The Official SDCC Coverage Thread

[buggs0268]

The IMDB boards are loaded with spamming and trolling from the same users though; not very reliable for making any intelligent assumptions.

Check out the USER rating for Superman Returns on RT.com

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/superman_returns/reviews_users.php

Its probably a more reliable way of gauging general movie-going audience reaction overall. 76% is a fair rating. Nothing near the first Spider-man but a decent start for the \S/ franchaise.

Also; its pretty much in line with the SHH ratings poll as well.

Now wait a second. The argument for people liking it was given as IMDB. You go on IMDB and read the user comments on the SR section and most of them are bad. So now that the views of those who go to IMDB is that they don't like the movie. Now all of a sudden IMDB is not trust worthy and only those who feel negative will be more vocal and post in the comments. While other movies that are liked, like Die Hard, don't have that phenomenon. You guys can't have it both ways, and then when a site that you list does not like SR, ignore it and go to another site. The proof is in the pudding as they say. Anyone can vote in a poll, and it was shown here a long time ago that there are people who will vote multiple times. But the user comments are the voice of the people. That is why I don't like those damn polls and trust the comments made more.

 

[buggs0268]

good my man, back for a moment. I am really glad the sequel is in limo. So that singer gets fired and we get a proper take on the character. It's safe to say singer knows nothing about superman. Who he is as a character and what he stands for.

You know what is even sadder. Since he was following the Donner movies, which understood the character, you would think with that blueprint he could have made a Superman movie that was proper for the character. But nope. We got Singerman. A guy who sits outside an ex girlfriends house and uses his X-ray vision to stalk her.

 

[Qwerty©]

That is why I don't like those damn polls and trust the comments made more.

"I don't listen to actual figures and facts and would rather listen to those that share my views"

 

[FlawlessVictory]

yeah....I still think Singer made a mistake by not casting Caviezel. Caviezel would have been amazing as Supes.

For the story that Singer was telling, a returns story with a decent amount of history between Supes and Lois and Supes having a son, they should have cast someone older than Routh, like Caviezel. To me, Routh could practically pass as Tristan's brother, esp. at some of the premiere photos. Routh was just too young looking.

It really didn't matter.

Supes/Clark had basically no development and lines. I'm glad Jim didn't get it for this particular film. Wouldn't have fully taken advantage of his skill.

True.

 

[Showtime]

Now wait a second. The argument for people liking it was given as IMDB. You go on IMDB and read the user comments on the SR section and most of them are bad. So now that the views of those who go to IMDB is that they don't like the movie. Now all of a sudden IMDB is not trust worthy and only those who feel negative will be more vocal and post in the comments. While other movies that are liked, like Die Hard, don't have that phenomenon. You guys can't have it both ways, and then when a site that you list does not like SR, ignore it and go to another site. The proof is in the pudding as they say. Anyone can vote in a poll, and it was shown here a long time ago that there are people who will vote multiple times. But the user comments are the voice of the people. That is why I don't like those damn polls and trust the comments made more.

By that same token don't you not trust the polls because alot of them are pointing towards the fact that Returns was liked therefore you are turning to the comments because you believe that the majority were negative although they aren't as accurate as the polls?

 

[Superman_]

To be honest the majority of people liked Superman Returns or it would not have made 200 million +. Most people's problem with the movie was not Routh or Kate or even the story; their problem was it had no action.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Fine, everyone loved it, it was a huge success and will spawn 10 sequels. When your head comes out of the sand and you actually look at general publics reactions and thoughts instead of thinking your feelings are everyone's we'll talk.

The public didn't love it because it didn't do well. Movies that do huge business are loved. That's why it makes sense.

Look what we got with Transformers? What was that, a headache inducing void of a film with a middle section that could put an insomniac to sleep. Transformers was all CGI and no bite. $150 million goes far in a vapid piece of crap. Superman needs sets, art direction, real money for real effects. You can't compare the two. My Stealth analogy was a poor one as well.

Sorry, but, this is bull****, the movie didnt do well you say? Well it didnt do badly either, and since when is box office an indicator of quality? Are saying Titanic is the most popular movie ever?

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Oh the old so when is boxoffice a indicator of quality thing. It's not an indicator of quality for the public (nor should it be) but it is for the studios, who are trying to make money...because they are a business.

I have to say that I disagree with everyone when it comes to internet polls and message boards. If you believe that the internet folk repersent the general movie going public Hulk would have gotten a Ang Lee helmed sequel and Fantastic Four would have not had a sequel. Movie studios, rightfully so, don't care about a bunch of nerds talking about there love of movies on the interenet enough to change anything big about there big budget movies. They are going to do what they can to please the general moviegoing non nerd masses.

These polls are not to be trusted one way or the other IMHO. If the polls said most people hated it I wouldn't believe it and vice versa. I find it amazing that people keep bring up IMDB considering that most moviegoers don't post on the threads or vote on the polls. If you bring IMDB up when responding to my posts I'm not going to aknowlege that part.

 

[FlawlessVictory]

^Agreed.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

^Doubley agreed.

 

[matthooper]

Sorry, but, this is bull****, the movie didnt do well you say? Well it didnt do badly either, and since when is box office an indicator of quality? Are saying Titanic is the most popular movie ever?

I never once said that box office was a measure of quality. Not once. I also never said it did badly. It's all relative, it was a huge dissapointment to the studio's expectations and whether you want to admit it, just about every fan. No one thought $200 million would be the domestic figure. While not bad it's not good.

I simply said that the movie was a bigger box office dissapointment than the defenders care to admit. I also said that because of the low box office figures, it points to the fact that the public didn't embrace it. That's pretty obvious. I never once said anything about quality. ID4, Transformers, Signs, Rush Hour 2, all crap movies that made more money than Superman Returns. I didn't like SR much, but it was better than all those films.

The box office figures for SR is a combination of things. People didn't embrace it for one reason or another, so the word of mouth was not great and there were few repeat viewings. Those are the two things that make a film a big hit. But, there are dozens of films that I have loved that made nothing at the box office. Ed Wood is a perfect example. It was an enormous flop, but I think it's a classic. Box office has nothing to do with quality, and I never said it did. Box office only has to do with how much the public cares to see it and likes it.

 

[matthooper]

This is the major problem with web boards. You get one idiot who can’t read and claims someone said something they didn’t, then you get bigger idiots saying “ ^ I agree”.

I don't know if it’s the fact that the board is made up of 12 year olds or adult morons.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

This is the major problem with web boards. You get one idiot who can’t read and claims someone said something they didn’t, then you get bigger idiots saying “ ^ I agree”.

I don't know if it’s the fact that the board is made up of 12 year olds or adult morons.

Please.

 

[Excel]

I never once said that box office was a measure of quality. Not once. I also never said it did badly. It's all relative, it was a huge dissapointment to the studio's expectations and whether you want to admit it, just about every fan. No one thought $200 million would be the domestic figure. While not bad it's not good.

I simply said that the movie was a bigger box office dissapointment than the defenders care to admit. I also said that because of the low box office figures, it points to the fact that the public didn't embrace it. That's pretty obvious. I never once said anything about quality. ID4, Transformers, Signs, Rush Hour 2, all crap movies that made more money than Superman Returns. I didn't like SR much, but it was better than all those films.

The box office figures for SR is a combination of things. People didn't embrace it for one reason or another, so the word of mouth was not great and there were few repeat viewings. Those are the two things that make a film a big hit. But, there are dozens of films that I have loved that made nothing at the box office. Ed Wood is a perfect example. It was an enormous flop, but I think it's a classic. Box office has nothing to do with quality, and I never said it did. Box office only has to do with how much the public cares to see it and likes it.

Box Office is a measure of what is most popular film at a given moment. While Supes is big...Pirates was far more popular. Very rarely do films coexist and do HUGE numbers when one ofth efilm is not a sequel.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

I never once said that box office was a measure of quality. Not once. I also never said it did badly. It's all relative, it was a huge dissapointment to the studio's expectations and whether you want to admit it, just about every fan. No one thought $200 million would be the domestic figure. While not bad it's not good.

I simply said that the movie was a bigger box office dissapointment than the defenders care to admit. I also said that because of the low box office figures, it points to the fact that the public didn't embrace it. That's pretty obvious. I never once said anything about quality. ID4, Transformers, Signs, Rush Hour 2, all crap movies that made more money than Superman Returns. I didn't like SR much, but it was better than all those films.

The box office figures for SR is a combination of things. People didn't embrace it for one reason or another, so the word of mouth was not great and there were few repeat viewings. Those are the two things that make a film a big hit. But, there are dozens of films that I have loved that made nothing at the box office. Ed Wood is a perfect example. It was an enormous flop, but I think it's a classic. Box office has nothing to do with quality, and I never said it did. Box office only has to do with how much the public cares to see it and likes it.

Were are getting it from that it dissapointed nearly every fan please? I'd love to know, because on Bluetights its well loved, and on here it always does very well on polls, that means IMO its well liked on the internet, but there is no possible way to gauge what "Most fans thought."

This is the major problem with web boards. You get one idiot who can’t read and claims someone said something they didn’t, then you get bigger idiots saying “ ^ I agree”.

I don't know if it’s the fact that the board is made up of 12 year olds or adult morons.

So we're idiots now huh?

 

[OobeDoobBenubi]

Pirates was far more popular

& a movie about a Ring is more popular then Pirates & a movie that takes place on a boat is more popular then both the Rings & Pirates movies

 

[Lightning54SC]

ok seriosuly this is getting to ebe like BT.net...

get it through your skulls peole teh movie flopped in the eyes of the studio.. yes it made 390 million when it was expected to make double that...

you want proof it flopped, if ther is a sequel and i say "IF" but if there is one the kid will have a far less role, and there will be more action thus giving the reason why people disliked it, even the average movie goer knows superman shouldnt have akid and that the studio blew their wods to early on the film

 

[matthooper]

So we're idiots now huh?

Again you people don't read. I called the people idiots who mis-quoted me. I never once said box office numbers were an indication of the quality of the film. Yet, I was basically quoted that. Do you read posts and forget 2 seconds later?

 

[matthooper]

Please.

Please what? I was misquoted and I called them on it.

 

[FlawlessVictory]

This is the major problem with web boards. You get one idiot who can’t read and claims someone said something they didn’t, then you get bigger idiots saying “ ^ I agree”.

I don't know if it’s the fact that the board is made up of 12 year olds or adult morons.

Wow, you're so angry. Here :heart:.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Again you people don't read. I called the people idiots who mis-quoted me. I never once said box office numbers were an indication of the quality of the film. Yet, I was basically quoted that. Do you read posts and forget 2 seconds later?

Basically yes, and whats with the attitude anyway. Ok you said that BO indicates the popularity of a movie, is that what you said?

If you did, then i would still call bull****, many of the most popular movies of today did terrible at the BO. Fightclub anyone?

 

[superbaby]

ok seriosuly this is getting to ebe like BT.net...

get it through your skulls peole teh movie flopped in the eyes of the studio.. yes it made 390 million when it was expected to make double that...

you want proof it flopped, if ther is a sequel and i say "IF" but if there is one the kid will have a far less role, and there will be more action thus giving the reason why people disliked it, even the average movie goer knows superman shouldnt have a kid and that the studio blew their wods to early on the film

obviously, WB didn't know. they thought superman can use the incredibles or formula.

 

[manofsteel4life]

You know what is even sadder. Since he was following the Donner movies, which understood the character, you would think with that blueprint he could have made a Superman movie that was proper for the character. But nope. We got Singerman. A guy who sits outside an ex girlfriends house and uses his X-ray vision to stalk her.

i just dont understand why you insist that what he did makes him a stalker

 

[manofsteel4life]

You know what is even sadder. Since he was following the Donner movies, which understood the character, you would think with that blueprint he could have made a Superman movie that was proper for the character. But nope. We got Singerman. A guy who sits outside an ex girlfriends house and uses his X-ray vision to stalk her.

why cant you understand that he wasnt using his xray in a bad way?...he was only using it to try to figure out the best way to approach Lois

 

[Crook]

It was eavesdropping, plain and simple. Doesn't help that he was doing it behind some bushes either.