Superman Returns The Official Bryan Singer Thread

[wellsy]

OK - SR is a revival, in much the same way as ST:TMP was for the Star Trek franchise. Star Trek got canned in its 3rd season, in much the same way as the Superman franchise was trashed after IV.

Hence, reintroducing the characters and seeing where they are a few years later (Kirk has become an Admiral, etc, and Supes has gone home to see what he can find, etc) provides a good restart to such a franchise.

Another example of this is Full Metal Alchemist, and the subsequent move, Conquerer of Shamballa. Its coming back to them years after we last saw them, and so there are new aspects to those characters that need to be introduced.

However, the idea that action is what makes a good movie is utter nonsense, so I agree with you, Hulktified, on your second comment.

But in anyone else's hands, Superman will go the way of the dinosaurs very quickly. Just remember, not everyone in the audience is a purist like you. Some of us do see interesting dynamics emerging.

 

[hypeSUPERMAN]

Singer has made Superman Returns THE THINKING MAN'S franchise. The problem is, the kids won't understand it until 2009. Though I don't care about box office, so that doesn't bother me.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

OK - SR is a revival, in much the same way as ST:TMP was for the Star Trek franchise. Star Trek got canned in its 3rd season, in much the same way as the Superman franchise was trashed after IV.

Hence, reintroducing the characters and seeing where they are a few years later (Kirk has become an Admiral, etc, and Supes has gone home to see what he can find, etc) provides a good restart to such a franchise.

Another example of this is Full Metal Alchemist, and the subsequent move, Conquerer of Shamballa. Its coming back to them years after we last saw them, and so there are new aspects to those characters that need to be introduced.

However, the idea that action is what makes a good movie is utter nonsense, so I agree with you, Hulktified, on your second comment.

But in anyone else's hands, Superman will go the way of the dinosaurs very quickly. Just remember, not everyone in the audience is a purist like you. Some of us do see interesting dynamics emerging.

I think Singer will introduce many interesting dynamics and arcs in the sequel, i think it will be amazing and will please all the people who didnt enjoy SR.

 

[patrickbateman]

^ i hope he is right

 

[TripXyDE]

Singer has made Superman Returns THE THINKING MAN'S franchise. The problem is, the kids won't understand it until 2009. Though I don't care about box office, so that doesn't bother me.

"the THINKING MAN's franchise?"

are u kidding?

what was the thinking in SR?

(many of these have been SERMONed by others over and over before)
-Luthor cant travel to the North Pole using that mini-yacht
-Superman knows he has enemies, shouldnt he be smart enough to have some sort of security or maybe locks for his Fortress & the crystals inside it? How can he be so irresponsible to simply leave the place with potential Earth-destroying material out in the open? Is he guitared ?
- Superman is rendered useless and puny by a small Kryptonite, right? Lex proved that, so, how come he can still lift the entire Krypto-continent with kryptonite sticking in his face literally? Okay, its desperation, but so much of it around he cant even move, how does he manage that?
- How is it that a big-ash gattling gun can’t render the slightest damage to Superman’s suit but Lois can easily cut it up using her scissors?
- Luthor is supposed to pride in himself as the “greatest criminal mastermind” yet, his schemes were a bit too idiotic. He wishes to create a Kyptonite continent which he says would be a great beachfront real estate using data crystals he stole from Superman’s Fortress of Solitude. Duh. If he wanted great real estate property, he should’ve sold those crystals and used the money to buy Boracay. He’s so dumb, he hasn’t even set up a plan if air strikes or sniper teams would try to take him out. In addition, he should’ve brought in a month-long supply of popcorn & using those data crystals, learned EVERYTHING there is to know about killing Superman, & loads of secrets more! Who knows? Maybe the info on those crystals teaches you how to make fuel out of cockroaches?

do i sound like nitpicking?
no, no
i'm actually just pointing out how much of a THINKING MAN's franchise Superman Returns is

hehehe

 

[Axl Van Sixx]

I don't really agree with Singer's thinking. Yeah, okay, you introduce all the characters in the first film of a series. But it seems to me that Singer takes this a bit far with his movies. With both X-Men 1 and SR, you get the impression that the movie's main purpose is setting us up for sequels, where "the real action will happen". But this mode of thinking seems to me to be too franchise-oriented. The first film shouldn't just serve as a prelude to sequels, it should be a great, self-supporting film in its own right. That's one of the problems with Superman Returns...there is basically no forward character motion after "gee, Superman has a kid now. How about that?" By the end, nothing has changed. As a whole, the film seemed like nothing more than an expensive retread of Superman: The Movie, and I would expect a bit more than that after 20 years and 200 million dollars. I shouldn't have to wait for a sequel to get a really kickass Superman movie. Singer seriously fumbled the ball.

 

[Octoberist]

"the THINKING MAN's franchise?"

are u kidding?

what was the thinking in SR?

(many of these have been SERMONed by others over and over before)
-Luthor cant travel to the North Pole using that mini-yacht
-Superman knows he has enemies, shouldnt he be smart enough to have some sort of security or maybe locks for his Fortress & the crystals inside it? How can he be so irresponsible to simply leave the place with potential Earth-destroying material out in the open? Is he guitared ?
- Superman is rendered useless and puny by a small Kryptonite, right? Lex proved that, so, how come he can still lift the entire Krypto-continent with kryptonite sticking in his face literally? Okay, its desperation, but so much of it around he cant even move, how does he manage that?
- How is it that a big-ash gattling gun can’t render the slightest damage to Superman’s suit but Lois can easily cut it up using her scissors?
- Luthor is supposed to pride in himself as the “greatest criminal mastermind” yet, his schemes were a bit too idiotic. He wishes to create a Kyptonite continent which he says would be a great beachfront real estate using data crystals he stole from Superman’s Fortress of Solitude. Duh. If he wanted great real estate property, he should’ve sold those crystals and used the money to buy Boracay. He’s so dumb, he hasn’t even set up a plan if air strikes or sniper teams would try to take him out. In addition, he should’ve brought in a month-long supply of popcorn & using those data crystals, learned EVERYTHING there is to know about killing Superman, & loads of secrets more! Who knows? Maybe the info on those crystals teaches you how to make fuel out of cockroaches?

do i sound like nitpicking?
no, no
i'm actually just pointing out how much of a THINKING MAN's franchise Superman Returns is

hehehe

I don't think that Superman Returns was a bad movie. However, I think Singer just lacked scope.

I sounded like Singer had some good ideas but nothing really get materialized the way it should. Lex's plan felt like a subplot (and revisiting old territory from the Donner film). The three way romance felt underwhelming. Superman/Clark lacks character development....and no, staring off to the sunset 100 doesn't count.

I felt that Singer didn't try hard enough. Kinda like, as if he THOUGHT he had the concept, but in reality, he barley grasped it as it almost slipped away.

 

[WormyT]

Singer can say whatever he likes but I'm sure the execs at WB are thinking..

"Yeah he just needs to keep talking about the sequel until the DVD revenue is dried up, then we fire his A$$ for making a boring chickflick and embarressing WB with another summer disappointment and turning our flagship icon into a dumb, wimpy, supermodel crybaby."

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Singer can say whatever he likes but I'm sure the execs at WB are thinking..

"Yeah he just needs to keep talking about the sequel until the DVD revenue is dried up, then we fire his A$$ for making a boring chickflick and embarressing WB with another summer disappointment and turning our flagship icon into a dumb, wimpy, supermodel crybaby."

Yeah i'm SURE thats what they are thinking

Or , maybe its "Okay the first movie underperformed, but there is still potential here for a multi-million dollar franchise. Superman is finally back in people's minds, so lets take advantage of that and help Bryan make a kick-ash sequel!"

 

[Spike_x1]

it's kinda a stupid comment because the reason it's even a sequel to the originals is because so that he skipped the whole introduction thing and dive directly into the "wrath of kahn" movie. The reason for this vague history nonsense is because we knew the characters already from the donner films, and this is just the next chapter. Now he's going back on his word. If he really needed to reintroduce the characters, then he really should have just done an origin film instead.

Maybe not an origin film, but he should've done something like the '89 Batman where the hero already exists, but there's still much to learn about him and his supporting cast of characters, IMHO.

I don't really agree with Singer's thinking. Yeah, okay, you introduce all the characters in the first film of a series. But it seems to me that Singer takes this a bit far with his movies. With both X-Men 1 and SR, you get the impression that the movie's main purpose is setting us up for sequels, where "the real action will happen". But this mode of thinking seems to me to be too franchise-oriented. The first film shouldn't just serve as a prelude to sequels, it should be a great, self-supporting film in its own right. That's one of the problems with Superman Returns...there is basically no forward character motion after "gee, Superman has a kid now. How about that?" By the end, nothing has changed. As a whole, the film seemed like nothing more than an expensive retread of Superman: The Movie, and I would expect a bit more than that after 20 years and 200 million dollars. I shouldn't have to wait for a sequel to get a really kickass Superman movie. Singer seriously fumbled the ball.

Agreed 100%

 

[DrMylesOBoogie]

:
SInger, you have spoilt superman enough!!!

I agree. WB are insane if they let him make a sequel.

 

[elvislennon2005]

Actually, since this is a sequel to Superman 2, it technically isnt a new franchise. And in Star Trek the motion picture, they weren't re-inroducing the characters, they were just giving them each a seperate entrance scene into the movie. The only thing that was actaully a re-introduction was the new Enterprise, which the director said he did that scene that way to say to the audience "this is the Enterprise now." It was just a continuation of the show 5 years later.

Star Trek: The Motion Picture takes place 18 Months after Kirk's five year mission which is 1 year and a half. Kirk's five year mission ended in the year of 2269. We didn't see two years of Kirk's five year mission. That was told by using the Animated Series. Star Trek: The Motion Picture is in the year of 2271. Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan takes place 18 years after the episode "Space Seed". So considering that, The Motion Picture takes place 14 years before Star Trek II, which in that process Kirk and company led for another five year mission. The Motion Picture was doing a few things. First and the most important - To Re-Introduce the characters. Nimoy wasn't originally going to be in the movie. Next, make out that the Enterprise needed a upgrade. Next, have more special effects than the series, we see the Enterprise go to warp speed for the first time and go through a worm hole and etc... That is basically it.

As for Superman Returns, It is re-introducing the characters by adding new faces to those characters. Next, have it take place 5 years after Superman II and make believe that III and IV doesn't exist. Next, with computer technology and better special effects, have Superman be display better than what they were in the first two movies. What I mean is that example, When you see Superman get hit by the bullets it really doesn't seem real. Some bullets looks like as if they was hitting air and bouncing off than hitting him which it looks like most of the bullets did look like it hit him. Now in Superman Returns you see Superman walking into the bullets as they are bouncing off of him. Yes, Superman: The Movie had great special effects and so did Superman II. But Superman Returns seem to do better on the special effects with the technology of today. It was hard for the effects back in the time of Superman: The Movie and Superman II, alot harder.

 

[rduce]

I'm confused. In one breath, the man says this is a sequel to the Richard Donner films so that we'd have those established characters and then he's saying that he saved the "Wrath of Khan" for the second film because he needed THIS movie to establish the characters, introduce the world, So is it a sequel, i.e., established universe everyone is familar with which is why he needed Brando and the John Williams score, or is it an all new movie, which needed to be slow and meandering to establish the universe and then the REAL sequel will be the "Wrath of Khan"?

The more I read interviews with this guy, it seems like he's got an excuse for every reason the movie underperformed except for taking credit himself and saying maybe there's some stuff he could have done differently. And just like he couldn't seem to make up his mind if it was a sequel or an all-new movie, it's sounding like he can't make up his mind which excuses he likes best.

 

[Morgoth]

I am so happy to hear Singer say what he did about the sequel, that's what he tends to do, even though he's proven himself with X-men he seems to take it easy on the first movie and go nuts with the sequel, and I figured that's what he was going for.

But he really didn't need to establish the characters we had Superman the movie to do that but that's okay, Returns is like a recap and now it's time for the action. And even if he doesn't read the comics I'm sure his writers do and I'm sure he does research, moreso than just the movies.t:

 

[Super78]

Well i'll resort from the singer bashing this time and look things from an optimistic approach.
Hopefully singer keeps his word :




Well Brian. Here's hoping you don't screw it up

Well, he already screwed up with Returns, as far as I'm concerned.

He had two great Superman movies, countless number of comic books, Live TV and Animated versions to draw from.

And he SCREWED UP!

 

[Super78]

Empire Strikes Back

Wrath of Khan



wow he sure knows how to pick 'em.lets hope he doesnt fall flat on his face by setting the bar too high.

Its a good thing he never said Godfather part II.

 

[Spike_x1]

I am so happy to hear Singer say what he did about the sequel, that's what he tends to do, even though he's proven himself with X-men he seems to take it easy on the first movie and go nuts with the sequel, and I figured that's what he was going for.

But he really didn't need to establish the characters we had Superman the movie to do that but that's okay, Returns is like a recap and now it's time for the action. And even if he doesn't read the comics I'm sure his writers do and I'm sure he does research, moreso than just the movies.t:

You'd think that, wouldn't ya? But, aside from a couple small tidbits here and there, I've seen nothing to prove that he and the writers have been influenced by anything other than the previous movies.

Hopefully, Singer proves me wrong with the sequel, but I'm definitely not expecting him to.

 

[green]

Here's the whole article...

http://www.todayonline.com/pdf_open.asp?id=2209FCL056

 

[matrix_ghost]

Well, he already screwed up with Returns, as far as I'm concerned.

He had two great Superman movies, countless number of comic books, Live TV and Animated versions to draw from.

And he SCREWED UP!

Well i do agree that this wasn't the superman movie i wanted ...either as a contuination or a standalone movie.
But time will tell if Singer really did screw up with SR when he releases his two sequels.
Something can suck if you just watch it , but within the context of a series of movies it does make sense.

Besides the obvious negative backlash of SR is exactly what Brian and Warner needed. Because you can't improve with just having people saying positive things. Each negative aspect ( no matter how big or small it is is something to consider).Look at the prequels. They each got progressively better and better. Imagine ROTS being like TPM in terms of acting , storyline and VFX.
The only thing that i hope that WB and Singer will learn from this is :

1 Donner movies = financial , general audience and comic fan DOOM
2 Listening to what (comic) fans/writers say about the movie. Actually having pulbic screeningsis also something that is a big plus
3 Use comic book writers and/or use the ideas of comic book heavily. This isn't X-men where you have multiple superhero characters and superhero villains.
4 Get the approval from the people who made Superman popular : comic book writers.
5 Just deliver on some physical villain with superhero action.
I'll say this again : 200 million budget. Years of advanced CGI. Near perfect CG humans. The time right for superman to finally battle.

 

[bosef982]

You people aren't paying attention to what the man is saying:

He had to reintroduce the charater's archs, their developmental struggles and he did so in a very new and unforseen way. That's what he's talking about.

As to his comment about sequels: Singer has alreayd proven himself with X2. X2 was a far leaner, meaner film that X1 and X3 combined, a tight, concise piece of cinema with action, character, and theme. Setting the bar with Empire Strike's Back and Wrath of Kahn is not over the top at all -- he already proved he could do it with X2.

 

[matrix_ghost]

In terms of character development , i'll give you that X2 is better then X1 and X3 for certain characters . However the action is what really is great about X3 , which IMO is ten times better then X1 and X2 combined.
To be honest IMO , X2 is really has some pacing problems. Leaner , meaner it ain't. Action = good + improvement over X1 , character development = good but not an improvement over X1 , pacing = okay as a standalone thing , but definately not good compared to the first flick.
Leaner meaner , X2 aint IMO

I'm sure that had Rattner been given the same amount of prep. time that Singer had gottten for X2 , he would've made a far better picture in terms of storyline.
I love X3 , and i think it'perfectly fits the contuinity of X1 and X2.
Rattner had to deliver thru the same Fox Studio politics that Brian had gotten in X1.
What bothers me is that he didn't have that with SR. He got free reign from WB. And he still made IMO a mediocere movie

And i am paying attention to what the man is saying. I just don't agree with what he saying.

and he did so in a very new and unforseen way.

And look how great that turned out to be

Anyway , X2 was a improvement over X1. Lets see just what Brian has in store for us. Let's see what Wrath Of Khan superman looks like

 

[Spike_x1]

He had to reintroduce the charater's archs, their developmental struggles and he did so in a very new and unforseen way.

I disagree with every single word in this sentence.

He shouldn't have had to reintroduce anything, because that was supposed to have been the point of taking off from the Donner movies in the first place: so that we wouldn't have to go through that again.

And no, it was not done in a very new and unforeseen, in my opinion. It was very predictable and a complete rehash of Superman: The Movie.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

In terms of character development , i'll give you that X2 is better then X1 and X3 for certain characters . However the action is what really is great about X3 , which IMO is ten times better then X1 and X2 combined.

I disagree i thought the Nightcrawler White House attack and Magneto's prison escape were a lot better than any action scene in X3. Also Wolverine vs Deathstryke was a better one-on -one than any of the X3 ones.

To be honest IMO , X2 is really has some pacing problems. Leaner , meaner it ain't. Action = good + improvement over X1 , character development = good but not an improvement over X1 , pacing = okay as a standalone thing , but definately not good compared to the first flick.
Leaner meaner , X2 aint IMO

X2 is definately meaner than X1 and X3, the action is the best of the series and it has MUCH more character development than X3. You do realise X2 is widely considered one of the greates CB movies ever dont you, X3 is not though. X2 even won a poll in Empire for best CB movie ever, dont think X3 would ever win a similar poll.

I'm sure that had Rattner been given the same amount of prep. time that Singer had gottten for X2 , he would've made a far better picture in terms of storyline.
I love X3 , and i think it'perfectly fits the contuinity of X1 and X2.
Rattner had to deliver thru the same Fox Studio politics that Brian had gotten in X1.

This must be a joke right? Ratner only got about 2/3months less prep time AND most of the cast and the finished script were already there for him before he came on.

And Ratner had to deliver through the same studio politics as Singer did in X! is this a complete joke? It has to be. Okay lets look at it then. With X1, Singer was given a $100 million dollar budget and told the release date would 6 months later than when the movie was actually released. Fox THEN reduced the budget to $75 million and brought the release date 6 months forward, despite cast and story/storyboards already being in place. Ratner was given a $210 million dollar budget, a ready cast, a finished script and fixed release. So who had the harder job?

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

You people aren't paying attention to what the man is saying:

He had to reintroduce the charater's archs, their developmental struggles and he did so in a very new and unforseen way. That's what he's talking about.

As to his comment about sequels: Singer has alreayd proven himself with X2. X2 was a far leaner, meaner film that X1 and X3 combined, a tight, concise piece of cinema with action, character, and theme. Setting the bar with Empire Strike's Back and Wrath of Kahn is not over the top at all -- he already proved he could do it with X2.

Totally agree with this. And even though this was a sequel, Singer STILL had to re-introduce the characters, as half the people seeing SR would not have been born when the first 2 movies were released and a lot of people would not have watched them either at all or for years!

 

[matrix_ghost]

I disagree i thought the Nightcrawler White House attack and Magneto's prison escape were a lot better than any action scene in X3. Also Wolverine vs Deathstryke was a better one-on -one than any of the X3 ones.

Opinions , we'll have to agree to disagree here
But yeah , i think the bullet time shot of Jean Grey blasting everything away with the water rising owns pretty much all of X2 bigger VFX sequences.
And there's is of course DBZ Iceman and Pryo , Jean Grey atomising Prof X ..etc etc.
Personal opinion

X2 is definately meaner than X1 and X3, the action is the best of the series and it has MUCH more character development than X3. You do realise X2 is widely considered one of the greates CB movies ever dont you, X3 is not though. X2 even won a poll in Empire for best CB movie ever, dont think X3 would ever win a similar poll.

I know that X2 is loved by many. But hey , i don't consider it to be THAT great. I doubt most of the people who voted in that poll are comic purists HEck alot of my friends like/love X1-X2 and they don't even read comics. They judge the movies as standalone pieces of entertainment.

This must be a joke right? Ratner only got about 2/3months less prep time AND most of the cast and the finished script were already there for him before he came on.

And Ratner had to deliver through the same studio politics as Singer did in X! is this a complete joke? It has to be. Okay lets look at it then. With X1, Singer was given a $100 million dollar budget and told the release date would 6 months later than when the movie was actually released. Fox THEN reduced the budget to $75 million and brought the release date 6 months forward, despite cast and story/storyboards already being in place. Ratner was given a $210 million dollar budget, a ready cast, a finished script and fixed release. So who had the harder job?

Rattner.
For starters , Rattner has to live up Brian vision (which given the critical response that X1 and especially X2 got is really hard) , introducing many characters ( he didn't have much of a say in this , because Brian still focused on a very small group of mutants; Brett just got he script and was told to work with all the characters ), securing that X3 made more money then X2 and a fixed release date. They had a total of 12 months to work on this movie ( from starting the shoot all the way till release date , can you imagine a massive blockbuster movie like X-men having a post. prod slate less then a year with that many complex VFX).
Not only that , but Rattner also had to turn in a movie that was considerably shorter in lenght for Fox , cause as we all know this logic :
shorter running time equals more showings equals more money.
Fox wanted to make as much as possible back from their 210 million investment. And also i think that FOX would've never given Brian Singer a 200 million dollar budget had he been on board. It was their intention all along to to release this movie in 2006 no matter what ( i have the empire issue at home where they're talking releasing this flick in 2006). When Brian left to do SR along with his crew members who were all there for start for the X-Men franchise , Fox was in a real problem . They had to now have a script , start essentially from scratch with set designs , casting other actors , and negotiating new deals with the actors
I think the main reason why the budget was so high was because of the VFX slate ( and to a less extent the salaries of the actors).
You need to deliver BIg , complex scenes with in a very short period. The only way you can do that is by increasing the budget big time.

So yeah , summarising. Brett had the harder time.