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

[Nightwing1977]

btw, mostpowerful, regarding your signature. i think it's one most f***ing arrogant line. he was suppose to apologise to lois, that he ****ed her and left without a goodbye. but all he cares is his fame, telling her that people crying for him and her article is wrong.

Wow. Just wow. Watch your language, kid.

And you think the line was arrogant? Maybe you don't really understand the meaning of it. It's not perfect, but it really work.

The opening scene of SR was one of the silliest and most campy things I've seen in any superhero movie. And they didn't stop there. Fortunately, Batman Begins never stooped anywhere near that level of goofiness.

Silly & campy? I suppose you never see all first 4 films, 'cause it look the same just like SR.

It's okay if you like the movie, and it's okay if you're a big Singer fan. That's fine...I have no problem with that. Just please don't lie to yourself in order to justify your devotion.

Lie to yourself? How you know she is lying to herself? Do you read mind or something? Until then, stop acting like someone is a Singer's fans because they dig SR. There are fans that like SR & some that don't. We're all Superman's fans. Stop lying to yourself that MP is a Superman's fan that love SR.

 

[Nightwing1977]

For all it's supposed flaws, Superman Returns still delivered nearly $400 million worldwide and got a lot of positive buzz from critics. The best easiest thing for WB to do, I'd think, would be to make another movie with Routh and Singer but keep a tighter grip on the purse strings and insist on a little more pandering to the young male demographic.

Yep. I agree with you. Singer already said he is going to make the budget smaller, use plenty of action to keep those who hate story entertained, an "alien" villian (hopefully Brainiac ), etc. He prove it with X2, so I think he can do it with MoS. If not, I will eat some crows.

 

[Excel]

Chill with that fire superbaby

smaller budget+more actrion dont go together.

A sequel to a franchise that aint going anywhere dont make no sense. they to just call me up and put me charge

seriously they need start looking at origin script for 2010 WINTER.

 

[superbaby]

So...where should w.b. go from here?

btw, Excel, my advise is don't write anymore superman treatment, script and story. it will only piss you further cos you will not have the chance to make them. unless writing is your hobby.

opps, my previous post was deleted. i guess it's more voilent than the kicking superman's ass scene and not suitable for adult too. t:

 

[turtlefocker]

The Usual Suspects is pure ***** loving testosterone.

 

[turtlefocker]

..I thought that word would have been censored

 

[superbaby]

Wow. Just wow. Watch your language, kid.

And you think the line was arrogant? Maybe you don't really understand the meaning of it. It's not perfect, but it really work.

enlighten me pls.

and i think that word is one of the most amazing words in english, as you are so pissed off and there is no any word can describe the feeling any better. that word is just so perfect and emotion releasing. like drinking a cold drink under the hot sun. t:

 

[Tony Stark]

For all it's supposed flaws, Superman Returns still delivered nearly $400 million worldwide and got a lot of positive buzz from critics. The best easiest thing for WB to do, I'd think, would be to make another movie with Routh and Singer but keep a tighter grip on the purse strings and insist on a little more pandering to the young male demographic.

If Singer is anywhere near the next Superman film it will fail. You don't give your son the keys to the Porsche after he returned it with a big scratch on the side.

Superman Returns was nothing but an overbloated rehash of the Donner movie. It was Singers' love poem of Donner's work, not a movie in it's own right.

Singer did a good job with X-men due to the heavier science fiction elements of X-men. I know Superman has sci-fi elements, but what I mean by this is X-men is almost like Star Trek in a way, and I think Singer keyed in on that, where as Superman is not anything like Star Trek.

 

[stargazer]

very hardcore indeed, but unnecessarily that violent for a Superman movie. Sure we didn't see blood and the stabbing was done off-screen, but still the way Lex punctuated every word ("learn to walk before you leap")with a kick to the stomach was too much. If i'm a parent, i would not allow my children to see it

Please... so what do you think of the animated Superman: Doomsday movie? or the original Death of Superman in the comics? Or Superman fighting Darkseid in the JLU cartoon? Or the beating of Clark by Rocky in Superman 2? Or the fight of evil Superman vs Clark in Superman 3? Or all the times Clark fight in Smallville (the tv show)? Or all the times Superman fights and gets beaten in the comics and cartoons? What do you think of that?

Superman clearly has fought and gotten severely beaten in those^^occasions. So you don't like those either?


A lot biased? Yes, a lot.

 

[stargazer]

I won't argue that SUPERMAN RETURNS was very much Bryan Singer's movie, based very much on where he would like to see the character go. But it just really cannot be argued that he did not include most, if not all, of the truly classic and unique elements of the basic Superman mythology, and he also made the movie a nod to the Donner film, which back then, fans were clamoring for. NOW fans aren't pleased with that approach, but back then they were screaming for it.



Trust me on this. The Hulk is not portrayed as a hero until the end of the movie. He's being hunted through the entire thing. He's still supposed to be scary. Even Banner is scared of him. And The Hulk is supposed to be, at it's best portrayals, a scary concept. The idea that a man can lose control like that is frightening.



Ok...then don't reply to them. Quit wasting my time with "I'm not going to respond to you anymore" posts.



Good point. A reboot may not be needed, but it seems to be wanted. Although there's no reason MAN OF STEEL has to stick to the Donnerverse.



I think it was a bit sobering and serious, and that's what turned some people off it as a blockbuster. But "dull"? Maybe if you dislike certain kinds of drama...



What in God's name are you talking about? He's sitting there writhing and screaming and struggling to break free, and struggling to keep going.

What did you freaking want?

And your structural complaints are absurd. The movie didn't just SPRING Luthor's revenge on Superman during the New Krypton sequence. It built this angle, via Luthor stealing and usurping Superman's technology, kidnapping his friends, and then threatening his city. And Superman's emotions built as well.

You saying that the movie didn't build up to this just doesn't make that the case. It was clearly structured and built to this point.



Agreed. I cannot for the life of me see how someone could not consider this an emotional scene. I'm curious to what he does consider an emotion scene.



It was mostly Lex's henchman who beat Superman up, which is as it should be. Lex using others to do his dirty work until he's ready to deliver the killing blow. Lex delivered the final "blow", so to speak. Which again, is as it should be.



Absolutely. Wasn't developed REAL well, but it was there.



You've got to be kidding me. The man was beaten within an inch of his life, stabbed with Kryptonite, which was then broken off inside him, and fell off a cliff into the water, where he was clearly as good as dead. And it's ow, that
hurts?"

I think some of the bias against this movie is seeping into the logic center of people's brains, because some of the assessments of these scenes are just becoming ridiculous.



I'm just baffled at how you can come away from the movie with that mindset. Are you talking about Superman's emotional struggle BEFORE the scene? What kind of emotional struggle in regard to "Lex has taken my technology" should he have, in that case?



Patently untrue. The suit itself bears little resemblance to Donner's movie, and more to both the classic design and Fleischer's Superman. There are obvious references to the comic books, both early, classic and modern. The story itself was clearly inspired by WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE MAN OF TOMORROW or RETURN TO KRYPTON stories, and you can see bits of THE DEATH OF SUPERMAN in the film. Add to that all the comic book references, Superman soaking up the sun, Bibbo, etc.



The same way he doesn't always die right away when poisoned with Kryptonite in the comics, cartoon or SMALLVILLE. Because Kryptonite doesn't have any definitive "time of death" to it. What, do you want the hero to die?

Just a particle of kryptonite can seriously do damage to Big Blue. Yet, he's not even poisoned by the radiation of the Kryptonite inserted inside him.



It's definitely just you. And some scary, scary issues.

Excellent post.

 

[stargazer]

Theres nothing wrong with that-infact the idea itself COULD have been a very good one and COULD have worked really well but...you dont think theres something, I dunno, odd about Singers plot being inspired by one of the biggest chick flicks in the past decade?

Superman films entire plots should not be inspired by chick flicks, sorry but thats how I see it.

You don't know that, you are just speculating, that's all.

To me, SR feels a lot like Casablanca, which is a classic..

 

[stargazer]

For all it's supposed flaws, Superman Returns still delivered nearly $400 million worldwide and got a lot of positive buzz from critics. The best easiest thing for WB to do, I'd think, would be to make another movie with Routh and Singer but keep a tighter grip on the purse strings and insist on a little more pandering to the young male demographic.

yes, plus Routh makes such a wonderful Superman. And most people liked him.

 

[DavidTyler]

For the 2nd straight summer, we've seen a lesser known source matriel become a huge box office hit and we are all left to wonder why Superman Returns did not achieve this. I am now more than ever certain Bryan Singer is not the man for the job.

And it all starts, obviously, with the film itself. Lets compare the trailers for the 2 film I was refering to, and the Superman Returns one. Dont even look so far at the matrial itself-look at the look & feel, the general tone the trailers give off:




and then we have...



Where is the imagination? Wheres the creativity? Where is the fun? Whats hilarious yet depressiing is that both film look much bigger and more expensive than superman, despite supes costing 53 and 73 million more than both

The most frusterating thing from Singers film is what it COULD have been. Superman lends it self perfectly to action! How is there a SHORTAGE of money shots in a superman film? Superman has so many lush setting, why would they try to make Metropolis into a real city? There should have been Oscar nominations all over this films technical aspects! There should have been kids everywhere clamoring to see the man of steel go against his badass villain!

There should have been SO many things...W.B., right now. find themselves in a very tight situation. For the 2nd straight summer after their own failure, a studio has made what wb wanted to do look easy; they have done it with less matiriel and for less money than WB did. Frankly, its embarassing.

"200 million + biggest brand name hero in the world + easiest to adapt to cinema" is supposed to = more money, more fans, and more damn entertainment than "132 million + no name hero + decent cinema adaption ability" or "150 million + "decent name recognition + hard cinema adaption".

Its simple math.

Where do w.b. go from here? How do they give the franchise back to Singer when they know we are in for another under achiever amongst fans, critics, and at the bank?

HOW? Someone explain this to me. I know a lot of people like RETURNS and I enjoyed it for what it was but how can anybody deny a superman film should be soooo much more?? A drastic change in direction is so clearly needed if they ever hope to achieve whats possible.

What should the w.b. do?

Me...greenlight this:

http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?t=282813

for July 4th weekend of 2010. If you cant get Michael Bay, pay JJ Abrams the money he wants and get the film done! Its obvious from his script he totally gets the tone and feel they need from a Superman film. This guy is the next Mike Bay; its clear from the trailer of his 1st blockbuster MI3 he mimics Bay's use of lighting to make it look cool, modern, ect. just like Bay and also a flare for the big money shot...

http://www.apple.com/trailers/paramount/missionimpossibleiii/large.html

if i didnt know who directed that, I would go with Michael Bay, no question.

However Abrams takes the characters a bit more serious which is what makes him my ideal candidate. So a Abrams directed adaption of the story above for......Decmber 17 2010. Sounds good

This is why I wanted a Superman film that involved an antagonist the likes of a Darksied or Brainiac who could take on the armies of the world and maybe even give us some off-world action... possibly Apokolips or Death-world. Imagine Independence Day on steriods. Now that would give Superman a real challenge. And all the sub plots with the supporting cast would be incredible as we see Jimmy and Lois rescuing people from the fallout.

And also why I wanted a reboot. Krypton could be much more exciting than Donner made it. I would love to see Jor-el as the young rebel in a emotionally sterile world who gives his son not only a chance at life but a chance to lead a better, richer life.

Instead we get Luthor and another land scheme.. and Lois is made into a chick who must sleep around so much she isn't sure who the father of her son (who is an uneeded complication) is.

 

[stargazer]

If Singer is anywhere near the next Superman film it will fail. quote]

NO, it won't fail. Mark my words.

Whether you people like it or not, most people liked SR, watch the reviews, good dvd sales, etc., and I'm sure that those same people will go watch MOS with Routh and directed by Singer. Even the haters. and of course, they will continue whining, that will never change.

 

[Tony Stark]

If Singer is anywhere near the next Superman film it will fail. quote]

NO, it won't fail. Mark my words.

Whether you people like it or not, most people liked SR, watch the reviews, good dvd sales, etc., and I'm sure that those same people will go watch MOS with Routh and directed by Singer. Even the haters. and of course, they will continue whining, that will never change.

That remark is so far removed from reality. The movie was a failure on so many fronts. Technically it was a disaster with one of the poorest scripts I've seen in years.

Worst of all, the flying effects were absolutely horrible. The flight scenes in Fantastic Four (no matter what you think of the movie overall) and the scenes in Iron Man, blow Superman Returns out of the water.

Singer is a great director, just not for this franchise. And it wasn't just his fault, the script was horrid, and the casting of Kate Beckensale (the worst Lois Lane on film) also hampered his work. Either way, it's time for a new direction.

 

[buggs0268]

That remark is so far removed from reality. The movie was a failure on so many fronts. Technically it was a disaster with one of the poorest scripts I've seen in years.

Worst of all, the flying effects were absolutely horrible. The flight scenes in Fantastic Four (no matter what you think of the movie overall) and the scenes in Iron Man, blow Superman Returns out of the water.

Singer is a great director, just not for this franchise. And it wasn't just his fault, the script was horrid, and the casting of Kate Beckensale (the worst Lois Lane on film) also hampered his work. Either way, it's time for a new direction.

Trust me. Don't bother arguing the truth with these guys. They have their own reality on SR despite the facts. You will never change their mind. Used to show them articles and box office and still they wouldn't accept it. Even the WB calls it a failure, and still say it is a hit.

 

[wellsy]

buggs, you really should avoid saying that we "ignore the facts" when you clearly do it on an even more blatant basis than you can accuse us.

Simple fact of the matter is that, at this point in time, MoS as a sequel is the least risky of the options WB is presented with. A reboot requires more time to develop (so no movie until 2011), more money to be sunk in, etc. JL:M has many of the same problems, not to mention a much larger budget, continuity problems (it doesn't fit with BB, etc), as well as a questionable cast (for the most point). Doing nothing will see money wasted on Singer's contract and ensure that Supes misses its market.

As I see it, WB has been looking at its options very carefully. They tried JL:M on a lower budget (using Aussie tax breaks), but it didn't work, and they realise now (or so I feel with all the information I have) that MoS as a sequel to SR is easily the least risky option.

Or perhaps, buggs, I should simply stop arguing, since you're obviously not going to listen to any word of logic on this topic (going off past experiance. Come one, surprise me).

 

[Nixon]

Buggs: "Those of you who are on my [ignore] list, don't bother responding to this. I won't see it. [You're] on my ignore list, so replying to my posts is pointless."

You should fix that. Otherwise it makes your tagline seem like an unintentional joke.

 

[superbaby]

buggs, you really should avoid saying that we "ignore the facts" when you clearly do it on an even more blatant basis than you can accuse us.

Simple fact of the matter is that, at this point in time, MoS as a sequel is the least risky of the options WB is presented with. A reboot requires more time to develop (so no movie until 2011), more money to be sunk in, etc. JL:M has many of the same problems, not to mention a much larger budget, continuity problems (it doesn't fit with BB, etc), as well as a questionable cast (for the most point). Doing nothing will see money wasted on Singer's contract and ensure that Supes misses its market.

As I see it, WB has been looking at its options very carefully. They tried JL:M on a lower budget (using Aussie tax breaks), but it didn't work, and they realise now (or so I feel with all the information I have) that MoS as a sequel to SR is easily the least risky option.

Or perhaps, buggs, I should simply stop arguing, since you're obviously not going to listen to any word of logic on this topic (going off past experiance. Come one, surprise me).

i don't know. i thought going on with the sequel would be too risky. as singer is definitely not a '+' point anymore and there are too many unresolved and wicked issues need to be explained and it will take away the movie time. (and the audience has little interest in them but they must be addressed)

i thought a reboot would be refreshing and giving us new hope.

and hope is really what we need now.

 

[Nixon]

If Singer is anywhere near the next Superman film it will fail. You don't give your son the keys to the Porsche after he returned it with a big scratch on the side.

Superman Returns was nothing but an overbloated rehash of the Donner movie. It was Singers' love poem of Donner's work, not a movie in it's own right.

A more apt metaphor might be that he returned it without topping off the tank and that's something that's easy enough to fix. Even if we accept the worst criticisms of Superman Returns as true, and I don't think we should, the film did the same kind of business and got similarly positive reviews as Nolan's Batman Begins. If it had a budget similar to Nolan's film I don't doubt that WB would consider it an unqualified success.

I'm not going to argue that the film failed you, but that's an entirely different kind of "fail" altogether isn't it?

Singer did a good job with X-men due to the heavier science fiction elements of X-men. I know Superman has sci-fi elements, but what I mean by this is X-men is almost like Star Trek in a way, and I think Singer keyed in on that, where as Superman is not anything like Star Trek.

The thematic issues that link them are about alienation and acceptance. The X-Men are characters dealing with alienation, Star Trek is about mankind putting aside its prejudices and become more accepting, and from what we can see in Superman Returns with the Man of Steel Singer seems to be exploring the middle ground between accceptance and alienation and the importance and meaning of belonging.

Superman isn't any less sci-fi than the X-Men are and I think that translated into his movies. I mean, if you're not going to call Lex's plot to use alien technology to Kryptoform the planet Earth sci-fi then what do you call it?

 

[Ita-KalEl]

i don't know. i thought going on with the sequel would be too risky. as singer is definitely not a '+' point anymore and there are too many unresolved and wicked issues need to be explained and it will take away the movie time. (and the audience has little interest in them but they must be addressed)

i thought a reboot would be refreshing and giving us new hope.

and hope is really what we need now.

The fact that Singer is not a "+" point anymore, is debatable. He is still the director of X2, one of the best sequel ever and by now no one knows the real quality of Valkyrie. And if will it be a triple-a movie?

Nevertheless the idea of a reboot it's simply insane and the result of the Hulk, will prove it. I doubt that The incredible Hulk will do far better than Hulk at the box office. And atUniversal they'll be happy to do again $130-140m, simply because after the terrible negativity of the first movie, it would have been impossible to cross the $100m mark.

But SR did $200m with a nostalgic and romantic movie, it needs only an action packed sequel (like the first X-Men movie).
You can reboot a franchise after 3-4 movies (for example Batman), but not after a single movie. You can't reboot a franchise every time there is a problem.
If the kid is a problem you can solve it with a good script, I don't see why they should start again from zero...people are sick of Superman's origin, expecially after 8 years of Smallville.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Adding more action might apease the regular joe but it won't apease me because although the lack of action/fights was a huge problem I think that the movie had bigger problems than that. Namely, the storyline and characterzations and direction and acting. I first an foremost care about rather I like a movie or not.

 

[Ita-KalEl]

If you look at X-men and that at X2, they seems totally different from each other. The first one seem a tv-pilot and the second one is a terrific sh movie, IMO one of the best ever made.

The director is the same, and his name is Bryan Singer.

http://it.youtube.com/watch?v=XbmcSU-Osxs

 

[Super Kal]

yeah, they still both look like complete and utter crap to me...

 

[Showtime]

Kal...what Superhero movies do you like?