Superman Returns Supes to Return Again

Well technically, if he uses any villian from the DC gallery it is unoriginal, unless he makes his own.
 
Im telling you now its Batman and Robin all over again! But im open to seeing what happens.
 
I SEE SPIDEY said:
If WB was so happy with the movie's gross, why are they lowering the budget?



your not that dumb sweetie.:o

there just being carefull...the movie will probably go over budget anyway.. but i would think that now we have re-established The man of steel with Brandon now having the mantle so to speak.. the sequel should bring in more money..and they are taking the right coarse..time for some Action.!
 
ROBOCOP CPU001 said:
your not that dumb sweetie.:o
Don't call me dumb or even insenuate that I am

there just being carefull...the movie will probably go over budget anyway.. but i would think that now we have re-established The man of steel with Brandon now having the mantle so to speak.. the sequel should bring in more money..and they are taking the right coarse..time for some Action.!
A movie studio that is happy with the gross of their blockbuster film do not lower the budget or even green light it with a lower budget.
 
i didn't call you dumb..i said your not that dumb..jesus try reading what i said..why ask a question you already know the answer to...

you see^^^
 
ROBOCOP CPU001 said:
i didn't call you dumb..i said your not that dumb..jesus try reading what i said..why ask a question you already know the answer to...

you see^^^
Okay listen, I think that we have a different opinion on this subject. I think that WB lowering the budget is a sign of them not liking the boxoffice takings and you think that opposite. Lets leave it at that.
 
no i have no problem with what you said..ISS i'm taking offecnce that you thought i called you dumb..i didn't.

:(
 
Coo:cwink:l,more action oriented is smart and they needn't lose the character side of it,good news
 
If the first film was 200 million dollars and WB had trouble making their money back, it seems to me that it's perfectly logical that they wouldn't want to repeat that mistake again, hence lowering the budget.

But, Singer will make the film work with whatever budget they give him.
 
ROBOCOP CPU001 said:
no i have no problem with what you said..ISS i'm taking offecnce that you thought i called you dumb..i didn't.

:(
I pm'ed you.
 
J.Howlett said:
If the first film was 200 million dollars and WB had trouble making their money back, it seems to me that it's perfectly logical that they wouldn't want to repeat that mistake again, hence lowering the budget.

But, Singer will make the film work with whatever budget they give him.


Definately.

And people forget, you can add 10 Million for that Krypton sequence that will likely be added. (and be in IMAX 3D)

Looks like 09' is not a question now......:up:
 
yup,its gonna be awesome.
Pickle-El said:
Definately.

And people forget, you can add 10 Million for that Krypton sequence that will likely be added. (and be in IMAX 3D)

Looks like 09' is not a question now......:up:
 
You don't need more than 150 million dollars to make an action-packed Superman movie. 150 million is PLENTY.

What you need is to get RID of Singer and his gang of hacks.

I'm sick of this guy, his lame ideas, his wack casting choices, and the fact that he is even respected by so many in the industry as some kind of "serious comic book movie director."

This guy sucks, his superhero flicks are BORING, and I wish to God he'd just go away. No bad blood, no hate, no ill-will, just go away!

No amount of money will solve the problem of the Super-baby, Lois Lane being potrayed by an uncharismatic skeleton in a bad wig (ever hear of hair-dye??), and a doe-eyed "Superman" with a bad hairdo and no talent other than mimicking Christopher Reeve.

Sometimes I really hate you, Holllywood.
 
Poor Brandon..

I actually think he was the best thing about the movie..

he is superman for another generation
 
I SEE SPIDEY said:
Knowing Singer's unoriginal ass, Zod will be the villain in the sequel.

Sarcasm said:
The difference between me and other rabid SR fans is I don't care what the Spidey, Xmen or Batman movies did or continue to do (fyi ~ I can't wait for the sequels on all of em)....all I do care about is gettin another Superman movie (I don't care if each Supes movie has to eek it's way to meet the requirements for another film). And I LOVE those that hate SR (or Supes in general) and knowing how mortified they'll be with a sequel (especially a Singer sequel with a potential Zod twist LOL!).....the fact that a sequel will exist that they'll despise and will endlessly nerd out on makes me smile and laugh. :yay:


AAHAHAHAAH!!! Gonna be fun watchin some of you implode while this next Supes movie is made!
 
Lobster Charlie said:
You don't need more than 150 million dollars to make an action-packed Superman movie. 150 million is PLENTY.

What you need is to get RID of Singer and his gang of hacks.

I'm sick of this guy, his lame ideas, his wack casting choices, and the fact that he is even respected by so many in the industry as some kind of "serious comic book movie director."

This guy sucks, his superhero flicks are BORING, and I wish to God he'd just go away. No bad blood, no hate, no ill-will, just go away!

No amount of money will solve the problem of the Super-baby, Lois Lane being potrayed by an uncharismatic skeleton in a bad wig (ever hear of hair-dye??), and a doe-eyed "Superman" with a bad hairdo and no talent other than mimicking Christopher Reeve.

Sometimes I really hate you, Holllywood.
This is the funniest post that I have read in a long time. I'm not saying that I agree with everything you wrote...okay I agree with 95% of it but I'm probably a little less harsh than you when it comes to Superman...when it comes to X-Men, all bets are off.
 
Sarcasm said:
AAHAHAHAAH!!! Gonna be fun watchin some of you implode while this next Supes movie is made!


Land Mongrol Lex Luthor said:
Wait for it

:)

It'll be 2005 all over again once the premise comes out.
 
Showtime029 said:
You don't appreciate my witty remarks. :csad:

It's okay Showtime......the rest of the forum does. We will take time out of our Singer-Praying to salute you around 3pm.
 
ROBOCOP CPU001 said:
Poor Brandon..

I actually think he was the best thing about the movie..

he is superman for another generation
I don't have a huge problem with Brandon, he was a hell of alot better than the non-acting Welling. I can't tell you how angry it makes me when people/superman fans say that Welling would have been a better Superman.

HE CAN'T ACT! SEE THE FOG AND SMALLVILLE FOR DETAILS! ANYWHO I JUST HAD TO GET THAT OFF OF MY CHEST.

Brandon isn't exactly how I see Supes but I think that he did a decent job for what he had to work with. I still wish he looked older and his bulid was broader.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"