The Official Start/Release Date & Location Thread

[buggs0268]

As I said, it was on either Access Hollywood or Entertainment tonight. It was just after Singer got hired. When Singer go hired, everyone assumed he would go to Spacey for Lex, which he did. Spacey was at an event, and they asked him what he thought of Singer getting the job. Spacey said What I typed in my post.

"I am glad he is getting a chance to do Superman. I know that ever since I have known him, he would grab anyone on the set that would listen to him and tell them his idea for a sequel to Superman 2"

I remember it vividly. They also asked Spacey if he was going to play Lex, and he said "Who knows" or something like that. And when all that speculation of a kid for supes started, I knew exactly what he was doing. I posted what Spacey said the next day. A few of the old timers watched it and we had a talk about it. It was on TV. I am not making it up. I actually think it was Access Hollywood. I brought it up the whole time there was a kid debate. That interview was never quoted on the internet, but he did say it on TV. I can't make it any clearer than that.

 

[Showtime]

Again, where does Spacey say that the idea that Singer had was to give Superman a kid? That is just your speculation. Singer's idea for the kid did not come up until just before they pitched the idea to WB. So that idea that Singer was pitching for 2 years was a Returns story. You're making things up.

 

[buggs0268]

It is obvious that Superman and Lois had sex in Superman 2 the theatrical version. he was a human when he had it, and he gave Lois that damn kiss of forgetfullness. If you put two and two together, it is the most logical conclusion. I had posted the next day "they are going to give Supes a kid" We discussed it the day after in a long deleted thread.

And no I am not. It was on TV, and you don't have to be a brain surgeon to put two and two together, especially since it did happen.

Singer had been saying for the longest time, swearing that the kid was not Superman's. He lied to us for a whole year. And the kid was his. Don't call me a liar. He never said "kid for Superman" but it is pretty obvious what he meant. Epecially since it is what happened, and if the threads weren't deleted you would see I was talking about this quote and the kid two and a half years ago. It is logially the only thing that could come out of "...his idea for a sequel to Superman 2". A few of us here at the time saw it and came to the same comclusion. And if you could look back at all those threads where we discussed it, I have maintained all along that the kid was going to end up as Supes, even when Singer was lying and saying he wasn't.

 

[larryfilmmaker]

Hey all!

I can already see the pro-Singer fans embracing this news and the rest of us waiting to hear an official announcement from Warner Bros. rather than some Singer cronies.

Personally, although I think Superman Returns is atrocious, I am not totally averse to Singer returning IF he makes a good movie this time, because we know he can make a good movie.

But the questions remain:

1. Does Singer acknowledge there are a lot of people (including many Superman fans) who dislike Superman Returns?

2. Does Singer understand why so many dislike it?

3. Can he do anything about it...does Singer have it in him to make a Superman film the majority of people want to see?

4. Does Singer want to do anything about it...or plod on with the same tired formula?

5. Will Warner Bros. trust him a second time?

Hes already given Superman fans the 'bird' with Superman Returns, doing the sequel in the same manner is tantamount to flicking them the 'Vee's'!

Do YOU understand why I thought SR was amazing?

 

[Showtime]

It is obvious that Superman and Lois had sex in Superman 2 the theatrical version. he was a human when he had it, and he gave Lois that damn kiss of forgetfullness. If you put two and two together, it is the most logical conclusion. I had posted the next day "they are going to give Supes a kid" We discussed it the day after in a long deleted thread.

And no I am not. It was on TV, and you don't have to be a brain surgeon to put two and two together, especially since it did happen.

Singer had been saying for the longest time, swearing that the kid was not Superman's. He lied to us for a whole year. And the kid was his. Don't call me a liar. He never said "kid for Superman" but it is pretty obvious.

Whether you are lying or you are wrong Singer's idea was for a Returns story it's right here in front of me. He did not come up with the idea for a kid until 2004 after talking with Mike and Dan and during the writing of a treatment.

So you saying the only interest of Singer's was to give Superman a kid is way of base and is completely wrong. That's the bottom line. You can talk about Access Hollywood and Spacey's quote all you want, my point is that Singer's idea had nothing to do with a kid until he went over the treatment with Mike and Dan.

To make it clear, Singer's vision for Superman involved a Returns story and the kid came afterwards. I don't know how I can be any more clear.

 

[El Payaso]

Do YOU understand why I thought SR was amazing?

Excuse me, are we bolding words randomly here or do we have a specific pattern?

 

[\S/JcDc\S/]

As I said, it was on either Access Hollywood or Entertainment tonight. It was just after Singer got hired. When Singer go hired, everyone assumed he would go to Spacey for Lex, which he did. Spacey was at an event, and they asked him what he thought of Singer getting the job. Spacey said What I typed in my post.

"I am glad he is getting a chance to do Superman. I know that ever since I have known him, he would grab anyone on the set that would listen to him and tell them his idea for a sequel to Superman 2"

I remember it vividly. They also asked Spacey if he was going to play Lex, and he said "Who knows" or something like that. And when all that speculation of a kid for supes started, I knew exactly what he was doing. I posted what Spacey said the next day. A few of the old timers watched it and we had a talk about it. It was on TV. I am not making it up. I actually think it was Access Hollywood. I brought it up the whole time there was a kid debate. That interview was never quoted on the internet, but he did say it on TV. I can't make it any clearer than that.

Not to take sides but I do have a vague memory of this myself.

 

[Showtime]

Not to take sides but I do have a vague memory of this myself.

I still don't see why this is so hard to understand, the quote from Spacey says nothing about the kid. It talks about Singer's idea, which was a Returns story, the idea for the kid was included later. It was a thrown in while going over the idea with Mike and Dan.

 

[buggs0268]

And I can tell you that a few of us talked about it, and the next day we who were here were saying "supes is going to get a kid." Honestly I don't trust anything that Singer says. I don't know how I can be any clearer than that. because honestly how does a return trip equal to Spacey saying point blank "A sequel to Superman 2." And according to Spacey, Bryan had been telling his idea to anyone who would listen to it since her first met him" so he was telling people of his idea for a sequel to Superman 2 since he was filming the Usual Suspects. Is there any threads left from Superman 2. Zod, Non and Ursa are all killed in it. Lex was in jail. The only, and I mean only unresolved thing was the fact that he and Lois had unprotected sex while he was human, and he did give Lois the kiss of forgetfullness. That is the only unresolved thing from that film. And it was up for discussion for many years as to weather they would have had a kid or not. Since it was not brought up in Superman 3, everyone assumed that that kiss of forgetfullness did something if there was a fetus. And we did discuss it here and we were talking kid for supes early on.

 

[buggs0268]

Not to take sides but I do have a vague memory of this myself.

he was wearing a white jacket. It was backstage at some event. I think you and I maybe were talking about it. And if you remember, early on, one of the first rumors from whatever info we had at all was a kid for Supes., and that interview pretty much cemented it into the minds of those who saw it.

 

[Showtime]

I am not saying you didn't discuss Singer giving Superman a kid, or that Spacey didn't saying something similar to your quote on Access Hollywood. I am not saying there wasn't a thread about it, I am not saying Superman wasn't snuggling with Lois in a silver mylar bed in Superman 2.

I am telling you that the idea Spacey was talking about on the set of Usual Suspects could not have included the kid, because that idea was thrown in by the Mike, Dan, and Singer while they were writing the treatment for Superman Returns in 04. I am saying that nowwhere in Spacey's quote does he mention a kid. That is what I am saying.

 

[buggs0268]

I am not saying you didn't discuss Singer giving Superman a kid, or that Spacey didn't saying something similar to your quote on Access Hollywood. I am not saying there wasn't a thread about it, I am not saying Superman wasn't snuggling with Lois in a silver mylar bed in Superman 2.

I am telling you that the idea Spacey was talking about on the set of Usual Suspects could not have included the kid, because that idea was thrown in by the Mike, Dan, and Singer while they were writing the treatment for Superman Returns in 04. I am saying that nowwhere in Spacey's quote does he mention a kid. That is what I am saying.

Okay, then what else could "sequel to Superman 2 mean"? Hell, Guber even said at the onset when Singer was on Hollywood shootout, which was before any script was even done, and early on, to Singer "And now you are making a sequel to a 20 year old sequel". Singer did not rebut him, correct him or anything. The only look I saw on Singer's face was "**** you weren't supposed to say "sequel to a sequel" in that moment before he spoke. Honestly, what do you think could possibly cary over at all from Superman 2? In the Lester version, Non, Zod, and Ursa are dead. The only, and I mean only unresolved anything that can spring from Superman 2 at all is him having a kid. And he may not have initially included it into his treatment for fear of the WB rejecting a direct sequel and brought it in later. Some writers have done this with movies, originally intending it to be in the film, but keeping it out of the treatment and then in later drafts bringing it in. But that is the only thing that carries over from theatrically released version of Superman 2 at all. It is the only thing you have to spring board from at all. Hell, superman fans have been discussing it before for years. And treatments rarely end up resembling the final film at all.

 

[Showtime]

Okay, then what else could "sequel to Superman 2 mean"? Hell, Guber even said at the onset when Singer was on Hollywood shootout, which was before any script was even done, and early on, to Singer "And now you are making a sequel to a 20 year old sequel". Honestly, what do you think could possibly cary over at all from Superman 2? In the Lester version, Non, Zod, and Ursa are dead. The only, and I mean only unresolved anything that can spring from Superman 2 at all is him having a kid. And he may not have initially included it into his treatment for fear of the WB rejecting a direct sequel and brought it in later. Some writers have done this with movies, originally intending it to be in the film, but keeping it out of the treatment and then in later drafts bringing it in. But that is the only thing that carries over from Superman 2 at all.

He wanted to make a sequel to the Donner films involving Superman leaving and Returning to a world that has moved on and learned to live without him, which actually didn't end up happening. Again, I can provide quotes of when the kid came into play during the idea process, you're just speculating and theorizing. The timeline you are hanging onto is wrong, the idea that you keep throwing about where Singer just wanted to tackle Superman to give him a kid is wrong. That is all I am saying.

 

[buggs0268]

And all I am saying is "Sequel to superman 2" was said twice early on before a first draft was even turned in. The first draft was turned in way after he was on Holywood shootout. What, if anything could you spring board off of except Lois and supes having un-protected sex in the fortress, and him giving her the kiss of forgetfullness.

There may say one thing on whatever you have, but honestly, what does sequel to Superman 2 mean? I mean, repeating, what is the only un-resolved thing at all from Superman 2 the Lester cut? And as far as I know, he has always said Lois was unmarried but with someone else.

just because he didn't include it in the treament doesn't mean that wasnt what he was going around and telling anyone on his film sets who would listen to his idea for a sequel to Superman 2.

let me put it this way, bringing another film. The guy who wrote and directed the fog remake wanted the end to be Elizabeth was reincarnated from some chick on the boat that was burned. But they did not include it in the first draft or treatment. It wasn't until the studio started asking for changes did they put it in stating that they wanted it in all along, but knew they wouldn't get it aproved right away. This happens all the time in movies.

 

[Showtime]

And all I am saying is "Sequel to superman 2" was said twice early on before a first draft was even turned in. The first draft was turned in way after he was on Holywood shootout. What, if anything could you spring board off of except Lois and supes having un-protected sex in the fortress, and him giving her the kiss of forgetfullness.

There may say one thing on whatever you have, but honestly, what does sequel to Superman 2 mean? I mean, repeating, what is the only un-resolved thing at all from Superman 2 the Lester cut?

Right...but you're still not seeing the big picture here Buggs. The 1st draft of the script was actually being worked on while the art depeartment was already fleshing out storyboards. I am agreeing with you that the kid was already a part of the script as Superman's son at this point, he was also part of the 30 page treatment that WB greenlit the movie on. That isn't my point. That interview about Superman 2 and what not, was after the treatment was already handed in. You are going around posting that he had this idea since Usual Suspects but that is false. That is all I am saying. Your claim that this is why he wanted to do a Superman movie, to give him a kid, is therefore also false. That's what I am saying.

 

[buggs0268]

Right...but you're still not seeing the big picture here Buggs. The 1st draft of the script was actually being worked on while the art depeartment was already fleshing out storyboards. I am agreeing with you that the kid was already a part of the script as Superman's son at this point, he was also part of the 30 page treatment that WB greenlit the movie on. That isn't my point. That interview about Superman 2 and what not, was after the treatment was already handed in. You are going around posting that he had this idea since Usual Suspects but that is false. That is all I am saying. Your claim that this is why he wanted to do a Superman movie, to give him a kid, is therefore also false. That's what I am saying.

A lot of times directors don't put things they intend to put into the final film into the treatement as they are afraid the studio wont go for the pitch or the idea. They know to bring things in later when they are already officially on the pic. This happenes a lot. As far as the art department drawing up storyboards, films have major changes written in during filming. and the kid does not effect any production changes. if you look, the only thing is the one scene in the kids room, and her whispering into his ears. Singer had said early on that the Shield saves supes life, but that didn't end up in the film. So many things change. Many movies start without a finished script. Sometimes scripts drastically change from when you start filming to finish. Whoopie Goldberg had it written into her contract that on any film she starts she didn't want amajor rewrite to the script after Jumping Jack Flash. Jaws started without a finished script. They wrote the whole shark blowing up while they were filming it. Star Trek the motion picutre started with on 75 percent of a script. They were filming without an ending. No one knew what Vger was through most of production and it being a satelite was a very late edition. The T-Rex returning in Jurrassic Park was not in the final shooting script. They came up with that on the set a few days before filming it. And they cut out the scene of the t-rex at the waterfall to do it. It came literally on the last days of filming. They pretty much made it up while they were filming it and had Phill Tippett working out the T-rex's and Velociraptors timing while filming it.

Batman had a major rewrite while filming to the end of production. Just because a film is in production doesn't mean major changes to film don't happen all the time. And like I said, sometimes writers will leave things they want to do out of the treatment, and sometimes even the first draft as they are afraid the studio will back out of it. They add it later. But these are things that they always meant to have in the film.

And again, honestly, is there anything else you can springboard as sequel of Superman 2 other than that? Nothing. If it isn't for that, you couldn't make a sequel and call it a sequel.

Honestly, director's leaving out things they always intended to do until later drats is a common thing. It happens all the time on more provacative ideas the director, writer feel they cant get past the studio at such and early stage in the game.

 

[Showtime]

A lot of times directors don't put things they intend to put into the final film into the treatement as they are afraid the studio wont go for the pitch or the idea. They know to bring things in later when they are already officially on the pic. This happenes a lot. As far as the art department drawing up storyboards, films have major changes written in during filming. and the kid does not effect any production changes. if you look, the only thing is the one scene in the kids room, and her whispering into his ears. Singer had said early on that the Shield saves supes life, but that didn't end up in the film. So many things change. Many movies start without a finished script. Sometimes scripts drastically change from when you start filming to finish. Whoopie Goldberg had it written into her contract that on any film she starts she didn't want amajor rewrite to the script after Jumping Jack Flash.

Batman had a major rewrite while filming to the end of production. Just because a film is in production doesn't mean major changes to film don't happen all the time. And like I said, sometimes writers will leave things they want to do out of the treatment, and sometimes even the first draft as they are afraid the studio will back out of it. They add it later. But these are things that they always meant to have in the film.

And again, honestly, is there anything else you can springboard as sequel of Superman 2 other than that? Nothing. If it isn't for that, you couldn't make a sequel and call it a sequel.

Honestly, directors leaving out things they always intended to do until later drats is a common thing.

I really don't understand what anything above with Whoopi or Superman's Life Saving Shield has to do with the fact that Singer, Mike, and Dan all said seperately that the idea to give Superman a kid came to fruition while they were writing the treatment and originally the idea was to give only Lois a kid and she was going to be married. The point is again, Singer's idea had nothing to do with the kid, it had to do with a Returns story originally. Your contention that Singer's plan for years, since Usual Suspects, was to give Superman a kid doesn't add up.

 

[buggs0268]

I really don't understand what anything above with Whoopi or Superman's Life Saving Shield has to do with the fact that Singer, Mike, and Dan all said seperately that the idea to give Superman a kid came to fruition while they were writing the treatment and originally the idea was to give only Lois a kid and she was going to be married. The point is again, Singer's idea had nothing to do with the kid, it had to do with a Returns story originally. Your contention that Singer's plan for years, since Usual Suspects, was to give Superman a kid doesn't add up.

And what of anything could Singer springboard at all from Superman 2? At all? The only thing is Supes and Lois having unprotected sex. That is it. What else would he be running around telling people about as his sequel to Superman 2. The last thing he said in Superman 2 was "Sorry I have been away for so long. I'll never let you down again." So, Supes having said that, how does a sequel to Superman 2 involve him doing the one thing he said he wouldn't do? So you can't spring board off of that. The only thing is the unprotected sex scene and the kid as a result. I mean literally, what elese can you springboard off of?

And we know that Singer has had inconsistencies he said throughout this whole production. We used to have a thread on it. Dougherty and Harris said "it will be Superman 3" at the talk they had at NYU, which was right after they got signed on.

 

[Showtime]

And what of anything could Singer springboard at all from Superman 2? At all? The only thing is Supes and Lois having unprotected sex. That is it. What else would he be running around telling people about as his sequel to Superman 2. The last thing he said in Superman 2 was "Sorry I have been away for so long. I'll never let you down again." So, Supes having said that, how does a sequel to Superman 2 involve him doing the one thing he said he wouldn't do? So you can't spring board off of that. The only thing is the unprotected sex scene and the kid as a result. I mean literally, what elese can you springboard off of?

And we know that Singer has had inconsistencies he said throughout this whole production. We used to have a thread on it.

I still have no idea what you are talking about, you don't think they could have continued the Donner movies backbone without giving Superman a kid? If you take away the kid all together, there are still so many connections to the movie that it could spin your head. It would still be a sequel because it's in the same universe?

 

[Showtime]

And we know that Singer has had inconsistencies he said throughout this whole production. We used to have a thread on it. Dougherty and Harris said "it will be Superman 3" at the talk they had at NYU, which was right after they got signed on.

Right! Which was after they already had done the treatment?

 

[buggs0268]

I still have no idea what you are talking about, you don't think they could have continued the Donner movies backbone without giving Superman a kid? If you take away the kid all together, there are still so many connections to the movie that it could spin your head. It would still be a sequel because it's in the same universe?

No it was a sequel to Superman 2. It is the only, and I mean only unresolved thing. If they were intending to use it as a backstory, then why have any connection at all. Be like Bond and say not have any conection. There is no reason to tie it in at all. they can say what they want, but we were calling it from the get go after that Spacey interview.

 

[Showtime]

No it was a sequel to Superman 2. It is the only, and I mean only unresolved thing. If they were intending to use it as a backstory, then why have any connection at all. Be like Bond and say not have any conection. There is no reason to tie it in at all.

Buggs, it's in interviews with the writers and Singer. The idea for the kid was developed while they were writing the treatment. Not on the set of Usual Suspects. I don't know what else to tell ya, but I can't go on and on about it. You don't agree. That is fine.

 

[buggs0268]

Oh really. In fact, I think someone even asked that early on. And he had said all the way through filming and up to release that he swore the kid was not Superman's. Do you remember Moriarity's script review post on AICN just weeks before the film was released about the kid being Superman's and the piano scene? The WB and Singer swore that wasn't in the movie and it was only in a budget draft that had been thrown out a long time ago. That was like 3 weeks before the film was released and everyone here who was a singerite was calling Moriarty a liar for. They also swore up and down in interviews that the kid was not going to be his even shortly before the film was released. The WB called Moriarty an out and out liar. And this was 3 weeks before the film was released. And low and behold the script that Moriarity did his review from was the final draft and not some B/S budget draft. They swore up and down, publically, the piano throwing scene was not in the movie at all. Are you talking about those very same people? I think they even said that no piano scene was even filmed.

 

[Showtime]

Oh really. In fact, I think someone even asked that early on. And he had said all the way through filming and up to release that he swore the kid was not Superman's. Do you remember Moriarity's post on AICN just weeks before the film was released about the kid being Superman's and the piano scene? The WB and Singer swore that wasn't in the movie and it was only in a budget draft that had been thrown out a long time ago. That was like 3 weeks before the film was released and everyone here who was a singerite was calling Moriarty a liar for. They also swore up and down in interviews that the kid was not going to be his even shortly before the film was released. The WB called Moriarty an out and out liar. And this was 3 weeks before the film was released. And low and behold the script that Moriarity did his review from was the final draft and not some B/S budget draft. They swore up and down, publically, the piano throwing scene was not in the movie at all. Are you talking about those very same people?

Again, that has nothing to do with anything. Why would Singer or anybody reveal a huge plotline in the movie? You're veering way off subject.

 

[buggs0268]

No I am not. I don't take anything those guys say as gospel. And the only thing you can tie to superman 2 at all is the kid. Nothing else. No Zod, Non and Ursa. They died in it and no one knew if the WB would get the Donner cut as they were having a major lawsuit with the rights owners that Elder Salkind left for Superman 1's DVD. As far as anyone knew, how could you make a sequel to a film that you didn't know you could legally get. If you couldn't legally get it, it would remain locked up in the very same vault it had been in in england since 1978, and only rumor. So what else could you do as a sequel. And specifically Superman 2. They were specifically negating Superman 3 and 4. It is the only, I repeat the only thing you can tie it too. It was specifially a sequel to Superman 2. The with only 20 percent of Donner scenes in it. And he was so hip to make a sequel to Donner stuff when the released version had minimal Donner footage in it.

If anything, Singer didn't add it in to the treatment because he didn't know how it would go over with Warner's. That draft was writen when he didn't have the job, and they were going in to pitch it to Warner's and get them to change from a storyline that the studio had already dumped million's into. Effectively asking them to go with your storyline would mean throwing away millions of development and another storyline. Of course they aren't going to add it in till a later draft to get the job. It happens all of the time. All of the time. You get the studio on board with your idea, then you put all of the things in that you didn't put in the treatment to get the job in the first place.

We can go on forever, but I guaren-damn-tee you, he was running around telling people a son for superman on the set of the Usual Susupects. In fact, I bet you people that he had told his idea to for years was going "he was able to do it." with the kid.