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

[phil]

The problem with the WB giving a good Superman movie is they have no idea what would be a good Superman movie. They gave the greenlight to Singer's pathetic version of Superman, that proves it.

 

[Maze]

That doesn't prove anything.

your point of view , that's all.

 

[Maze]

Hunter

 

[GreenKToo]

well,lets just hope that we all get what we want out of the sequel....for me, its a supervillian with a fight.

 

[SentinelMind]

I don't care too much about the action (although I understand a villain would have made the film exciting), I would have preferred a better characterization of Superman and more optimistic and inspirational presentation of Supes while dealing with internal and moral conflicts. Mega joe pretty much summarized problem with Superman Returns.

The argument that Superman didn't know Lois was pregnant, thus was entitled to leave is selfish and foolish. That's like some deadbeat guy having sex with his girl and then taking a trip to Arizona. The deadbeat didn't know his girl was pregnant, right? Superman isn't a teenager (or not suppose to be characterized as one) and should be able to stick around and see if Lois is alright, in a good position in life before taking up and leaving. He should also communicate with her. In fact, if had communicated with her, he might have found out she was pregnant. There shouldn't be a discussion here and the stretching you fanatics do for this film is unbelievable and sad.

But even looking to the future, I'm skeptical about the sequel. The thing about Superman 3 and 4 is that those were bad films, but they didn't tarnish Supes character so much that a good sequel to those couldn't be made. It's sort of like James Bond franchise, some additions are campy and others are more serious. However, with Superman Returns, Singer has written himself into a box and tarnished the potential of this franchise. All sequels have to be set up on Singer's silly premises and bad characterization of Superman.

 

[superbaby]

...

But even looking to the future, I'm skeptical about the sequel. The thing about Superman 3 and 4 is that those were bad films, but they didn't tarnish Supes character so much that a good sequel to those couldn't be made. It's sort of like James Bond franchise, some additions are campy and others are more serious. However, with Superman Returns, Singer has written himself into a box and tarnished the potential of this franchise. All sequels have to be set up on Singer's silly premises and bad characterization of Superman.

exactly. what's more horrible is that WB didn't realise that.

 

[The Kid]

We'll get Superman Begins some day. Maybe.

 

[bunk]

Why do people keep saying Singer wrote himself into a corner? You probably won't like how he progresses the story, but I promise you he does know where he's going with this, as far as Superman, Lois, Richard, and Jason are concerned.

 

[DvilDog]

He does know exactly where he is going, or at least has an idea. I personally think that even if you didnt Like SR you will like MOS. Im not gonna lie I want to see that big super battle between supes and someone! Hopefully Darkseid or Doomsday for me. But I would take Brainiac too!!

 

[mego joe]

Why do people keep saying Singer wrote himself into a corner? You probably won't like how he progresses the story, but I promise you he does know where he's going with this, as far as Superman, Lois, Richard, and Jason are concerned.

My opinion on this is that when you become a parent your children become your first priority over anything else, and if they don't, you aren't being a good parent. Therefore, if Superman is going to be portrayed as a good parent then Jason has to be the most important thing in his life. However, SR already shows that SUperman's sense of responsiblity towards being a parent is questionable. How can you be a good parent when your child doesn't even know who his 'real' father is? The answer to me is that you can't. You've already acted irresponsibly to get yourself into a situation where your child deosn't know that you are his dad.?!?!

Plus, it is highly likely that the sequel will involve Jason as a victim of sorts in a plot against SUperman, making the plot be more about a personal attack on Superman rather than a story that involves SUperman saving the world/ Metropolis from a dangerous villain/ threat. THis COULD be good, but should anyone really know that SUperman has a son? Are Superman stories really based on personal attacks against his family? It just seems to be moving farther away from the type of stories one enjoys when experienceing a Superman story.

The next step is that if Jason is endangered b/c he is SUperman's son, it just serves to emphasize how badly SUperman screwed up in the first movie. Superman being a screw up is not integral to the essence of the character. It actually fights against the essence of the character.

Now, say SInger more or less ignores Jason in the sequel. Then the question becomes "Why introduce him at all if he's not going to be a major part of the succeeding films?"

So it goes like this. Singer is kind of obligated to deal with Jason otherwise his existence and introduction in SR is pointless, but if he does make him a major part of the story the movie becoms either: Son of SUperman, or Superman's Mistakes Emphasized, moving the film further away from the essence of the character.

If you make the Jason character a major part of the sequel, Superman and the audience are constantly reminded of Superman's mistakes, and while SUperman may not be perfect or infallible, his flaws are not what are integral to understanding the character, which I thing SR incorrectly suggests.

 

[mego joe]

He does know exactly where he is going, or at least has an idea. I personally think that even if you didnt Like SR you will like MOS. Im not gonna lie I want to see that big super battle between supes and someone! Hopefully Darkseid or Doomsday for me. But I would take Brainiac too!!

He may know what he wants to do next, but it doesn't give me any confidnce in the sequel or that I will actually like it. (BTW, that implies that I will actually see it, and at this point there is nothing to make me think I will see it.)

For those of us that REALLY disliked SR, it was not in the aspects of action, or the colors of the costume, or necessarily the homage/ retread ot the Donner films, it all comes down to the charcterizaiton of SUpemran and a personal story that seems to be about as far from a Superman story as you can get.

So, if Jason is in the film, a constant reminder that Singer's vision of SUperman is of a screw up whose character essence is defined by the public hero/ private screw up in his personal relationships/ responsibility, then I will not like it. If it exists in the same world as SR, I will not like it, I won't even be willing to give it a chance. The problems with SR are in the fundamental vision of Singer's Superman, it is not in execution or action sequences. While some points of execution could have improved the film, SInger's basic view of SUperman was the problem with the film, and I don't expect that that will change for the sequel.

 

[DvilDog]

He may know what he wants to do next, but it doesn't give me any confidnce in the sequel or that I will actually like it. (BTW, that implies that I will actually see it, and at this point there is nothing to make me think I will see it.)

For those of us that REALLY disliked SR, it was not in the aspects of action, or the colors of the costume, or necessarily the homage/ retread ot the Donner films, it all comes down to the charcterizaiton of SUpemran and a personal story that seems to be about as far from a Superman story as you can get.

So, if Jason is in the film, a constant reminder that Singer's vision of SUperman is of a screw up whose character essence is defined by the public hero/ private screw up in his personal relationships/ responsibility, then I will not like it. If it exists in the same world as SR, I will not like it, I won't even be willing to give it a chance. The problems with SR are in the fundamental vision of Singer's Superman, it is not in execution or action sequences. While some points of execution could have improved the film, SInger's basic view of SUperman was the problem with the film, and I don't expect that that will change for the sequel.

Im sorry Singers view of Superman did not fit yours and some other peoples. Thats all i can say. You seem truely upset. Im not a comic book fan myself but I have read a few supes comics seen a few eps of JLA, and watched pretty much anything and everything superman. even the bad stuff. I liked his interpretation. If you dont then like I said I apologize and I hope in 10 or so years they make the type of supes movie you want

 

[Cell]

Exhibit A:
Spider-man's box office...

Exhibit B:
Superman Returns box office...

First things first, I'm not citing the box office draw of each of these films to make the case for why one is superior to the other, nor am I saying this is proof positive that Superman Returns simply sucks. But what I will say is that the disparity here is unacceptable, and inexcusable, both in the business and creative sense. For those who enjoyed watching Singer's vision of Superman, well good for you. Here's the bottom-line as I see it... had Superman Returns been a Superman film more in line with the preferences and expectations of people like mego joe... I'm almost certain this disparity in box office receipts would not be so pronounced (competing with Pirates of the Caribbean 2 can not explain this away completely). It was simply not the Superman film a good number of people wanted to see. While comic boards such as this one are usually home to plenty of detractors for every film under the sun, the schism this film has created is impressive by any standard. The debate has been beaten to death alright, but the right film would never have produced such a heated debate in the first place.

 

[WormyT]

But even looking to the future, I'm skeptical about the sequel. The thing about Superman 3 and 4 is that those were bad films, but they didn't tarnish Supes character so much that a good sequel to those couldn't be made. It's sort of like James Bond franchise, some additions are campy and others are more serious. However, with Superman Returns, Singer has written himself into a box and tarnished the potential of this franchise. All sequels have to be set up on Singer's silly premises and bad characterization of Superman.

Wise words!


And did anyone read that god awful interview about Jesus/Spirituality/Superman crap. God almighty, try and get the Superman Character RIGHT before trying to make a Boring New Testament to the Bible. Yeah I know Superman died and returned in the books but we were not bored to death. We got 4 new temporary Supermen, a city destroyed, Mongul, a new Supervillain(cyborg Superman) and an amazing new Super Mullet.

SR needed action and excitement, NOT boring religeous visuals. I couldn't connect with the poor guy because he said nothing throughout the whole movie, did nothing, and they emotionally lost me the second he started lifting a bloody continent of deadly Kryptonite.

 

[Maze]

Exhibit A:
Spider-man's box office...

Exhibit B:
Superman Returns box office...

First things first, I'm not citing the box office draw of each of these films to make the case for why one is superior to the other, nor am I saying this is proof positive that Superman Returns simply sucks. But what I will say is that the disparity here is unacceptable, and inexcusable, both in the business and creative sense. For those who enjoyed watching Singer's vision of Superman, well good for you. Here's the bottom-line as I see it... had Superman Returns been a Superman film more in line with the preferences and expectations of people like mego joe... I'm almost certain this disparity in box office receipts would not be so pronounced (competing with Pirates of the Caribbean 2 can not explain this away completely). It was simply not the Superman film a good number of people wanted to see. While comic boards such as this one are usually home to plenty of detractors for every film under the sun, the schism this film has created is impressive by any standard. The debate has been beaten to death alright, but the right film would never have produced such a heated debate in the first place.

I don't agree.

Batman returns for example , imo , is a very good movie.

but,if it had been released in these days of internet the batboards would be a blood bath even worse than here.

even more ,mediocre (or even bad) box office number doesn't equal each time quality ,or movies like 2001 or Blade Runner would be considered critical failure.

Sometimes the vision of a director, please "everybody" sometimes not.

But personnally i'm only interested by good movies .. not a product that will try to please everybody.

 

[superbaby]

Why do people keep saying Singer wrote himself into a corner? You probably won't like how he progresses the story, but I promise you he does know where he's going with this, as far as Superman, Lois, Richard, and Jason are concerned.

you promise??? did you promise that the red would get brighter during the post production???

btw, what the storyline i can forsee is lex luthor will kidnap the kid, superman falls into the kryptonite trap again to save his son. disaster comes (the so-called war of khan), kid saves his father. the father saves metropolis. all questions & relationships will still be unresolved.

mark my words.

 

[Maze]

btw, what the storyline i can forsee is lex luthor will kidnap the kid, superman falls into the kryptonite trap again to save his son. disaster comes (the so-called war of khan), kid saves his father. the father saves metropolis. all questions & relationships will still be unresolved.

mark my words.

Yes and it will suck

Singer has raped the legend and it's only the beginning!

And ,every of your words here will not change a thing.

(i wanted just a little fun , you can continue ... )

 

[bunk]

you promise??? did you promise that the red would get brighter during the post production???

btw, what the storyline i can forsee is lex luthor will kidnap the kid, superman falls into the kryptonite trap again to save his son. disaster comes (the so-called war of khan), kid saves his father. the father saves metropolis. all questions & relationships will still be unresolved.

mark my words.

Did I promise the red would get brighter? ....uh no...maybe you're getting me confused with somebody. And I like I said, you'll probably hate what Singer does, I don't promise it'll be good. WB would want to know where Singer plans to take the storyline involving Jason before he creates the character. Singer would've been thinking about Jean becoming Phoenix even before filming on the first movie began. Oh, and your words have been marked and quoted.

 

[Cell]

I don't agree.

Batman returns for example , imo , is a very good movie.

but,if it had been released in these days of internet the batboards would be a blood bath even worse than here.

even more ,mediocre (or even bad) box office number doesn't equal each time quality ,or movies like 2001 or Blade Runner would be considered critical failure.

Sometimes the vision of a director, please "everybody" sometimes not.

But personnally i'm only interested by good movies .. not a product that will try to please everybody.

And I in turn, do not agree with this sentiment, or at least parts of it. Making the Superman film people really wanted to see does not equate to a product that will 'try to please everybody', as difficult as that may be to understand. It simply means that there exists an alternate approach to the Superman mythos that just happens to be more in alignment with many peoples expectations, and that this approach(s) has much more potential for ultimately yielding a >good Superman film by any standard<, or at least one better than Superman Returns. The point was that Singers approach failed in this respect, and it adversely affected the quality of the film in certain ways from the perspective of very many people, not just those on the fringe who can 'never' be pleased.

A Superman film has every bit of potential that a Spider-man film has to draw an audience in and perhaps even more, Superman Returns failed to exploit this potential, plain and simple. I'm not saying SR should have made >just as much< money as Spider-man, and have that be the ultimate benchmark of its overall quality, I'm just saying there's no reason for such a severe disparity. Now it's true that it's impossible to please everyone, but it is possible to make a Superman movie that is so appealing that it enjoys more praise than heated debate over its quality, as other films in the genre have managed. Batman Begins by and large is considered to have nailed things just right, they pleased a good percentage of the fan-base, the professional critics, and the average moviegoer in one fell swoop. Keeping in mind of course that that license may not be quite as populist in its intrinsic appeal, probably because of its darker tone, just another reason I chose Spider-man as the point of comparison.

Further, here's why the reference/comparison to Batman Returns does not work. I used Spider-man as a reference on purpose, for one because it was contemporary (4 years ago versus 14 years ago), its source material is comparable in tone, and because it was birthing a new film franchise, just like Superman Returns (although more of a rebirth in its case). Plus, it wasn't anywhere near as stylized as the Burton films. The Burton films were hyper-stylized depictions of Batman, and before there was any Batman Returns, we had the first film to introduce us to that reality. What's more, there simply wasn't anywhere near as much pressure from the public at large or even from the studio producing it to deliver any particular kind of film one way or another, relatively speaking that is.

But most importantly, irrespective of Tim Burton's characteristic visual flare, the screen-writers (not Burton) wrote those films to be entertaining popcorn flicks, minus the camp of the TV show, and they are widely considered to have succeeded. While the style of those films don't necessarily fit with my vision of how Batman should be realized on the big-screen, at least I can see how they are genuinely entertaining and substantive in their own right, as whimsical interpretations of the source material. That license simply lends itself more to that sort of thing quite frankly.

Had Superman Returns been as genuinely entertaining on its own as a film, irrespective of the particulars of Singers approach to the Superman mythos, then I wouldn't mind it so much, and I think it would have reflected positively on its box office earnings. As it is, it failed to accomplish even this, and in the process went one step further and presented a vision of a pop culture icon that I and not a few, but many others do not agree with, one that fails to truly utilize the potential inherent to the license.

 

[Maze]

Further, here's why the reference/comparison to Batman Returns does not work. I used Spider-man as a reference on purpose, for one because it was contemporary (4 years ago versus 14 years ago), its source material is comparable in tone, and because it was birthing a new film franchise, just like Superman Returns (although more of a rebirth in its case). Plus, it wasn't anywhere near as stylized as the Burton films. The Burton films were hyper-stylized depictions of Batman, and before there was any Batman Returns, we had the first film to introduce us to that reality. What's more, there simply wasn't anywhere near as much pressure from the public at large or even from the studio producing it to deliver any particular kind of film one way or another, relatively speaking that is.

But most importantly, irrespective of Tim Burton's characteristic visual flare, the screen-writers (not Burton) wrote those films to be entertaining popcorn flicks, minus the camp of the TV show, and they are widely considered to have succeeded. While the style of those films don't necessarily fit with my vision of how Batman should be realized on the big-screen, at least I can see how they are genuinely entertaining and substantive in their own right, as whimsical interpretations of the source material. That license simply lends itself more to that sort of thing quite frankly.

Your argument doesn't hold.

Yes Spiderman tone (normally) is more akin to Superman, but i i simply said that Returns is considered not respectful of Superman like Br.And there have been heated debate about it even to this day.. if it has been released one year ago instead of Batman Begins there would have been a blood bath imo.. i know too many Batman fans to doubt that.and no Batman returns especially was not written as a pop corn flick..But rather like a dark comedy /horror film (it's not even an action film)

after that, the appreciation of the movie is personnal opinion (but even if yes the Burton movie are more stylised yes , Sr is too..not an important point in what we are saying but that's my opinion )

 

[Maze]

that there exists an alternate approach to the Superman mythos that just happens to be more in alignment with many peoples expectations, and that this approach(s) has much more potential for ultimately yielding a >good Superman film by any standard<, or at least one better than Superman Returns. The point was that Singers approach failed in this respect, and it adversely affected the quality of the film in certain ways from the perspective of very many people, not just those on the fringe who can 'never' be pleased.

And i repeat myself: sometimes a director vision is more in alligment with "everybody ", sometimes not.

i just don't wan't an artist compromising his vision to please the fan base.

Even more when it's about a Superhero who had ton of incarnation .. and sometimes talking a lot of liberties ( Byrne's Superman )

 

[Maze]

but it is possible to make a Superman movie that is so appealing that it enjoys more praise than heated debate over its quality,

But it's the case you know. the more heated debate around here especially ( look on a" normal site for example , the movie is rather liked) are about the kid and Superman so called selfish side.and sometimes about the quality of the movie ( and even there some haters recognize that the movie is well directed ,aside, from some flaws in pacing, the script departement ,and sometimes even acting)

you know, i talked to a great number of person of the Gp (who didn't like and liked the movie) online and on the streets , they just don't know what that talk about a decadent superman is .. they just saw a good guy on screen .. who has a character crisis.

You don't need to please ALL the fan base and make Spiderman Box office numbers to make a good movie about Superman . it could have been the case ,yes , if the director vision was in alignement with "everybody" but i for one am glad it is not the case.. Spiderman movies? good movie really well done , enjoyable.. but subtle , really deep?really moving? not in my opinion.

 

[Cell]

Your argument doesn't hold.

i simply said that Returns is considered not respectful of Superman like Br.And there have been heated debate about it even to this day.. if it has been released one year ago instead of Batman Begins there would have been a blood bath imo.. i know too many Batman fans to doubt that.

after that, the appreciation of the movie is personnal opinion (but even if yes the Burton movie are more stylised yes , Sr is too..not an important point in what we are saying but that's my opinion )

The argument holds just fine, you just don't agree with it, there is a difference. The debate over Superman Returns also far, >far<, outstrips any debate over Burton's films, and this will become increasingly apparent over time. The problems with Superman Returns lay far beyond it simply not being 'respectful' of the source material. Also, all films have some sort of style, the point was Batman Returns was poignantly more stylized in comparison.

and i repeat myself: sometimes a director vision is more in alligment with "everybody ", sometimes not.

i just don't wan't an artist compromising his vision to please the fan base.

Even more when it's about a Superhero who had ton of incarnation .. and sometimes talking a lot of liberties ( Byrne Superman )

There's plenty of room for interpretation, new approaches, and so forth with these kinds of things... it just so happens that in this case... the vision many have for the license holds more potential to yield a superior Superman film than Singers particular take.. and I understand thats purely a matter of opinion. No one is talking about 'compromising' visions for anybody, the creative process should naturally select the approach that is best for the expression of a story in a particular medium. In fact, of course there exists different approaches to the source material than what we've seen, many the vast majority of people haven't even thought of... and many of >those visions< would undoubtedly make for a superior approach to the material for a Superman film than what I've seen so far of Singers approach. That too, is a matter of opinion... but we shall see where the sequels take us with Singer still on-board... I hope it's to a better film.

 

[Maze]

ps Talking about Burton :

There's a story BATMAN director Tim Burton likes to tell. In 1978 Burton was still in school and was attending a big comic book convention in San Diego. The event was held just a few months before Richard Donner's big budget SUPERMAN movie was due to open and a Warner Bros press officer was there to give a slide show presentation featuring scenes from the production.

"The ballroom was packed with people," said Burton. "All eyes were glued to the screen with this poor Warner guy trying to keep it all under control. Suddenly, one fan stood up and screamed, 'Superman would never change into his costume on a ledge of a building. I'm going to boycott this movie and tell everyone you are destroying the legend! Intense applause followed as he stormed out of the hall. Wow, I thought. And from that moment on I always knew in the back of my mind the enormous problems facing anyone taking on a film version of a comic book hero.

 

[Maze]

The argument holds just fine, you just don't agree with it, there is a difference. The debate over Superman Returns also far, >far<, outstrips any debate over Burton's films, and this will become increasingly apparent over time. The problems with Superman Returns lay far beyond it simply not being 'respectful' of the source material. Also, all films have some sort of style, the point was Batman Returns was poignantly more stylized in comparison.

If you say so.. talk to hardcore batman fans about that ...

About the debate over time. so you are a medium? seeing things in an alternate reality? no seriously just kidding with you.. but you know what? even on ain't it cool news THE site where fan like to spit on movies , there is a good percentage of people who like the movie (and some after having seen it anew on dvd.)

as for your second point, nope, not every movie is stylised as Sr.

after that Burton movies are more radical? .. of course there are.So? that mean because a Michael Mann Movie is not as outrageous as a burton in style it is not very stylised? nope it's just not as radical that's all.

There's plenty of room for interpretation, new approaches, and so forth with these kinds of things... it just so happens that in this case... the vision many have for the license holds more potential to yield a superior Superman film than Singers particular take.. and I understand thats purely a matter of opinion. No one is talking about 'compromising' visions for anybody, the creative process should naturally select the approach that is best for the expression of a story in a particular medium. In fact, of course there exists different approaches to the source material than what we've seen, many the vast majority of people haven't even thought of... and many of >those visions< would undoubtedly make for a superior approach to the material for a Superman film than what I've seen so far of Singers approach. That too, is a matter of opinion... but we shall see where the sequels take us with Singer still on-board... I hope it's to a better film.

yup if you mean that you hope that the second movie will be more in allignement with what you like .. that i can understand.