Sequels The Official Kevin Spacey As Lex Luthor Thread

[The Incredible Hulk]

I hate to be so blunt and stereotypical, but I have a penis..ergo, I want to see Superman kick somebody's butt, and vice versa to satisfy my bloodlust.

best. quote. EVER

in fact I just may sig that

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

People are expecting big things from the sequel. A supervillain(s), 2 or 3 big fight scenes, and alot more action.

I wonder if they'll try to give the public what they want this time.
or will they ignore the fans pleas and do their own thing.

It will be interesting to see how it plays out, no doubt about that.

Sometimes giving the public what they want can hamper the movie though. For example, i've just read the sypnosis for the new Hulk film, and it completely drained ALL of my anticipation for it, it sounds so generic and cliche i am honestly now questioning whether i will see it.

And why have they made the movie like this? Because of all the complaining about the (brilliant IMO) first Hulk movie. The first one at least had some imagination and something different to offer. This new one sounds like they read "How to make a typical comic book movie 101" before writing it.

So, IMO, SR2 should be about half and half, add plenty of action for the fans, but please, dont lose what made SR so special to many fans in the process.

 

[echostation]

it would've been just as easy to create either a Bizarro type villain or Doomsday or even a Metallo type of being with the blood spilled on New Krypton Apartments (pun intended) who could then cause havoc in the city and when Superman goes up for a nice little energy boost from la sun, he goes down, has a pretty big city fight and finally ends up kicking some major ass and takes the villain all the way back to new krypton... tosses his ass in through the rock, then go on lift the rock, throw it into space... cue stupid idiotic hospital scene.

 

[superbaby]

Sometimes giving the public what they want can hamper the movie though. For example, i've just read the sypnosis for the new Hulk film, and it completely drained ALL of my anticipation for it, it sounds so generic and cliche i am honestly now questioning whether i will see it.

And why have they made the movie like this? Because of all the complaining about the (brilliant IMO) first Hulk movie. The first one at least had some imagination and something different to offer. This new one sounds like they read "How to make a typical comic book movie 101" before writing it.

So, IMO, SR2 should be about half and half, add plenty of action for the fans, but please, dont lose what made SR so special to many fans in the process.

so what are the so-called special things from SR you want them to stay in the sequel? story wise.

 

[DarkSuperman]

so what are the so-called special things from SR you want them to stay in the sequel? story wise.

Exactly. Wasn't Very Special to me.

All I saw was the same old same old...ohhh no wait, they gave Superman a illegitimate kid and made him a dishonest ordinary man with the morals of a Frat brother.

 

[mego joe]

Exactly. Wasn't Very Special to me.

All I saw was the same old same old...ohhh no wait, they gave Superman a illegitimate kid and made him a dishonest ordinary man with the morals of a Frat brother.

Keep emotion, keep humanity, just don't characterize it with the dishonesty and morals of a frat brother. Show Superman's emotions and humanity in keeping with his character as a good, honorable upstanding genuinely caring and genuinely good person. Not a frat brother.

 

[GreenKToo]

Keep emotion, keep humanity, just don't characterize it with the dishonesty and morals of a frat brother. Show Superman's emotions and humanity in keeping with his character as a good, honorable upstanding genuinely caring and genuinely good person. Not a frat brother.

yeah, that should be his character in every film, no matter WHO directs it.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

so what are the so-called special things from SR you want them to stay in the sequel? story wise.

The focus on character rather than action, Supes' developing and learning (though keep his love and dedication to humanity the same as in SR) and most importantly, keep the emotion. IMO the best CB movies are the one's with the most emotion in.

 

[Grinder]

In other words: You have no interest in a Superman movie.

 

[YÅ«gi's BM]

In other words: You have no interest in a Superman movie.

Stop being a dick, please?

A Superman movie can be more about violence, you know. Sure, I want to see him get into a fight so large Metropolis is left looking like the giant shovel of God was trying to rip its roots from the ground but let's face facts here, you guys complained about X3 and Transformers being shallow and then when a superhero film actually tells a story with some considerable depth you run like there's no living to see the next day.

 

[Grinder]

Stop being blind, please?

When will YOU learn that 'boring' doesn't equal 'character depth'!?

SR has ZERO depth! It's the most pretentious piece of crap of all the crappy superhero movies.

Go watch a movie with an actual storyline for god's sake ...

 

[superbaby]

if shiitty movies like ghost rider and rush hour can get a sequel, it would be very unfortunate if superman can't.

 

[TheComicbookKid]

Ghost Rider isn't getting a sequel. At least as far as I've heard.

Rush Hour 1 and 2 made money. I do think the joke has worn thin by now though, but who knows what will happen with the new one.

 

[El Payaso]

The focus on character rather than action, Supes' developing and learning (though keep his love and dedication to humanity the same as in SR) and most importantly, keep the emotion. IMO the best CB movies are the one's with the most emotion in.

In other words: You have no interest in a Superman movie.

In other words your interest in a Supeman movie doesn't include characters' development, Superman's love and dedication to humanity and emotion. Ok then. You're not the first.

Stop being blind, please?

When will YOU learn that 'boring' doesn't equal 'character depth'!?

Maybe you'll change your perspective when you get that movies about Superman are not necessarily only CGI super-punches to giant robots.

SR has ZERO depth! It's the most pretentious piece of crap of all the crappy superhero movies.

When will YOU learn that 'bashing' doesn't equal how many times I can type 'crap'!?

Please some effort.

SR has depth in many scenes and more than the average money-making blockbuster you can catch around.

Superman's expressing how he sometimes feel overwhelmed by people around the world calling him a saviour and asking him for things and the speech to his son are 2 examples I'll give you. At least in the next post you can start thinking how to bash some specific points and that way you'll get a higher level of discusion thanks to me.

Go watch a movie with an actual storyline for god's sake ...

Go read a book so you can type opinions properly instead of ruling out other people's far better expressed ones, for god's sake.

 

[VenomsMom]

Ghost Rider isn't getting a sequel. At least as far as I've heard.

Rush Hour 1 and 2 made money. I do think the joke has worn thin by now though, but who knows what will happen with the new one.

Yes the joke has worn thin. And judging from those trailers it will be the same jokes and story all over again. De ja vu anyone? Might as well watch the first two again.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

In other words your interest in a Supeman movie doesn't include characters' development, Superman's love and dedication to humanity and emotion. Ok then. You're not the first.



Maybe you'll change your perspective when you get that movies about Superman are not necessarily only CGI super-punches to giant robots.



When will YOU learn that 'bashing' doesn't equal how many times I can type 'crap'!?

Please some effort.

SR has depth in many scenes and more than the average money-making blockbuster you can catch around.

Superman's expressing how he sometimes feel overwhelmed by people around the world calling him a saviour and asking him for things and the speech to his son are 2 examples I'll give you. At least in the next post you can start thinking how to bash some specific points and that way you'll get a higher level of discusion thanks to me.



Go read a book so you can type opinions properly instead of ruling out other people's far better expressed ones, for god's sake.

Excellently put, SR has more depth than most summer blockbusters released over the last few years, and i applaud it for that. Though i like watching mindless action movies as much as the next guy every now and then, the one's with depth and emotion are the one's i watch repeatedly.

 

[Hugh'sMrs]

Ghost Rider isn't getting a sequel. At least as far as I've heard.

Rush Hour 1 and 2 made money. I do think the joke has worn thin by now though, but who knows what will happen with the new one.

I went to the theater on Monday and saw the trailer for Rush Hour 3. EVERY scene was a ridicuously over the top fight sequence, which I guess appeals to some people. I'm not impressed with preposterous action sequences where the hero(es) gets tossed around and beaten up yet emerge without a scratch. In Rush Hour 3 it looks like they fall off the Eiffel Tower. Gimme a break.

 

[echostation]

While I have major issues with the lack of exciting action sequences or a supervillain and some parts of superman's characterization... I definitely feel Singer nailed a lot of the dramatics far better than most other Superhero film directors... I felt at least Returns while majorly flawed, had far more character depth and subtlety than X-3, any of the fantastic four films, it reminded me a lot of some of the character depth in Begins, Batman Returns (which I found to have more depth than the original Batman particularly between catwoman an Bats) and the first Superman.

It's one of the main reasons why I think Returns I think may not have done better at the box office,but I think it would've been better liked as a film overall had it released in the winter like the earlier two Superman films. I think audiences mainly wanted big summer fun which SR obviously lacked... also the trailers didn't really help market what kind of film it was... it was all out of focus, poorly done and all over the place. It amazes me how **** the trailers and commercials were for this film under WB yet at the same time some of the best promos and trailers i've seen in recent years came under the same studio WB ala 300...

 

[superbaby]

While I have major issues with the lack of exciting action sequences or a supervillain and some parts of superman's characterization... I definitely feel Singer nailed a lot of the dramatics far better than most other Superhero film directors... I felt at least Returns while majorly flawed, had far more character depth and subtlety than X-3, any of the fantastic four films, it reminded me a lot of some of the character depth in Begins, Batman Returns (which I found to have more depth than the original Batman particularly between catwoman an Bats) and the first Superman.

It's one of the main reasons why I think Returns I think may not have done better at the box office,but I think it would've been better liked as a film overall had it released in the winter like the earlier two Superman films. I think audiences mainly wanted big summer fun which SR obviously lacked... also the trailers didn't really help market what kind of film it was... it was all out of focus, poorly done and all over the place. It amazes me how **** the trailers and commercials were for this film under WB yet at the same time some of the best promos and trailers i've seen in recent years came under the same studio WB ala 300...

because 300 has a clear theme, therefore they know how to do the marketing. SR? a chickflick? how to sell? you tell me.

 

[El Payaso]

because 300 has a clear theme, therefore they know how to do the marketing. SR? a chickflick? how to sell? you tell me.

SR is not a chic flick, that could give us a clue.

 

[superbaby]

SR is not a chic flick, that could give us a clue.

the movie isn't about superman returns to the people and the world. clearly it is about a superman returns to the woman he left. not chick flick? even singer confirmed so. the most romantic and funny chick flick he ever done.

 

[El Payaso]

the movie isn't about superman returns to the people and the world.

Yes it is.

He goes to krypton then he returns, saves a plane and people cheer at him and later they all call out for his help.

clearly it is about a superman returns to the woman he left.

One thing doesn't rule the other out.

not chick flick? even singer confirmed so. the most romantic and funny chick flick he ever done.

Oh yes, he joked about it calling it a chic flick. As hilarious as your mistake is, he was not serious about that classification which is not official either.

And 'most romantic and funny' is just meant as a comparision to his other movies.

 

[superbaby]

Yes it is.

He goes to krypton then he returns, saves a plane and people cheer at him and later they all call out for his help.



One thing doesn't rule the other out.
.

you know what is a movie's theme and focus of a movie?

ya, he saved a plane and people cheered for him and we see a montage of his rescues. but they have no depth, progress, development and meaning. just to show he returned and did some good deems in that 3 minutes.
the movie's FOCUS/THEME isn't about superman returns to the people and the world. got that, now?

 

[superbaby]

because 300 has a clear theme, therefore they know how to do the marketing. SR? a chickflick? how to sell? you tell me.

and El Payaso read carefully next time before you post. i was talking about the theme. a clear movie theme.
again, you know what is theme, what is focus?

 

[El Payaso]

you know what is a movie's theme and focus of a movie?

ya, he saved a plane and people cheered for him and we see a montage of his rescues. but they have no depth, progress, development and meaning.

The meaning is that people mised him and they were too happy to see him again because, fo what we see later (scene of Superman and Lois above Metropolis), they feel they need him too much; maybe even more than they actually need him.

And no, it got no more progress than that given than the focus was in Superman-Lois relationship as in SII and big part of STM.

just to show he returned and did some good deems in that 3 minutes.

In movies you don't need 50 minutes to make a point. Depending on the director you might need a few seconds. Of course you have also the Hollywwod average director who needs to spoonfeed and underline everything due to the market exigences, audience not too able to get things and/or lack of skills.

the movie's FOCUS/THEME isn't about superman returns to the people and the world. got that, now?

No movie has only one focus.

But yes, the main focus wasn't on Superman-people relationship (even when it was addressed), my question is... so what? You can see yourself Supes-Lois was the main focus, there you have your focus.

and El Payaso read carefully next time before you post. i was talking about the theme. a clear movie theme.
again, you know what is theme, what is focus?

See? You need two posts to make one point. I see a fan of underlining.