WB/DC: It's All Part Of The Plan

[phil]

Some of the best poosts I've read concerning this movie. LexLives, nice to see you not get jumped for your honest thought-out posts.

I find it so hard to believe that they have given a sequel the greenlight with all this justified negativity. I can see just like the first film without a shadow of a doubt that this story continued will not work.
I want to see The Man of Steel on the bigscreen and Bryan singer is not the man for the job. They really need to realize that this movie had many more problems the just the "lack of action"
In my opinion a sequel will only bring down the character of Superman another level no matter how much action is given. They need a strong looking Superman without a Soap story to compete with the likes of Spiderman. To me it's a sad thing that Superman with today's technology can't even stand close to Spiderman. The bar was set and if it was any more obvious it would slap you in the face but for some reason Singer and the men in charge ignored it.
I'm still baffled as to why they even thought this idea for the story along with the look for Superman would even come close to being better to something that was given to us 30 years ago.

 

[lexlives]

Some of the best poosts I've read concerning this movie. LexLives, nice to see you not get jumped for your honest thought-out posts.

I find it so hard to believe that they have given a sequel the greenlight with all this justified negativity. I can see just like the first film without a shadow of a doubt that this story continued will not work.
I want to see The Man of Steel on the bigscreen and Bryan singer is not the man for the job. They really need to realize that this movie had many more problems the just the "lack of action"
In my opinion a sequel will only bring down the character of Superman another level no matter how much action is given. They need a strong looking Superman without a Soap story to compete with the likes of Spiderman. To me it's a sad thing that Superman with today's technology can't even stand close to Spiderman. The bar was set and if it was any more obvious it would slap you in the face but for some reason Singer and the men in charge ignored it.
I'm still baffled as to why they even thought this idea for the story along with the look for Superman would even come close to being better to something that was given to us 30 years ago.

Thank you - my posts are, if nothing else, from the heart. And despite the fact that a dwindling few label folks like me as "haters", we are indeed lovers. I was so a year ago - tempus fugate - when I got banned from BT (assuming you are that Phil).

My assertions at BT at the time all pretty much turned out to be true, just as the owner of that site's assertions turned out false. To me, that site became - sure it did not start out that way - a shill for Singer, WB and Routh - not an advocate for Superman. Which is what, IMHO, any fansite should first and foremost be.


As to action - if WB thinks the problem was mainly the lack of action - oh well, they have another thing coming.

I agree the "soft" Superman was a disaster - young males did not identify and did not turn out. I am so discouraged that Marvel/Sony get it so right and WB does not, apparently, get it at all. Routh may be a nice guy as some insist, but he had no business being cast in this iconic role.

Why WB/Horn gave Singer a carte blanche? IMO they were at the end of their ropes. 60 million or so in failed attempts, Ratner/Abrahms walking and what? Horn and Robinov could have been out of their jobs. But here comes Singer who, to that point, could do no wrong. He was the "white knight" and made demands - they gave in as they, honestly, felt he could do no wrong.

IMO, they would do it different now if they had the chance.

Its why, IMO, they will not greenlight a Singer sequel. Just to clarify - a sequel has not gotten a greenlight - Singer has only been commisssioned to come up with a potential script - there is a very long way from here to there as Variety itself has reported. It also why, IMO, there are these reports Singer is looking for other work in 2008. He probably knows WB is re-consdiering whether to continue or not with the Superman franchise.

The franchise, sadly, is dead for the next 15 to 20 years. The chances for a sequel, thankfully, diminish every week. Sadly, thanks to Singer and WB's acquieseance to him, you and I will be middle-aged before we see another Superman film.

 

[Jimmy, GL]

Thank you - my posts are, if nothing else, from the heart. And despite the fact that a dwindling few label folks like me as "haters", we are indeed lovers. I was so a year ago - tempus fugate - when I got banned from BT (assuming you are that Phil).

My assertions at BT at the time all pretty much turned out to be true, just as the owner of that site's assertions turned out false. To me, that site became - sure it did not start out that way - a shill for Singer, WB and Routh - not an advocate for Superman. Which is what, IMHO, any fansite should first and foemost be.


As to action - if WB thinks the problem was mainly the lack of action - oh well, they have another thing coming.

I agree the "soft" Superman was a disaster - young males did not identify and did not turn out. I am so discouraged that Marvel/Sony get it so right and WB does not, apparently, get it at all. Routh may be a nice guy as some insist, but he had no business being cast in this iconic role.

Why WB/Horn gave Singer a caret blance? IMO they were at the end of their ropes. 60 million or so in failed attempt, Ratner /Abrahms walking and what? Horn and Robinove could have been out of jobs. But here comes Singer who, to that point, could do no wrong. He was the "wewhite knight" and made demands - they gave in as they, honestly, felt he could do no wrong.

IMO, they would do it different now if they had the chance.

Its why, IMO, they will not greenlight a Singer sequel. Just to clarify - a sequel has not gotten a greenlight - Singer has only been commisssioned to come up with a potential script - there is a very long way from here to there as Variety itself has reported. It also why, IMO, there are these reports Singer is looking for other work in 2008. He probably knows WB is re-consdiering whether to continue or not with the Superman franchise.

The franchise, sadly, is dead for the next 15 to 20 years. The chances for a sequel, thankfully, diminish every week. Sadly, thanks to Singer and WB acquieseance to him, you and I will be middle-aged before we see another Superman film.

That's not optimistic at all. I'd say in less than ten years we could see a better Superman movie. Why do I say this? THe Hulk is already getting its restart and only about a 5-7 year gap between movies. Superman could more than be redone in a short amount of time. Fear not it will not be that long.

 

[phil]

Thank you - my posts are, if nothing else, from the heart. And despite the fact that a dwindling few label folks like me as "haters", we are indeed lovers. I was so a year ago - tempus fugate - when I got banned from BT (assuming you are that Phil).

My assertions at BT at the time all pretty much turned out to be true, just as the owner of that site's assertions turned out false. To me, that site became - sure it did not start out that way - a shill for Singer, WB and Routh - not an advocate for Superman. Which is what, IMHO, any fansite should first and foemost be.


As to action - if WB thinks the problem was mainly the lack of action - oh well, they have another thing coming.

I agree the "soft" Superman was a disaster - young males did not identify and did not turn out. I am so discouraged that Marvel/Sony get it so right and WB does not, apparently, get it at all. Routh may be a nice guy as some insist, but he had no business being cast in this iconic role.

WEhy WB/Horn gave Singer a caret blance? IMO they were at the end of their ropes. 60 million or so in failed attempt, Ratner /Abrahms walking and what? Horn and Robinove could have been out of jobs. But here comes Singer who, to that point, could do no wrong. He was the "wewhite knight" and made demands - they gave in as they, honestly, felt he could do no wrong.

IMO, they would do it different now if they had the chance.

Its why, IMO, they will not greenlight a Singer sequel. It also why, IMO, there are these reports Singer is looking for other work in 2008.

The franchise, sadly, is dead for the next 15 to 20 years. The chances for a sequel, thankfully, diminish every week. Sadly, thanks to Singer and WB acquieseance to him, you and I will be middle-aged before we see another Superman film.

I was banned twice by Justin at BT but let back in. Your right about that site but I have gained some good friends, even the ones who bashed the hell out of me and cut me down so low I had to look up to tie my shoes for not liking SR. I still get it here and there but not as bad since people are starting to admit the obvious instead of defending the movie and Singer no matter what.
A reboot is a must, Singer's vision just doesn't work for Superman. I think he had good intentions but it was just the wrong way to go. The only thing I really have against him is acting like the fans were born yesterday in his comments and not giving the audience Superman instead of his vision of what he wanted out of Donner's Superman.
I like Routh and without even knowing him have an opinion of him being a stand-up guy who would most likely bend over backwards for anyone. But to me he was cast because he resembles CR in looks and sound but lacks the presence CR has. He was just wrong for the Man of Steel but wish him all the luck in the world in his acting career.

 

[phil]

That's not optimistic at all. I'd say in less than ten years we could see a better Superman movie. Why do I say this? THe Hulk is already getting its restart and only about a 5-7 year gap between movies. Superman could more than be redone in a short amount of time. Fear not it will not be that long.

And don't forget Batman, he was givien another chance only 7 years after a 4 movie stint.

 

[lexlives]

I was banned twice by Justin at BT but let back in. Your right about that site but I have gained some good friends, even the ones who bashed the hell out of me and cut me down so low I had to look up to tie my shoes for not liking SR. I still get it here and there but not as bad since people are starting to admit the obvious instead of defending the movie and Singer no matter what.
A reboot is a must, Singer's vision just doesn't work for Superman. I think he had good intentions but it was just the wrong way to go. The only thing I really have against him is acting like the fans were born yesterday in his comments and not giving the audience Superman instead of his vision of what he wanted out of Donner's Superman.
I like Routh and without even knowing him have an opinion of him being a stand-up guy who would most likely bend over backwards for anyone. But to me he was cast because he resembles CR in looks and sound but lacks the presence CR has. He was just wrong for the Man of Steel but wish him all the luck in the world in his acting career.

There are great posters at that site - my problem was with the owner who in hindsight, and to be generous, was disingenuous. Assuming he had the "in" he claimed. Lost all respect for BT and have no desire to post there - not that he would let me anyway.

I do notice that BT is more anti-SR than before the film came out. Lots more so. Maybe they are not banning folks or maybe existing posters have "seen the light" - its probably a combo.

As for Singer - as I said, an act of ommission rather than commission - but either way he needs to be gone.

Routh? Register at soapzone.com for 3 bucks and ask the OLTL forum about this "nice guy" persona. I won't say more.

 

[phil]

It's not worth the 3 bucks, lol I just really think the guy was dealt a bad hand.

In my opinion you were banned ONLY because you made sense not supporting SR. You never once bashed anyone, members just kept bashing you even though you wrote well though-out posts. Your posts over there were exactly like the one in this thread.
I would only bash the movie and that was not allowed but bashing me was ok??? And when I was banned the first time it was with a very childish wise crack from Justin only for him to email me and admit that he banned me because he thought someone elses posts were me, lol
But oh well, ***** happens. But I'm glad to see you here being honest as usual. I respect the fact that you just want to see a blow your hair back Superman on the bigscreen like it should be. Anything else is a waste of time, this is The Man of Steel, the top dog of heros. Why they think something subpar with a story that honestly is seen over and over on day time TV is so beyond me it's not even funny.

 

[lexlives]

That's not optimistic at all. I'd say in less than ten years we could see a better Superman movie. Why do I say this? THe Hulk is already getting its restart and only about a 5-7 year gap between movies. Superman could more than be redone in a short amount of time. Fear not it will not be that long.

I hope you are right but Hulk was not ten years in development and 60 million out. At the blog I contribute to supporting a re-boot and no sequel we are honest in telling worried e-mailers that there is no guarantee that, if WB cans a sequel to SR, they will greenlight a reboot in 6 years like the Hulk.

The situations are different but, IMHO, it will be more like 10 - 15 years for a reboot. Especially if Flash or WW turn out to be another FF. That said, we have no choice but to wait - even if the wait is 10 - 15 years.

 

[lexlives]

It's not worth the 3 bucks, lol I just really think the guy was dealt a bad hand.

In my opinion you were banned ONLY because you made sense not supporting SR. You never once bashed anyone, members just kept bashing you even though you wrote well though-out posts. Your posts over there were exactly like the one in this thread.
I would only bash the movie and that was not allowed but bashing me was ok??? And when I was banned the first time it was with a very childish wise crack from Justin only for him to email me and admit that he banned me because he thought someone elses posts were me, lol
But oh well, ***** happens. But I'm glad to see you here being honest as usual. I respect the fact that you just want to see a blow your hair back Superman on the bigscreen like it should be. Anything else is a waste of time, this is The Man of Steel, the top dog of heros. Why they think something subpar with a story that honestly is seen over and over on day time TV is so beyond me it's not even funny.

You are that Phil - glad you are still around. Whatever happened to Routhman?

Its true, I was bannnd despite not violating any of the stated rules. But it makes no never-mind. That site has no integrity IMO - the folks who run it. Not the posters who, ironically, are coming round so to speak.

My loyalty is to Superman, the franchise, the mythos. I won't back down and thanks for SHH for allowing free exchange of ideas - though I notice BT is more "open" now too. Dare I surrmise "Justin" has seen the light - or maybe just given up?! He was on the "wrong side of history" so to speak.

 

[phil]

I think it all had to do with the inside tracks and purks given to him from the people incharge of SR. And the same goes for Steve at the homepage.

 

[Jimmy, GL]

I hope you re right but Hulk was not ten years in developemnt and 60 million out. At the blog I contribute to suporting a re-boot and no sequel we are honest in telling worried e-mailers that there is no guarentee that if WB cans a sequel to SR they will greenlight a reboot in 6 years like the Hulk.

The situations are different but, IMHO, it will be more like 10 - 15 years for a reboot. Especially if Flash or WW turn out to be another FF. That said, we have no choice but to wait - even if the wait is 10 - 15 years.

Then of course you can count what Phil said and add Batman to the mix. Doesn't he have about the same situation as Supe's?

I can't wait for the Flash movie.

 

[lexlives]

And don't forget Batman, he was givien another chance only 7 years after a 4 movie stint.

Phil, I wish it were so and I am again being honest here. If WB nixes an SR sequel, which I desperatrly want them to do, we likley will have to wait up to 15 years for a reboot.

Like I said, I am not going to tell anyone the sky is green when it is blue. At our blog we have gotten scores of e-mails from folks who want a reboot but don't ant to wait 10 - 15 years. We tell them, if an SR sequel is scrapped, it going to be at lesat 10 years. Especially with Flash and WW now on the fast-track. But the stakes are that high. If Singer gets a sequel the franchise is probably dead for our lifetimes.

While I would love a reboot in 7 years, truth to tell, IMO it will be 10 - 15 years. But I am willing to wait. Even though I do not like the wait.

 

[phil]

I think SR is already forgotten in the general publics eye, I want it now! I know the WB wants something now because they wouldn't have gave the box office that obvious last push, that was pathetic. I think they just wanted to end negative buzz to generate more DVD sales.
I will write to them very soon, thank you for providing the contacts.

 

[lexlives]

I think it all had to do with the inside tracks and purks given to him from the people incharge of SR. And the same goes for Steve at the homepage.

I agree - both sites were not giving "free" and honest reports. I remember when Singer supposedly went on a 3 week vacation in fall 2005 to attend a family wedding according to some such sites - when other independent sites like Dark Horizons were reporting otherwise.

At the time I referenced the DH report and got shot down on BT and other sites. I first began to suspect some folks were on the payroll so to speak at that point.

 

[lexlives]

Then of course you can count what Phil said and add Batman to the mix. Doesn't he have about the same situation as Supe's?

I can't wait for the Flash movie.

Look, I want it to be sooner rather than later. But with Flash and WW on the table, an if they do solid, then that pushes WB's need for Superman out. I do not want a Singer sequel, I think it is weekly becomig less likley to happen. But when they revive Superman it will, in all honestly, be like 15 or so years from now especially if Flash and WW and perhaps a GL film do well. WB may not need Superman as a film franchise anymore - let's be honest.

 

[lexlives]

It's not worth the 3 bucks, lol I just really think the guy was dealt a bad hand.

Phil, 3 bucks is like a Grande Mocha at Starbucks. It would be an eye opener for you to go to the OLTL site and ask honest and open questions about Routh and his stint there and the opinions of viewers not to mention his co-workers at the time. All I will say is the the image Singer an WB tried to project of Routh does not fit at all with what co-workers and viewers of OLTL say. Don't believe me by any means to be sure - forego a Starbuck's visit and register for a month and ask. It is quite revealing.

 

[Billy Batson]

Lexlives & Phil excellent posts!
I was banned from kryptonsite for disliking the concepts and artistic direction of the new superman film.
Lexlives, man you nailed it with the demographics, Foundational elements, divided fan-base and you brought it home with this. " Older movie-goers who saw Superman Returns and compared it to their memories of S:TM. "
Again! excellent,excellent posts!

 

[dpm07]

Lexlives & Phil excellent posts!
I was banned from kryptonsite for disliking the concepts and artistic direction of the new superman film.
Lexlives, man you nailed it with the demographics, Foundational elements, divided fan-base and you brought it home with this. " Older movie-goers who saw Superman Returns and compared it to their memories of S:TM. "
Again! excellent,excellent posts!

I agree as well. Great posts, LexLives and Phil. You too, Billy Batson. Everything you guys have said pretty much sums up what I think as well.

 

[phil]

Thanks guys, I'm a Superman fan, I went to see STM at age 7, then went to the same exact theater 28 years later to see SR. I swear to god I almost walked out after the first pathetic scene.
It's not my intension to bash anyone, really it isn't. But to me that was something a high school kid put together that isn't a fan of Superman. Anyone could have come up with a story and costume concept like that if they were handed 200+ million dollars.
It just baffles me that they would green light a story that's played over and over on daytime TV. I know I had two older sister's growing up and we only had 1 TV.
To me this is Superman, the friggin Man of Steel and he looked like he was ready to do a dance at an all male review. That is just wrong! And with a dam child, c'mon, this is friggin Superman, the Man of Friggin Steel!
And we all know what Lois looks like in the comics, but we get a girl that you have to put layers of clothing under her cloths just to make her appear thin??? Don't get me wrong Kate is an excellant actor but she was just acting on what she was given, another man's vision. She has a very mature way about her when she speaks when not playing this part. But in no way was she a Lois Lane.
And then we have a Lex Luthor that looks like he is Dr. Evil at Halloween! The same story from the 1970's????? Lex shouldn't look so old that he has a chicken neck already, what about sequels? He looks this old now what about then? But they claim they wanted a young actor for Superman to be able to do sequels?????? I like Spacey as an actor, but as Lex Luthor I was amazed in disbelief in every single scene. And I won't even get into his henchman with campy villian music with no lines.
The reason why comic movies took a hit before the likes of Spiderman and BB was because they were silly and campy. So why go back to something that was corrected and brought the audience back?
I'll never understand why the WB allowed this to happen? They have the wrong people making decisions and without a doubt have the wrong directer for The Man of Steel. I could see if this movie and it's elements were just ok, but what they gave us was the worse possible senario?? And yet they are greenlighting a sequel even though the name of new guy that just played Superman is not even known by most of the general public? When I say his name to a non fan all I get is "who's that?" For a guy playing The Man of Steel that's just wrong. that should send out a giant red flag to the people in charge. If they do go with the sequel Superman on the bigscreen is doomed for years to come.

 

[Super Kal]

okay, you're just grasping at straws now with the turkey line...

 

[Freddy_Krueger]

They're grasping at straws with a lot of things. When you actually have people that believe lexlives' spin, straw grasping is bound to happen.

 

[phil]

okay, you're just grasping at straws now with the turkey line...

you really think Lex Luthor should have a neck like Ronald Reagan did? c'mon Kak, in no way am I reaching for straws. You of all people know the "look" of characters are important to me.

 

[phil]

They're grasping at straws with a lot of things. When you actually have people that believe lexlives' spin, straw grasping is bound to happen.

yeah ok SR didn't suck, it should get best movie and Routh should get best actor, lol
I stand by my words that this version of Superman IS pathetic, there are no reaching for straws, I'm 36 years old, I don't post like people were born yesterday.

 

[Super Kal]

I never thought he had a "turkey neck"... and if he did, it never bothered me.

 

[dark_b]

They're grasping at straws with a lot of things. When you actually have people that believe lexlives' spin, straw grasping is bound to happen.

i have been thinkging a lot. are those people really that desperate? i am asking this because they agree with lexlives. the guy who thinks that WB wants to fire singer but dont have the balls.