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

[Deck Rickard]

The Internet never makes mountains out moleholes! Ever! Ever..ever lol. But yes, just dozens did that. Maybe 24 people. The rest will internet. The funny thing is, we've had pages go on for eternity over some things that were even more ridiculous before. It just gives us something to do before release lol. Rinse and repeat as long as these films will be made.

Totally. I guess this one just stuck out to me a bit because it’s not even like a whole trailer that was bad (or multiple scenes in a trailer) but literally one shot that people didn’t like. And I still don’t even see what’s so horrendous about it, lol.

 

[SwordOfMorning]

To be fair, a lot of people agree that the movie looks pretty ugly in general and that shot is just what is getting the most attention. Henry Braham is a menace. It's a mixed bag so far in my opinion, some shots look nice but overall it looks way too much like The Flash without that movies nightmare Fortnite CG. A little disappointing because I like the overall design choices a whole bunch.

 

[Tra-El]

My goodness

 

[Primal Slayer]

They do not.

Makes sense then. Just another money grab. I'm sure WB will pay up

 

[hopefuldreamer]

Dead serious here. Am I the only one who saw that flying shot, thought, “Oh cool, a new shot of him flying,” and then moved on? Seriously, even after all the scrutiny and now watching it over and over as people have analyzed it… it honestly looks fine to me.

I know I’m a bigger fan of Gunn than most and I’m really pulling for this movie but honestly… I feel like people are making a mountain out of a molehill here.

I went 'oh cool, a new flying shot! Huh, his eyes look a bit off. Still cool though, yay'.

Then I watched it 10 more times

Seriously, no one is pulling for this movie more than me. I need it to repair the hole MOS left in my heart

I think people maybe take these debates too seriously in general. We can all spend hours scrutinising what eyebrow lightening might mean too. Doesn't mean we actually care deeply about his eyebrows and that we aren't big cheerleaders of the film.

Well, that's because it is AI, lol. I can live with the shot either way, but it can still be fixed is the point if it received that big of a backlash. Gunn is the type that will just keep it anyway and let it be. I'm one to like the shot, but acknowledge what is being discussed. In a nutshell, it really is minuscule.

Yeah I agree it could be fixed, who knows! It really won't matter by the time the movie comes around anyway.

Except in 10 years time when we are all laughing about the time we nitpicked his eyes in a TV spot flying clip.

 

[Lily Adler]

 

[Lily Adler]

To be fair, a lot of people agree that the movie looks pretty ugly in general and that shot is just what is getting the most attention. Henry Braham is a menace. It's a mixed bag so far in my opinion, some shots look nice but overall it looks way too much like The Flash without that movies nightmare Fortnite CG. A little disappointing because I like the overall design choices a whole bunch.

James Gunn is no Alex Garland, Denis Villeneuve, Matt Reeves, or even J.J. Abrams. He'll give us a satisfactory ugly film probably.

 

[hopefuldreamer]

I think all the GOTG films are pretty...

 

[donuts]

Gunn has yet to make an ugly looking movie, and Superman doesn't look like it'll be, either.

 

[flickchick85]

Honestly, what I love about the look of this film is how DIFFERENT it looks from the usual CBM fare these days, so I can’t say I agree with any complaints saying it looks like the DCEU stuff. The only similarities I see to Braham’s ugly work in The Flash are some blue tint in some scenes, but lens/style/production design-wise it looks completely different to me. I’m not a fan of Braham but I haven’t had a problem with his work on Gunn’s films so far, and this film seems to be no exception there.

 

[Gamma Goliath]

To me the colors remind me a bit of the silver age comics.

 

[donuts]

To be honest, I don't even think that the cinematography ITSELF looks bad in The Flash. It's the VFX work that's the problem in that movie. But alas...

EDIT:

And some effects shots are really cool, too:

The Flash Blu-ray

The Flash Blu-ray Release Date August 29, 2023. Blu-ray reviews, news, specs, ratings, screenshots. Cheap Blu-ray movies and deals.

www.blu-ray.com

The Flash 4K Blu-ray (4K Ultra HD)

The Flash 4K Blu-ray Release Date August 29, 2023. Blu-ray reviews, news, specs, ratings, screenshots. Cheap Blu-ray movies and deals.

www.blu-ray.com

Anyway, not trying to open a can of worms here.

Honestly, what I love about the look of this film is how DIFFERENT it looks from the usual CBM fare these days, so I can’t say I agree with any complaints saying it looks like DCEU stuff.

Yup. Pretty much. In the age of cookie cutter entertainment, it looks different. And good.

 

[solidsnake86]

I don't practice copyright law, but this is so sketch to me. US Courts have no jurisdiction over foreign rights. If there was a legitimate claim that the Superman copyright had reverted to the Siegel and Schuster estates in Canada and other Commonwealth nations, the lawsuits would need to be brought here and the other jurisdictions where the rights are in issue.

Also, these claims allege that the rights reverted between several years ago and the limitations period for civil claims in Canada is usually around two years. In addition, if I recall correctly Toberoff lost last time around because the US Courts found that the estates and heirs entered into binding assignments back in the 90s or 2000s. Not sure how those agreements would effect application of the Dickens rule in the Commonwealth jurisdictions.

This is so sad because I believe the Siegel heirs got a pretty good royalty settlement with their previous lawyer and then Toberoff came in and lured the younger heirs to tear it all up on based upon some crazy scheme of them making more money by Toberoff making Superman movies himself through his Pacific Pictures company.

Agreed, I'm not a copyright lawyer either but I would imagine the civil limitations period applies unless there is some exemption. Also in agreement regarding jurisdiction. Although, with the backlog in the courts here in Ontario, it's probably for the best it's in the U.S.

It will be interesting if WB goes back to the lawyer they ended up hiring to put an end to the previous litigation. I believe his name was Dan Petrocelli (sp?).

Either way it's clear this was done because the release date is fast approaching.

 

[Babillygunn]

Is a lawyer just looking for an extra payday?

Every single ****ing time

Oh sure…blame the lawyers!

I don't practice copyright law, but this is so sketch to me. US Courts have no jurisdiction over foreign rights. If there was a legitimate claim that the Superman copyright had reverted to the Siegel and Schuster estates in Canada and other Commonwealth nations, the lawsuits would need to be brought here and the other jurisdictions where the rights are in issue.

Also, these claims allege that the rights reverted between several years ago and the limitations period for civil claims in Canada is usually around two years. In addition, if I recall correctly Toberoff lost last time around because the US Courts found that the estates and heirs entered into binding assignments back in the 90s or 2000s. Not sure how those agreements would effect application of the Dickens rule in the Commonwealth jurisdictions.

This is so sad because I believe the Siegel heirs got a pretty good royalty settlement with their previous lawyer and then Toberoff came in and lured the younger heirs to tear it all up on based upon some crazy scheme of them making more money by Toberoff making Superman movies himself through his Pacific Pictures company.

You are a braver man than I am, my friend. I draw the line at discussing or trying to analyze intellectual property. That’s so far out of my wheelhouse that I won’t touch it. I’m just glad we have experts on that subject at my firm whom I can refer stuff to.
But your point is an interesting one regarding personal jurisdiction and venue. But could there be an argument that the studio distributed the film into foreign countries from their US office and transacted funds into their US office such that there was a US transaction allowing for jurisdiction in the US?

Admittedly, it has been nearly 25 years since I took civil procedure and issues like this don’t really come up in my practice because I primarily litigate against the federal government and personal jurisdiction is usually a no-brainer in my cases.


Edit:
As I think about this, I haven’t seen the lawsuit yet, but I almost have to assume that it pleads injunctive relief to prevent foreign distribution, since there has been no injury yet.
In which case, wouldn’t the court where the studio resides be the correct forum for an injunctive relief action?

 

[donuts]

Oh sure…blame the lawyers!

Always!

 

[Babillygunn]

Always!

Actually it doesn’t. My professional existence is a reminder that people don’t get along. I totally understand why that isn’t endearing to most folks.

 

[jetage]

Saints preserve US

 

[Silvermoth]

 

[GreenKToo]

Makes sense since it is indeed AI as a direct response in taking a stab at the complaints. The shot can be fixed with the touch-up tools the studio posseses to make it look good..if they use it at all (and make it look natural of course and don't stray away from David's work).

It also makes me wonder and think if that shot is the last shot of the film (like Reeve smiling into the camera-type concept). I can see Supes zig zagging through the icy Fortress and barrel roll into the end credits with an uplifting voiceover from Corenswet.

Or, it could be after krypto drags him to the FOS, he recovers/is healed, and he's returning to battle, kinda like S:II.
Either or tho is fine.

 

[GreenKToo]

Do I see Zod??

 

[Black Narcissus]

I see a bad hair dye. Soysauce colored in tone. Another brilliant move by Gunn no doubt!

 

[Lily Adler]

Do I see Zod??

View attachment 120749

No it's Jax-Ur of course.

 

[hopefuldreamer]

Do I see Zod??

View attachment 120749

I still can't see if he's wearing pants can anyone get closer?

 

[DKDetective]

Oh sure…blame the lawyers!


You are a braver man than I am, my friend. I draw the line at discussing or trying to analyze intellectual property. That’s so far out of my wheelhouse that I won’t touch it. I’m just glad we have experts on that subject at my firm whom I can refer stuff to.
But your point is an interesting one regarding personal jurisdiction and venue. But could there be an argument that the studio distributed the film into foreign countries from their US office and transacted funds into their US office such that there was a US transaction allowing for jurisdiction in the US?

Admittedly, it has been nearly 25 years since I took civil procedure and issues like this don’t really come up in my practice because I primarily litigate against the federal government and personal jurisdiction is usually a no-brainer in my cases.


Edit:
As I think about this, I haven’t seen the lawsuit yet, but I almost have to assume that it pleads injunctive relief to prevent foreign distribution, since there has been no injury yet.
In which case, wouldn’t the court where the studio resides be the correct forum for an injunctive relief action?

Our IP expert just left in December, so I can't ask him sadly.

However, I do practice in a city close to the US border and interjurisdictional issues do come up in my practice sometimes. Based on my limited understanding of how film distribution works is that most studios have subsidiaries in each country they distribute in, to minimize tax among other things. So theoretically, this should be litigation in Canadian/UK, etc. courts between the Siegel and Shuster estates and the different national subsidiaries of Warner Bros.

So the causes of action would arise in the foreign countries. injunctive relief would need to be done here to prevent the foreign Warner Bros. subsidiaries from distributing the film to Canadian theatre chains, etc.

There is also the whole issue of them having to litigate Canadian law in an American court. Foreign law has to be proved like fact with expert witnesses, etc.

 

[Babillygunn]

Our IP expert just left in December, so I can't ask him sadly.

However, I do practice in a city close to the US border and interjurisdictional issues do come up in my practice sometimes. Based on my limited understanding of how film distribution works is that most studios have subsidiaries in each country they distribute in, to minimize tax among other things. So theoretically, this should be litigation in Canadian/UK, etc. courts between the Siegel and Shuster estates and the different national subsidiaries of Warner Bros.

So the causes of action would arise in the foreign countries. injunctive relief would need to be done here to prevent the foreign Warner Bros. subsidiaries from distributing the film to Canadian theatre chains, etc.

There is also the whole issue of them having to litigate Canadian law in an American court. Foreign law has to be proved like fact with expert witnesses, etc.

That makes total sense if they’re naming the subsidiary.

As usual, I am in awe of your intellect!