The Official Zack Snyder Thread

[Project862006]

he needs a change imo not a drastic one where it is unrecognizable but it needs to be fresh routh/reeves feels stale

 

[HighFivingMF]

he needs a change imo not a drastic one where it is unrecognizable but it needs to be fresh routh/reeves feels stale

I concur, nobody's suggesting a green and orange leotard with pixie boots and a cape. Just change up the boots a bit or redesign the "S"

Keep the blue, red, yellow, and the basic layout (boots, cape, "S" and I'd be fine with or without trunks).

 

[GreenKToo]

From what I hear about snyder, he is just as big of a comic geek as we are, maybe moreso, so I doubt we have much to worry about with the suit. I'm more worried about the cast right now myself.

 

[roach]

I concur, nobody's suggesting a green and orange leotard with pixie boots and a cape. Just change up the boots a bit or redesign the "S"

Keep the blue, red, yellow, and the basic layout (boots, cape, "S" and I'd be fine with or without trunks).

trunks have to be there...visually the trunks break up all that blue and balance the look of the character...every design I have seen without the trunks has that problem.

 

[Mike22]

All I know is that the suit ain't broken, so there's no reason try to fix it. If they do, then to hell with it all.

 

[Mike22]

I concur, nobody's suggesting a green and orange leotard with pixie boots and a cape. Just change up the boots a bit or redesign the "S"

Keep the blue, red, yellow, and the basic layout (boots, cape, "S" and I'd be fine with or without trunks).

See I wouldn't have a problem with changing the boots a bit, that doesn't matter. But things like the removal of the trunks or belt are not acceptable. The shield should be like the comics one, and definitely a shield on the cape.

 

[bgshw44]

i am not going to worry, i have a feeling they will just do something different that hasnt been seen on film before, but popular in the comics ala birthright etc...

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

trunks have to be there...visually the trunks break up all that blue and balance the look of the character...every design I have seen without the trunks has that problem.

Agreed.

 

[Kurosawa]

trunks have to be there...visually the trunks break up all that blue and balance the look of the character...every design I have seen without the trunks has that problem.

The closest thing is a red or yellow sash and that's Captain Marvel territory. Trunks just work, and have got to stay.

 

[Nave 'Torment']

Keep the trunks, and the 'S', there are more people in the world who know Superman's 'S' than there are people who know Batman even has a logo. At least that's what my experience tells me.

There are a lot of interesting suggestions about the suit here, you guys might want to take it up to the costume thread. Now... about Snyder. Who's he hiring to re-write the story? I remember he wanted another draft from what Goyer wrote.

 

[Thread Manager]

This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]342472[/split]

 

[Spider-Fan]

I decided to bump this thread, given I was talking a lot about Snyder and Nolan's dynamic in the Cavill thread.

 

[roach]

How is this part 1 and its a continuation of another thread

 

[Maze]

I don't like Goode, so I am not for that.



I also think TDKR will turn out better if he focuses his energy on that as opposed to looking over Snyder's shoulder all the time. Plus, he too is a director at heart. Directors who produce know what it is like to have someone looking over your shoulder everyday. Does Nolan want to do that to Snyder? Given he is filming a movie himself around the same time, I doubt it.

Good points, i agree, i would prefer that he concentrate all is energy on Tdkr..IF overseeing superman would took too much energies from him.. i'm not Nolan, i expect him to knows what he need..

Now, yes, he seems to respect a director vision.. BUT from his own admission, he respect a lot Warner too and it seem, that he feels that he own them.. and imo Warner without doubts will be reassured if Nolan keep an eye on Snyder. why? Because Nolan did bring a lot more money than Snyder on his last movies and he is more respected as a filmmaker.

Gotta go, i will look for your answer later

 

[Spider-Fan]

Good points, i agree, i would prefer that he concentrate all is energy on Tdkr..IF overseeing superman would took too much energies from him.. i'm not Nolan, i expect him to knows what he need..

Someone needs to produce a 3rd film that doesn't dip heavily in quality! Nolan can do this, and I'm hoping he doesn't allow TDKR to suffer. I'm hopeful for it.

Now, yes, he seems to respect a director vision.. BUT from his own admission, he respect a lot Warner too and it seem, that he feels that he own them.. and imo Warner without doubts will be reassured if Nolan keep an eye on Snyder. why? Because Nolan did bring a lot more money than Snyder on his last movies and he is more respected as a filmmaker.

Gotta go, i will look for your answer later

Nolan probably does feel like he owns them, and he should. He has made WB a ton of money. But, would WB necessarily want their top property, ie Batman, not deliver after TDK and get some bad PR just so he can watch Superman more carefully? I think WB will feel Nolan's name being on it will help credibility, even if he is not hands on.

 

[ALP]

How is this part 1 and its a continuation of another thread

I was wondering the same thing LOL

Anyway it has been a while but now I make my return to the Snyder thread to praise his every move

 

[El Payaso]

How is this part 1 and its a continuation of another thread

Because it is a vague sequel.

 

[matrix_ghost]

I think WB will feel Nolan's name being on it will help credibility, even if he is not hands on.

Which is the case with Spielberg and Bay and TF. Spielberg is hands off when it comes to making the TF movies , that's Bay's job. He's just making sure everything is there for Bay to do his thing.

And i think that is what Nolan and SNyder should do. Nolan is the producer but he'll be/should be focused on TDKR.

 

[GoblinWhirlwind]

So I saw Jon Hamm in an interview last night for whatever awards show was going on, and he was asked about Superman. He gave the same old "too old for it" answer, and said he "just saw Zack the other day". He seemed to get sorta tightlipped and awkward talking about it, so I wonder if he really might play Jor-El. Probably reading too much into it, but that'd be awesome.

 

[KRIM]

I thought Smallville and Krypton were off-limits because of the lawsuit?

 

[GoblinWhirlwind]

I don't really know, I'd heard that, I thought they just couldn't do a straight up origin movie. I don't see why there couldn't still be flashbacks via the Fortress or something though. If you can't use anything Krypton related, I don't see how they can even make a Superman movie.

 

[KRIM]

I think it's just Krypton and Kryptonite. This restriction might even force them to get creative. I think most fans would agree those two are overused elements in every Superman story. The former loves to drive home that Clark is the last of his race, the latter almost reached the levels of deus ex machina.

They can do a Superman film just fine without any hints of his origins or weaknesses. I always found it interesting to make his past a mystery and reveal it through the sequels. Let the Kryptonian roots get revealed later on, and have the audience learn with CK along the way.

 

[GoblinWhirlwind]

That sounds good. I'm all for no Kryptonite too... I'm really sick of it. I want a threat that Superman can go head to head with, and doesn't end with him sick on the ground while regular dudes stomp him out. What's impressive about that?

 

[Saint]

I think it's just Krypton and Kryptonite. This restriction might even force them to get creative. I think most fans would agree those two are overused elements in every Superman story. The former loves to drive home that Clark is the last of his race, the latter almost reached the levels of deus ex machina.

They can do a Superman film just fine without any hints of his origins or weaknesses. I always found it interesting to make his past a mystery and reveal it through the sequels. Let the Kryptonian roots get revealed later on, and have the audience learn with CK along the way.

Didn't they resolve that? I can never keep track of this crap. Anyways, if they really needed to they would just pay to use whatever they needed.

Part of me wants to see the story from the beginning (Mark Millar's never-made three film epic depicting Superman from his birth to his death thousands of years later always appealed to me), though I fully understand that it may be less tiresome for the audience to simply hit the ground running. Superman's never had that sort of film before, at least not one that was well done. STM was all about the origin, SII heavily involved Krypton and the family history, and the others... well, you know.

I can see how it would be really tempting to say "Here's a film that could be any classic Superman story, in the prime of his career--nevermind Krypton and blah blah." I think the trade-off you might have to make is that you may have a less fully-formed universe, because you haven't walked the audience through the whole of it.

Of course, there's an argument to be made for slowly unfolding your universe, as opposed to showing it in a linear fashion. Reveal Krypton and touch on Superman's origin in a sequel, and that might work--though that's getting ahead of ourselves. I just worry that if you cut out Krypton, you're cutting out a huge part of the science fiction spectacle that I enjoy. If you put Brainiac in there, that might solve my problem.

 

[GreenKToo]

question for snyder fans...how well did he communicate with the fans during watchmen?