that takes the most cherished/recognized aspects of the Superman mythos and traces Clark's path to donning the blue and red (and if i made the movie i would literally have it end with him donning the suit for the first time, possibly with the old fanfare fully developed for the first time in the movie)

Anyways, late night thoughts.

 

[Herr Logan]

Oh, no offense taken at all about the 'to troll or not to troll' issue - i was just expressing my position on the subject (expressing a predominantly positive view towards the upcoming movie is not trolling by default i hope - and if it is, i will shut my mouth about the movie) BUT it may not have been the right place for it, this is a SAFE haven after all.

Expressing a positive view isn't trolling. Arguing against criticism and/or negative views without providing significant criticisms about the same movie or concept is. I know that sounds weird, and I'm aware it may come off to some people as endorsing a "negative only" attitude in these Safe Havens. Still, I firmly believe that better and more faithful movies could be made if the right people just had the will, and there is no progress to be made by simply showering existing, flawed products and their creators with boundless praise.
When I say "flawed," I mean to whatever degree, great or small. Everything has flaws, and if those flaws can be fixed, people should attempt to fix them. Even after those flaws are fixed, more will seem to appear, and then people should fix those as well. Perfection will never be achieved, but it should still be sought, because otherwise people are just denying their better natures and setting themselves up for complete boredom and stagnation.
Anyway, I didn't make these threads with a negative attitude in mind. However, anyone who has negative feelings towards existing products is welcome to talk about it here, to a point. If it's a huge amount of complaining without any suggestions for how it could be improved or redone or whatever. It's all about showing love for the source material and respect for the human imagination. So many people on these boards are devoid of the bare minimum imagination it takes to actually enjoy the comics. So many are also cowards who are insecure with their preference for superheroes, and that's why they don't dare support the idea of anything "unrealistic" making its way into a superhero movie, and will rarely let it go unchallenged when someone so much as asks a question about such decisions being made. Oh noes! Robin was campy in a few Batman incarnations in various media... he can't possibly fit into Christopher Nolan's "realistic" Gotham City, where high-intensity microwaves have no effect on the human body, fresh steam that bursts out of underground pipes isn't very hot, a Kevlar utility harness gets produced with no actual harness (the straps he cut off do not count, as those wouldn't have been of any use either way) and a big-shot mob boss who supposedly runs Gotham's underworld gets caught at the scene of a drug shipment. Everything in that scenario is perfect, and making the Batman's costume less bulky and allowing the Joker to act like the Joker would destroy it all!
That's the kind of bull$hit I've had to put up with, and even in my own Batman thread recently. He dared to defend all that childish pseudoscientific nonsense about microwave emmitters that do nothing but make Dr. Scarecrow's perfectly plausible fear toxin into the air, not coming close to scalding anyone.

That's why I was wary of you, not because you yourself did anything wrong. As long as you follow the rules and bring lots of junk food every time you enter my sanctum, we'll be just fine.

I REALLY like your idea about having the mental-FOS being activated by crystals, that sounds really 'comic-bookically' (is that a word?) plausible. Not to mention, it presents a device that could fall into the wrong hands heheh...

Well of course you like it! I said it, didn't I!?
You should be grateful I even so much as let you live to see the sun slink away from this horrible day like the coward it is!!!


*achem*


Forgive me, for I have not slept, and I had an exam today in a class I need to complete my major that's on a subject I've never been good at.

Seriously, though, thanks. That was just something that came to me at the time, as I'd never considered the idea of the FOS taking place in Superman's mind. That's some imagination right there! If you make sure to throw enough crystaline/arctic imagery into it, it's a very creative new idea that doesn't stray too far from the source material.

I may be abusing the rules when i throw this question in the mix but, has anybody thought of making a Prequel movie somewhat a la Batman Begins?

I don't think that's a caning offense, at first glance, anyway.

- And i'm not talking about turning Smallville into a movie or anything like that -

Damn right!

I was just thinking along the lines of a movie that takes the most cherished/recognized aspects of the Superman mythos and traces Clark's path to donning the blue and red (and if i made the movie i would literally have it end with him donning the suit for the first time, possibly with the old fanfare fully developed for the first time in the movie)

From what it sounds like, I think I personally would not be too excited about that as a movie, but if your basing the concept on viable comics source material (and stays away from 'Smallville' like there was a restraining order on it, which there oughtta be!) I have no problem with you discussing it here. Maybe Hunter Rider will have something meaningful to say about it. That's if he could get his roving-eyed, voyeuristic ass out of his favorite borderline porn thread for 30 minutes and pay me my God damn tribute already!!

*achem*

Bottom line, personal tastes alone aren't grounds for blocking ideas. The defining criteria are whether it strays too far from the comics and/or is too strongly based on other blatantly unfaithful adaptations with insufficient repairs. Feel free to elaborate, even if Hunter chooses to continue to walk his shameful path of sin instead of rejoicing here in my little kingdom. I probably haven't read whatever origin story from the comics you're basing this on, so I'm just in the dark on this, is all.

Anyways, late night thoughts.

Where do you live? Or are you like me and just haven't slept a single minute of last night, making the present time seem the equivalent of being very late at night?

Thanks for posting, man. Keep that imagination rollin'.



P.S.: If this post needs editing because my current state is not very conducive to cogent and correct writing, I shall attend to it soon.

 

[kame-sennin]

I have nothing constructive to add to this thread, but I just watched the HBO first look on Superman Returns and I felt the need to say: I hate that ****ing costume! His cape looks practically black in the night scenes and it pisses me off. He's a goddamn international symbol for hope, justice, and a hole bunch of other good ****, why the hell is he wearing maroon and blue/grey?! Everyone has specific tailor-centric conscerns about this costume, but I feel I've narrowed mine down. It's the goddamn colors. More than the stupid little 'S', more than the swimmer's physique and bikini trunks, and more than those lame, stumpy boots. I. Hate. The. Colors. On. That. Costume.

Vent complete. Sorry if that wasn't very logical or well thought out, but I needed to get that out.

 

[Herr Logan]

I have nothing constructive to add to this thread, but I just watched the HBO first look on Superman Returns and I felt the need to say: I hate that ****ing costume! His cape looks practically black in the night scenes and it pisses me off. He's a goddamn international symbol for hope, justice, and a hole bunch of other good ****, why the hell is he wearing maroon and blue/grey?! Everyone has specific tailor-centric conscerns about this costume, but I feel I've narrowed mine down. It's the goddamn colors. More than the stupid little 'S', more than the swimmer's physique and bikini trunks, and more than those lame, stumpy boots. I. Hate. The. Colors. On. That. Costume.

Vent complete. Sorry if that wasn't very logical or well thought out, but I needed to get that out.

Now that's good venting!

My biggest beefs are still with the bikini trunks the tiny-ass shield, and above all, Brandon Routh's boyish, goofy, completely un-Super face in every God damn photo I've seen!!...


...but yeah, them colors is just wrong.

 

[Herr Logan]

So, I saw 'Superman Returns' last night. I have mixed reactions to this movie, but my varying feelings are mostly very polarized. What they did well, they did very, very well, and most of what they did wrong was unforgivably wrong. I gave the movie a 5 out of 10 in the official review/poll thread.

If I was a supporter of this project, I would give you the bad news first and the good news later, leaving you, my faithful readers, with a more optimistic impression of it, since I would have saved the best for last and gone out on a high note. Yeah, well, that ain't the case, so you're gettin' the good stuff first! Spoilers ahead!

The Good:

Spoiler

First off, it used the theme music from the original movies and a very similar presentation of the beginning credits. That theme brought tears to my eyes... when I saw 'Superman: The Movie' and 'Superman II.' Thankfully, it did not do it this time, as I would have been ashamed to shed any tears during this film but those that signify sadness and woe. Let me tell you all right now that the original Superman movies are what got me addicted to superhero fiction, so they have a very, very special place in my heart, so the theme music touches me deeply in general. It did not do that this time, because I knew I was seeing a movie that was not about the real Superman. Still, if they had taken the premise of this movie seriously, the opening visuals and music would have been a terrific choice.

The action was overall very satisfactory for me. I didn't have any problems with the CGI. If that had been the real Superman instead of an imposter, that part of it would be a 10 on the 1 to 10 scale, with consideration for the fact that there were no superpowered villains. There was a good deal of action, although there were very few physical encounters with criminals, as opposed to saving people from random accidents and collateral damage from Lex Luthor's Kryptonian crystal shenanigans.

Kevin Spacey played the part written for him perfectly, and the part was written well, considering he's picking up where Gene Hackman left off. A lot of people criticize him because he's allegedly "campy." Screw that. Seriously, if you like 'Superman: The Movie' and Gene Hackman's role, then you'd agree that he's less campy, while still retaining the best qualities of the original performance. If you didn't like Gene Hackman's role, then I can understand that, although Luthor is more brutal and less comical here (not that he isn't funny at all, because he is, and I think he really had some fun in this role). Anyway, I consider Lex one of the highlights of the movie. His hench-wench, Kitty, was annoying, though.

Lex's evil plan was pretty decent. I had no real qualms about it and enjoyed it. As anybody reading this probably knows, Luthor travelled to the Fortess of Solitude and told Holographic Jor-El to tell him "everything." Ge Stole Kryptonian crystals from the Fortress that form large, jagged land masses that mimic the terrain of Krypton when dropped into water. That's the kind of crystal that created to the Fortress in the first place. His grand scheme tied in very well to the one in the first movie. In S:TM, Luthor bought up a whole bunch of uninhabited, low-cost desert in California and then launched a missle at the San Andreas Fault, hoping to cause the coast to the west of the fault line to break off into the sea, leaving the barren desert the new beach-front property. I don't know how plausible that is, considering that countries don't float, but are rooted to the ocean floor. In any case, Movie!Luthor is all about real estate, and this movie kept that theme, as Luthor stuck one of those crystals into the center a big chunk of Kryptonite that was cut into the shape of a cylinder, launched it into the Atlantic Ocean and thus created a massive island, characterized by jagged crystaline rocks jutting out every which way. He said that crystals take on the properties of the elements surrounding them, which is meant to explain why the island had lots and lots of Kryptonite fragments in it. I don't know if he was only referring to Kryptonian crystals, and that it happens slowly over lots of time, or only when it's a Kryptonian crystal put in the water. Whatever. So Luthor's big plan is to create this "New Krypton" nation that he would control, and in the process of forming, the island would destroy or land masses, killing billions. I think it was a worthy plot.

The Bad:

Spoiler

I'm not gonna spend too much time on this. Either you understand the basic characteristics of Superman, or you don't, so don't even think about defending this aspect of the film, unless you've got a huge amount of complaints about other aspects of it. Here at the Safe Haven, we demand more quality and faithfulness!


Anyway, the premise of this movie was completely wrong. At the end of 'Superman II,' our hero promised the President that he wouldn’t let him down again (he took a red sunlight shower and turned off his powers so he could be with Lois, and then Zod & Friends showed up and conquered the planet while Supes and Lois were cuddling). So what would Brian Singer have you believe? That Superman just took off and left Earth for five years, leaving Lex Luthor free to slip through the fingers of the criminal justice system. Yeah, that sounds like our Superman. And don’t anybody tell me that they were trying to make Superman more “human” or “relatable” or “realistic” by making him flawed. If that was their intention, then it was a failure. They didn’t make him a “relatable” person in the least. It was a betrayal of what he stands for. Yes, we know that him saying “I never lie” to Lois in the first movie was, in fact, a lie, but he still keeps that down to a minimum. And yes, I do indeed criticize the plausibility of both Superman and Clark Kent returning to Metropolis at the exact same time while nobody seriously considers it, and no, having Movie!Cyclops make hints about it doesn’t make that any better, and no, I will not suspend my disbelief the same way I suspend it with regard to his extremely weak “disguise” being effective. Superman’s no-mask method of keeping his secret identity is a permanent part of the mythos. Superman leaving for five years just to look at a floating chunk of Kryptonite is not.. I do not question most of the sci-fi elements of the Superman mythos, but anything that’s completely new and from the mind of Brian Singer or any of his colleagues is fair game.

The next major point is the kid. I’m not even going to explain what’s wrong with this. Again, you either get it or you don’t. Yet again, don’t anybody dare defend this ridiculous idea without offering substantial criticism of other elements of the movie.

The amount of time between the last bit of action and the end credits was way too long. It’s as if they wanted us to forget that there was something exciting in the movie. Did they somehow think it was more worthwhile to show Superman in his hospital bed, see him yet again spying on Lois and have him talk to a child that never should have existed in the first place? There are better ways to show “down time” with this character, and they sure as hell shouldn’t have left that much tepid screen time go by towards the end. Singer & Co., you should learn the difference between a Superman movie and a track meet—after running around a track for extended periods of time, it is recommended that one walks around for a while before becoming still for too long. This is called “cooling off.” A moviegoer doesn’t need that much time to cool off. God forbid you should actually make this movie for the fans (which include a huge part of the Earth’s population) and viewers, instead of for the purpose of bringing their own fan-fiction ideas to life.

The Ugly:

Spoiler

The costume. There is absolutely no excuse for that costume. You’d think it was impossible to stick to the basic design (which they did) and screw it up, but somehow they felt the need to do so. Was it in order to make him “sexier” or something? Whatever the motive, it’s just plain wrong. Movie!Supes’ cape is maroon, not red, and that’s irrefutably wrong. The “S” shield is much, much too small, which makes him look scrawnier. The shorts are also much too small, and the extremely low beltline makes him look, yet again, scrawnier. He looks like a swimmer, and he’s supposed to look like a weight-lifter (or something like that). The fact is, Brandon Routh is actually quite broad in the shoulders, but they completely ruined that with their idiotic alterations.

One more thing: the neckline. To anybody who would dare tell me that any of the changes in this movie were for the sake of “realism,” take a look at his neckline. How the hell do you wear something like that under a suit? Yes, you could potentially get away with it… if you were sitting still the whole time you were in public! What stupidity enabled the costume designers to ruin Superman’s costume? It’s so easy, and yet they couldn’t even measure up my lowest expectations. Pathetic.

Well, that’s how it is. For anyone who hasn’t seen the movie yet, I do recommend that you watch it. There’s a lot of good action and there’s a damn good Lex Luthor. Go in with as much negative bias as you want… you’ll enjoy it more that way, since the good parts will surprise you.