The Daily Planet - Superman News and Speculation Thread (🚨TAG SPOILERS🚨)

Status
Not open for further replies.
He drew his \S/. The top is curved and the sides are not. Maybe we’ve all been half-right this whole time! :funny:


At this point, James Gunn should just hire you as the film's official "Emblem Caregiver". Your job would require that the curves and thickness of the emblem and David (if necessary) remain untouched.
 

It seems that the sweatshirt is indeed making him look bigger than he is though. Not that I'm complaining since Superman gets his powers from the sun so it literally does not matter.
Not really. In the straight on, arms crossed shot, SuperDave is looking ****ing wide and none of that shoulder width is due to the sweatshirt.
 
I'm strangely content now. I'll give it a day, tops, before I'm craving the suit reveal again, though.
 
I mean that comes from a guy that actually saw him upclose.
Yeah, but that exchange was skewed from the start with the linebacker reference. No cinematic Superman is going to be NFL linebacker size.

Also, not sure I would put too much stock in this guy:
rn5CLpsY_400x400.jpg

Evaluating different types of athletic physiques. :funny:
 
I mean that comes from a guy that actually saw him upclose.
To be fair, so did this guy who described him as “absolutely huge”:


The thing is, both can be true. Swimmer’s build doesn’t mean “small.” It just means not wide and stocky. He’s obviously not gonna be super puffy, but he’s also more jacked than Routh was in SR. Important to remember he’s 6’4,” and that kind of build on someone that height can look pretty damned imposing on the big screen.
 
To be fair, so did this guy who described him as “absolutely huge”:


The thing is, both can be true. Swimmer’s build doesn’t mean “small.” It just means not wide and stocky. He’s obviously not gonna be super puffy, but he’s also more jacked than Routh was in SR. Important to remember he’s 6’4,” and that kind of build on someone that height can look pretty damned imposing on the big screen.
Also, I can't take anyone credible who calls that a "swimmer's build". Corenswet really doesn't have Olympian swimmer proportions at all. His bone structure is totally different. If you want to talk about someone with a swimmer's build, Chris Hemsworth is the perfect example when he isn't bulked up for Thor (see Vacation remake).
 
He's 6'4'' and very clearly been in the gym. He'll look great on screen, especially among his smaller castmates where Fillion/Hoult are the 2nd tallest at 6'2'' and Gathegi is probably the 2nd biggest. I'm assuming he'll share the most screen time with Lois and Olsen and he's got over half a foot on the tallest of those two. He'll dominate the frame physically.
 
To be fair, so did this guy who described him as “absolutely huge”:


The thing is, both can be true. Swimmer’s build doesn’t mean “small.” It just means not wide and stocky. He’s obviously not gonna be super puffy, but he’s also more jacked than Routh was in SR. Important to remember he’s 6’4,” and that kind of build on someone that height can look pretty damned imposing on the big screen.


It's my preference when Superman isn't super bulky anyway. I feel it works best for the Clark Kent persona. My personal belief for Superman's physique is he should be muscular enough to look well in the suit, and nothing more. He doesn't get his strength from his muscles.
 
Also, I can't take anyone credible who calls that a "swimmer's build". Corenswet really doesn't have Olympian swimmer proportions at all. His bone structure is totally different. If you want to talk about someone with a swimmer's build, Chris Hemsworth is the perfect example when he isn't bulked up for Thor (see Vacation remake).
Lol, I literally almost included a bit about Hemsworth having a proper swimmer's build, but I was afraid of opening up a can of worms with his L&T build vs. Ragnarok etc. :funny:
 
Here's some food for thought:

With Gunn's constant insistence that this "isn't a young Superman movie" and that he's pretty well established by the time the movie picks up, not to mention saying Superman will be the same age as David, what would you guys think if it turns out he's actually been on the job for 8 years and started at age 22? In the Man and Superman comic he started at that age, and I read that in pre-Crisis and New 52 he started around that age too. Which makes sense to me, as it doesn't really make sense that Clark would wait that long to become Superman since he already has his powers from the getgo, unlike Batman who has to train at least a decade to be able to become Batman.
 
Here's some food for thought:

With Gunn's constant insistence that this "isn't a young Superman movie" and that he's pretty well established by the time the movie picks up, not to mention saying Superman will be the same age as David, what would you guys think if it turns out he's actually been on the job for 8 years and started at age 22? In the Man and Superman comic he started at that age, and I read that in pre-Crisis and New 52 he started around that age too. Which makes sense to me, as it doesn't really make sense that Clark would wait that long to become Superman since he already has his powers from the getgo, unlike Batman who has to train at least a decade to be able to become Batman.
Birthright is my headcanon origin for him, and in that he spends some time after college traveling the world working freelance and finding his feet before settling in Metropolis and becoming Superman, but I'd still put him in his early 20's when that happens. Just makes sense, imo.
 
Here's some food for thought:

With Gunn's constant insistence that this "isn't a young Superman movie" and that he's pretty well established by the time the movie picks up, not to mention saying Superman will be the same age as David, what would you guys think if it turns out he's actually been on the job for 8 years and started at age 22? In the Man and Superman comic he started at that age, and I read that in pre-Crisis and New 52 he started around that age too. Which makes sense to me, as it doesn't really make sense that Clark would wait that long to become Superman since he already has his powers from the getgo, unlike Batman who has to train at least a decade to be able to become Batman.
I bet they won't get that specific but, sure, that'd make sense to me.
 
Birthright is my headcanon origin for him, and in that he spends some time after college traveling the world working freelance and finding his feet before settling in Metropolis and becoming Superman, but I'd still put him in his early 20's when that happens. Just makes sense, imo.
Him being Year 5-10 on this feels about right tbh. I don't like the idea of him spending most of his young adulthood not being Superman, or the MoS take where he just wandered around doing nothing. It could also kinda help to tighten the potential """gap""" he'll have with Batman (even tho I don't think it matters) as they can just say... let's say Batman is in Year 15 and Superman is in Year 8 or whatever. The gap of "experience" between the two would just be 7 years, which is still a bit and accomodates for the disparity of one of them being a patriarch of a superhero family, but it's not necessarily as drastic as people may have thought at first, even if the Batman actor turns out in their mid 40s (which if we're lucky he will)


I bet they won't get that specific but, sure, that'd make sense to me.
On the movie itself probably not but I've watched some of the BTS of Gunn's previous work and he does tend to go hyper specific on details that are barely seen in the films themselves. For the Guardians films he had entire documents outlining alien cultures that are only seen in the background or something because he wanted to be very thorough, and I do expect he'll do something similar here, albeit I do think this sort of chronology or whatever is probably something he'd come up retroactively rather than something he had in mind from the beginning lol From everything we heard about the casting process for this and even the way he referred to it (merely calling this Superman "younger than 40" before he cast Corenswet) it does sounds like Gunn was a little bit more loose in that aspect than people think. (Like I'm 99% sure that even if Corenswet was 35 he'd have still cast him)
 
Last edited:
He's 6'4'' and very clearly been in the gym. He'll look great on screen, especially among his smaller castmates where Fillion/Hoult are the 2nd tallest at 6'2'' and Gathegi is probably the 2nd biggest. I'm assuming he'll share the most screen time with Lois and Olsen and he's got over half a foot on the tallest of those two. He'll dominate the frame physically.
When Corenswet was first announced, I looked him up on Celebheights.com. And I could have sworn he was listed @ 6’ 4” — which would have made him the tallest Superman. Next time I checked, he was 6’ 3½” (same as Chris Reeve). And now he’s 6’ 3”. :shrug: Anyhoo… still a big dude.
 
Cudlitz can’t play anything but a dumb redneck. Casting him as Lex was Kevin-Costner-as-Robin-Hood bad.

So bad it made $400 million worldwide in 1991 on a $48 million budget? ;)

May all my bad decisions be as such!! :o :rofl:
 
So bad it made $400 million worldwide in 1991 on a $48 million budget? ;)

May all my bad decisions be as such!! :o :rofl:

LOL, hey, I loved that movie when I was a kid. But I can’t deny that was some of the worst miscasting in movie history.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"