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

[solidsnake86]

than why don't you talk to the people who say that because they do exist.

 

[SuperDaniel]

Well...i`m writing a Superman script that is a proof that an origin movie can be done better than Donner's, has plenty of action and has a great story.

So far i`m on page 30 but I have the whole storyline outlined. 90 more to go.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

I don't get this. Everytime I come on this board it's the same thing.

Two years later and the same thing.

Why, after two years, are people still whining about Superman Returns? Still creating these fictitious arguments about box office returns, public reception, etc.

So, I'm just going to lay it down and call it how I see it. If you don't like SR, fine. Fantastic. More power to ya. Move on!

First, none of us are owed anything when it comes to a Superman movie. You are not owed anything. If you don't like the movie, you don't like the movie. Pack up your things and get out of the franchise, just like many people did with the X-Men franchise after Ratner took an abortionist's skills to his directing of it. Two years later you still do not complain, curse the director, etc.

It's redonkulous.

Secondly, I've noticed that many people who dislike SR have this hyperbolized vision of Superman, this untouchable (and quite frankly untranslatable) version of Superman as this or that. Yet, there have been so many version of his hero, that so many of us have different expectations of what we should get, yet very few of us are able to reconcile these perceptual differences and say, "They just didn't make MY Superman, but they made someone else's...."

I hated X-Men 3. However, my hate for it does not preclude me from seeing the trend in the X-Men movies. And I appreciate X3 for what it tries to do. X1 was very much the 60s version of the X-Men, a cooky sci-fi scheme, etc. X2 was very much the 80s/early 90s of the X-Men, sharp, harder edge, bit more blatant with its themes. X3 embraced the late 90s/2000s version of X-Men which has tended to be bombastic, somewhat arbitrary, and very rushed.

But, God forbid anyone notice that SR does pull elements from the comics and Superman's cultural history.

Third, this whole Superman Returns was a retread of Superman: The Movie. Oh, wait, most of you say "basically" a retread and by "basically" you mean "eliminating anything in Superman Returns that is different than Superman: The Movie"...Superman Returns is a rehash.

Did Superman: The Movie feature Superman being away for a long while, returning to find his love moving on. Nope.

Did Superman: The Movie feature Lois engaged to a good-hearted, heroic human figure? Nope.

Did Superman: The Movie have Superman discover he has a son? Nope.

Did Superman: The Movie feature Lex using kryptonian technology to build his own continent which would be free of Superman due to its poisionous qualities? Nope.

Did Superman nearly die in Superman: The Movie? Nope.

Did Superman have to give up his only son to be raised by humans in Superman: The Movie? Nope.

I mean, Christ, people. That alone shows the differences. But no, we have to whine about how it's a rehash when it most clearly isn't.

if Superman Returns is a rehash that all the Spider-Man movies are rehashes of each other, as are all the X-Men, and I can then most certainly predict that Iron Man will be as well.

Fourth, then we have this whole box office mumbo-jumbo. Now, we now that SR's budget was inflated due to all the failed production costs of the past TEN YEARS, so Excel's little comment about SR costing more is clever misdirection, as is the comparison alone.

To me, the effects in Iron Man were very noticeable at times. As was the case in Transformers, where I couldn't tell what the **** was going on most of the time with all these mechanical FX shots flashing back and forth. And seriously, anyone who touts Transformers as anything more than the base slime of blockbuster sell-out just can't be listened to.

Superman Returns made just as much as Batman Begins, regardless of cost, and tapped into the same markets, and same mass of people, that Batman did. Batman's hailed a success, Superman is not. You cannot say audiences were underwhelmed by Superman Returns when the same amount of people came out for Batman Begins, and yet it was not. You can say all you want that Superman Returns cost MORE, but audiences do not come out because a movie costs a certain amount of money, they come out because they like the genre, word-of-mouth, etc. So, the same amount of people who saw Batman Begins saw Superman Returns. Rottentomatoes shows great critical response. All of this makes sense, considering they are in the same genre. See, what WB failed to do was look at Begin's success and project their budget according when greenlighting Superman Returns.

Superman Returns "failed" at the box office not because of poor audience turn-out. It failed at the box office because WB couldn't handle its purse correctly.

These are but a few points of blatant fact that get trampled on while ravenous fanboys launch their everlasting crusade against Superman Returns, here, two years after the movie's premiere.

Comic dogmatists choose their "winner films" so arbitrarily it's somewhat sickening and boggles the mind.

My advice to all of you: leave.

Just like these people who whine about content on TV and always have the option to just not watch it, stop doing the same here. If you don't like it, go watch what you like and leave it be. Get over it. State your initial displeasure, and then leave.

As it stands now, Singer's back. Everything's on course. If this discourages you, you have no entitlement to the film and you should just find somewhere else to discuss topics of your interest.

Happy you got that off your chest. Good.

Sequel still hasn't been greenlit though, so part of your theory must be off.

And oh yes, I'm not going anywhere. If that annoys you tough beans.

 

[dark_b]

this will not end very nice. a fight i sense

 

[SuperDaniel]

Plus, I hate people who use past movies as a proof that Superman acted terribly. Who cares about past movies or bad storylines from the comics? THe new movie was a chance to improve over the mistakes from the past. Actually it`s gotten worse.

 

[bosef982]

Well...i`m writing a Superman script that is a proof that an origin movie can be done better than Donner's, has plenty of action and has a great story.

So far i`m on page 30 but I have the whole storyline outlined. 90 more to go.

Humble, wow...so why hasn't WB called you?

 

[stargazer]

I don't get this. Everytime I come on this board it's the same thing.

Two years later and the same thing.

Why, after two years, are people still whining about Superman Returns? Still creating these fictitious arguments about box office returns, public reception, etc.

So, I'm just going to lay it down and call it how I see it. If you don't like SR, fine. Fantastic. More power to ya. Move on!

First, none of us are owed anything when it comes to a Superman movie. You are not owed anything. If you don't like the movie, you don't like the movie. Pack up your things and get out of the franchise, just like many people did with the X-Men franchise after Ratner took an abortionist's skills to his directing of it. Two years later you still do not complain, curse the director, etc.

It's redonkulous.

Secondly, I've noticed that many people who dislike SR have this hyperbolized vision of Superman, this untouchable (and quite frankly untranslatable) version of Superman as this or that. Yet, there have been so many version of his hero, that so many of us have different expectations of what we should get, yet very few of us are able to reconcile these perceptual differences and say, "They just didn't make MY Superman, but they made someone else's...."

I hated X-Men 3. However, my hate for it does not preclude me from seeing the trend in the X-Men movies. And I appreciate X3 for what it tries to do. X1 was very much the 60s version of the X-Men, a cooky sci-fi scheme, etc. X2 was very much the 80s/early 90s of the X-Men, sharp, harder edge, bit more blatant with its themes. X3 embraced the late 90s/2000s version of X-Men which has tended to be bombastic, somewhat arbitrary, and very rushed.

But, God forbid anyone notice that SR does pull elements from the comics and Superman's cultural history.

Third, this whole Superman Returns was a retread of Superman: The Movie. Oh, wait, most of you say "basically" a retread and by "basically" you mean "eliminating anything in Superman Returns that is different than Superman: The Movie"...Superman Returns is a rehash.

Did Superman: The Movie feature Superman being away for a long while, returning to find his love moving on. Nope.

Did Superman: The Movie feature Lois engaged to a good-hearted, heroic human figure? Nope.

Did Superman: The Movie have Superman discover he has a son? Nope.

Did Superman: The Movie feature Lex using kryptonian technology to build his own continent which would be free of Superman due to its poisionous qualities? Nope.

Did Superman nearly die in Superman: The Movie? Nope.

Did Superman have to give up his only son to be raised by humans in Superman: The Movie? Nope.

I mean, Christ, people. That alone shows the differences. But no, we have to whine about how it's a rehash when it most clearly isn't.

if Superman Returns is a rehash that all the Spider-Man movies are rehashes of each other, as are all the X-Men, and I can then most certainly predict that Iron Man will be as well.

Fourth, then we have this whole box office mumbo-jumbo. Now, we now that SR's budget was inflated due to all the failed production costs of the past TEN YEARS, so Excel's little comment about SR costing more is clever misdirection, as is the comparison alone.

To me, the effects in Iron Man were very noticeable at times. As was the case in Transformers, where I couldn't tell what the **** was going on most of the time with all these mechanical FX shots flashing back and forth. And seriously, anyone who touts Transformers as anything more than the base slime of blockbuster sell-out just can't be listened to.

Superman Returns made just as much as Batman Begins, regardless of cost, and tapped into the same markets, and same mass of people, that Batman did. Batman's hailed a success, Superman is not. You cannot say audiences were underwhelmed by Superman Returns when the same amount of people came out for Batman Begins, and yet it was not. You can say all you want that Superman Returns cost MORE, but audiences do not come out because a movie costs a certain amount of money, they come out because they like the genre, word-of-mouth, etc. So, the same amount of people who saw Batman Begins saw Superman Returns. Rottentomatoes shows great critical response. All of this makes sense, considering they are in the same genre. See, what WB failed to do was look at Begin's success and project their budget according when greenlighting Superman Returns.

Superman Returns "failed" at the box office not because of poor audience turn-out. It failed at the box office because WB couldn't handle its purse correctly.

These are but a few points of blatant fact that get trampled on while ravenous fanboys launch their everlasting crusade against Superman Returns, here, two years after the movie's premiere.

Comic dogmatists choose their "winner films" so arbitrarily it's somewhat sickening and boggles the mind.

My advice to all of you: leave.

Just like these people who whine about content on TV and always have the option to just not watch it, stop doing the same here. If you don't like it, go watch what you like and leave it be. Get over it. State your initial displeasure, and then leave.

As it stands now, Singer's back. Everything's on course. If this discourages you, you have no entitlement to the film and you should just find somewhere else to discuss topics of your interest.

In Singer I trust.

 

[bunk]

I do agree it seems somewhat silly to continually argue about Superman Returns in these threads when there's an entire section devoted to just that. Many sequel discussions cannot take place without invoking SR... still, way too many of the arguments that take place in here have nothing to do with the sequel at all.

 

[stargazer]

Humble, wow...so why hasn't WB called you?

.... .....

 

[bosef982]

Hyperbole begets hyperbole.

Solidsnake made the best point when he said its the SAME PEOPLE over and over and over and over again with the same old arguments in various threads that have nothing to do with those arguments but they'll take that thread -- say on what powers to show in the sequel -- and mutate into a burning effigy for Superman Returns.

And I'm not a blind follower of Singer. Remember, I listed when this movie came out multiple things that I didn't like. But I meet the director on their ground, what they wanted to do with the movie, and I judge it accordingly.

Singer never came out and said this was going to be an action-fest. That was an expectation that ALL OF YOU set for yourselves. He said, multiple times before the movie premiered that he was making a "love story" and a "homage" to Donner.

Then, some loud group of fanboys walks out of the theater and goes, "NO! WHAT WAS THAT? BLASPHEMY HITS MY EYES! LEGIONS, LAY DOWN OUR DUNGEON AND DRAGONS CARDS, RAISE YOUR SWORDS, BASH SINGER WITH STUPID COMMENTS OF MORALITY, SEXUALITY, AND ILLOGICAL BOX OFFICE COMPARISONS THAT MAKE NO SENSE!!!! INTO THE FICKLE BEAST!!!"

And you're right, it hasn't been greenlit. But all signs point to Singer being on board, including statements of the people who are financing the damn thing. Don't play semantical logic games with me when you so loosely adhere to such rules yourself.

And I'm not saying you can't express displeasure, but for Christ's sake make it progressive and a discussion.

You guys blast on here -- the same people (Flawless Victory, Excel [who just wants to plug his "good" ideas]) and a whole legion of fanboys who are "working on a script that disproves that Superman Returns was good." I've read most of these premises and scripts and most of them wouldn't past the Hollywood coverage reader, let alone get greenlit -- they're fanboy orgasms puttered out thru Courier font in screenplay format.

What's funny is if I went to the X3 boards and decided to rehash arguments, the same people who piss all over SR would rush there and say "If you don't like it, leave."

That's the most appalling thing on these boards: the total lack of a consistency amongst posters.

What one believes in one forum where they hate a movie is not what they adhere to in another forum where they love the movie.

It's hilarious and somewhat reminiscent of high school, if not grade school.

Lastly, the fact that you guys reply to basically nothing in my argument (especially the stuff about the box office and the rehash crap), is proof enough that you must simply skip over that which displeases or contradicts you, and continue on pontificating your self-ordained ideas on Superman while typing away on some script that'll (thankfully) never see the light of a talented day.

 

[Super Kal]

As it stands now, Singer's back. Everything's on course.

so I guess you can tell us the release date for the sequel...

...

oh yeah... that's right... there isn't a release date.

 

[bosef982]

I do agree it seems somewhat silly to continually argue about Superman Returns in these threads when there's an entire section devoted to just that. Many sequel discussions cannot take place without invoking SR... still, way too many of the arguments that take place in here have nothing to do with the sequel at all.

That's actually my main gripe. Focus on the sequel.

 

[El Payaso]

Well...i`m writing a Superman script that is a proof that an origin movie can be done better than Donner's, has plenty of action and has a great story.

So far i`m on page 30 but I have the whole storyline outlined. 90 more to go.

Congratz. But... is that your proof that Donner can be surpassed? (and I'm not even saying he can't be)

 

[Hunter Rider]

Why all the aggro ? We have all been here long enough to know that SR polarizes ppl on this board more than any other movie, and if Singer is indeed given the sequel then it will be a rinse repeat situation as far as how ppl feel.

 

[bosef982]

so I guess you can tell us the release date for the sequel...

...

oh yeah... that's right... there isn't a release date.

Yes, well, weren't you one of the many posters who stated what the businessman behind Superman Returns felt about the movie, how Alan Horn was displeased, yadda yadda yadda, all these rumors many of you construed into meaning that Singer was gone. When things happened like the writers leaving: SINGER IS GONE! is all I heard.

Now, when Legendary Pictures represenative comes out and says, "we're making a sequel and Superman will be an angry God," you go, "Wait, how do you know that bosef? That makes no sense." Brandon Routh comes out and says things are moving. Singer comes out and says things are moving.

Or is it just that which is said in the media that you can distort into supporting an anti-SR agenda is truthful and to be taken and anything to the contrary well...why would we even consider that stuff?

Consistency: ever heard of it?

If you haven't, you should look it up. A few pages after in the H section you'll find "hypocrisy" too.

You should familiarize yourself.

 

[Super Kal]

(especially the stuff about the box office

yeah, it completely underperformed because of the utter crap-tacular, lacking story that Singer gave it...

and the rehash crap)

there were pieces in there that were original, yes, and I liked those pieces, but that doesn't mean that just because there were original pieces gives us the right to completely dismiss everything else in the movie that WAS a copy. Singer was too stuck in his love for Donner's STM (which is overrated, IMO) to actually have a movie that was free of the problems that were connected to the Donnerverse... and what's worse, he DID copy almost the entire movie, with the exception of certain elements...

just because there are pieces of chocolate in crap, it still won't make the crap taste or look good.

 

[solidsnake86]

I remember after the movie came out what it was like and we were on the same page if I'm not mistaken bosef, and your right about the x-men boards, if you say you didn't like x-3 they will tell you to leave and guess what its the same people. I especially like when they say the GA hated SR and than refer to their friends on the save superman blog and singerman sucks, but guess what, its the same people. You wanna bash SR fine, but make it a good argument, not one followed up by the box office returns and how good your script will be because lets face it, half of you are not good writers and don't have the proper education for it.

 

[Super Kal]

Yes, well, weren't you one of the many posters who stated what the businessman behind Superman Returns felt about the movie, how Alan Horn was displeased, yadda yadda yadda, all these rumors many of you construed into meaning that Singer was gone. When things happened like the writers leaving: SINGER IS GONE! is all I heard.

um... no, I wasn't. I always stayed away from the business side of it, to be honest, because I really didn't understand it.

I beleive you're thinking of someone else

 

[bosef982]

I remember after the movie came out what it was like and we were on the same page if I'm not mistaken bosef, and your right about the x-men boards, if you say you didn't like x-3 they will tell you to leave and guess what its the same people. I especially like when they say the GA hated SR and than refer to their friends on the save superman blog and singerman sucks, but guess what, its the same people. You wanna bash SR fine, but make it a good argument, not one followed up by the box office returns and how good your script will be because lets face it, half of you are not good writers and don't have the proper education for it.

Yep, righteo. Thank you! Especially this fan-fiction stuff.

I mean, I'd listen to them if they were like TheVileOne, who is actually studying film and such.

And you're right, the GA is that group of friends that person knows who has been brow-beaten with their arguments against Superman Returns.

The BEST indicators of how an audience responded is looking at reviews: which on Rotten Tomatoes are largely favorable to Superman.

And Box Office: which is the equivelant of Batman Begins, which is considered a success.

Come on people, think, WB overspent on Superman Returns. Superman Returns didn't underperform.

 

[bosef982]

um... no, I wasn't. I always stayed away from the business side of it, to be honest, because I really didn't understand it.

I beleive you're thinking of someone else

Perhaps then you shouldn't attempt to refute the arguments of someone who does understand the business side of it.

While no movie is certain until it escapes post-production (since even shot movies can be canned). I'll give you that.

But there are more indicators to Singer returning for a continuation of Superman Returns then there are not.

The rest, I won't bother you with since you admit to not understanding it anyway.

 

[dark_b]

how was the story with an lee and bana? were they talking about returning until 2007?

 

[GreenKToo]

I'm one of those on the fence as to how I feel about S.R. Didn't hate it, but didn't love it either. I am somewhat worried about whether or not singer can deliver what he promised for the sequel. That said, I am willing to see what he has in mind for it. If I don't like the direction it takes, then I simply won't see it.
How about we all calm down and wait and see if singer even directs it before we condem the man. It gets old, really old.

 

[solidsnake86]

Well you can always look for the inside scoops from emijayne if you wanna hear what you like to hear, she caters to the smallville and SR hater crowd with her reports. Oh I can't forget the tom welling for superman crowd as well.

 

[bosef982]

how was the story with an lee and bana? were they talking about returning until 2007?

Perhaps, who cares?


This isn't Hulk. And I'm talking about indicators.

There are more indicators at the present moment saying it's happening.

You can't just presume the negative for the sake of doing so, or for the sake of your own displeasure in the movie.

You can perhaps wish it goes off track. Fine. Your choice.

But, you can't say that it's stupid to say that everything looks to be on track for a sequel when...well, it is.

And if I hear a stupid Hulk argument again...have you guys seen the little nugget of joy you'll be getting as a reboot to Lee's film? Yeah, go enjoy that one if you've already read the script.

I also love the band wagon.

When Begins succeeded, suddenly it was "BEGINS" everything. Superman Begins, X-Men Begins, James Bond Begins, Daredevil Begins, Passion of the Christ Begins -- you guys couldn't laud the concept enough, despite the overwhelmingly unique variables that lead to Begins' success.

Then, you what happens with Hulk. "VAGUE HISTORY" it. SUPERMAN VAGUE HISTORY, SPIDER-MAN VAGUE HISTORY...blah blah blah, wait a few years, see how Hulk does....

Then Iron Man's successful and it's "DC needs to retain the rights of their films and then all their movie will be as good as...Iron Man???" Oh yeah, Iron Man was the pinnacle of cinema. Fun, yes. But without major flaws: certainly not.

What Band Wagon's next? If Indiana Jones succeeds are we going to start discussing recasting Gene Hackman as Lex Luthor, bringing back on Richard Donner, and hell, while we're at it, let's CGI Christopher Reeve back into the role! Awesome!

Have any of you had an original thought in a while?

 

[Super Kal]

Perhaps then you shouldn't attempt to refute the arguments of someone who does understand the business side of it.

While no movie is certain until it escapes post-production (since even shot movies can be canned). I'll give you that.

But there are more indicators to Singer returning for a continuation of Superman Returns then there are not.

The rest, I won't bother you with since you admit to not understanding it anyway.

I may not understand the business side of it, but I also don't care about it... why should I care about the business side of a movie that I hate?... you can tell me all the cost efforts and budget cuts and budget limits and whatnot, but it's not gonna do a bit of difference to me, because no matter what is said, it still won't change the fact that IMO, the movie was absolutely terrible.

just because they went through a lot of crap on the business side doesn't maker the movie any better.