Superman Returns Will they make sequel?

[Captain Kirk]

Ok. That sounds frikkin awesome!

Thanks, I would be happy with something at least similar to this!

 

[FCEEVIPER]

Since Singer is on his way to Comic Con towards the end of July to discuss Returns and "what is next" it seems like WB is going forward with a sequel and are moving forward with Singer and company.

You best bet!



I'm going to SDCC: whoooowho00!, you can bet I'll be asking him about the Supes sequel.

 

[Saint]

Yeah, cos their budgets were the same right?

The fact that it's performing better than Begins makes allowances for the higher budget. That said, I don't believe the film cost 260 million as some phantom source claims--I suspect it is closer to what Singer said it would be at comic con last year; 200 million.

 

[el brujo138]

Oh, "the sequel will shut up a lot of people?"

I thought this film was going to shut up a lot people?

Hey, maybe the third film will shut up a lot of people?

The fourth?

"The sun'll come ouuuut, tamarrah....."

Kind of funny is it not?I have not seen this many excuses since King Kong failed to topple Titanic like the rabid fanboys were predicting before that movie.

And another thing, I like how people who are defending the movie (SR) keep talking about how thoose who did not like it are a bunch action-loving freaks who can not enjoy a movie without seeing explosions. Like SR is some sort of esoteric, deep movie full of clever subtext. Get over yourselves, SR is a romantic action drama it is not Bergman´s "The Seventh Seal".

 

[romeogbs19]

I admit, SR wasn't the best Supes film -- or as great as some of us expected -- but like many critics have said, this is far from a bad film. I honestly think the problem (if you can even call it that) is the nature of Superman itself -- it's not a dark, brooding mythos -- Supes is about hope and moral strength. Let's admit it, barring a straight-up religious movie, these themes aren't necessarily going to attract the biggest crowds -- and deep down, I think the numbers shouldn't be that surprising.

At the end, Singer delivered a critically successfull film -- and that'll help Supes draw in an audience now and later with DVD sales (like many here have said).

The sequel is actually already slated -- it was mentioned in Wizard, Premiere or EW (can't remember which) as heading for a 2009 release. I expect Singer and everyone else to be back -- Singer said in the Wizard interview that he sees this as a trilogy and has an inner meaning he wants to convey -- given he never wrapped up X-men, rest assured he'll be pushing to finish this one.

And on budget, the movie cost about $180 million -- Singer quoted that in Premiere/EW (again, can't exactly remember which) -- and did so to lay rest to all these phantom numbers lying around. This one will easily rake in that amount -- think about the licensing fees, DVD sales, advertising partnerships, and international gross -- $300 - 400 million easy.

No way will WB reboot the franchise again. I do agree with posters that Singer will have less creative control -- but that's not a bad thing at all. I think ultimately, though, it will still be his vision -- and while we can't predict the future, I suspect SR2 will be a much better movie than SR -- like X2 was compared to X1.

And finally, WB won't need to spend another $180 million (or whatever amount you guys want to believe) for a sequel. Routh, as well as Harris, have said in interviews that a sequel won't cost nearly as much -- since most of the set pieces and any special effects tools are done.

The general rule in movies and videogames is that a franchise launch will either break even or be slightly in the red -- the objective is to make a quality product, and then efficiently deliver 'cheaper' sequels that then shoot you clearly into the black.

Superman's sequel is in NO danger -- the reception may not have been Spider-Man worthy, but it was a good reception.

 

[Steelsheen]

if SR wil make a killing on DVD (like BB did) i think we can pretty much be assured of a sequel.

 

[SBrooks1]

They really need to give Superman a formidable opponent if they expect this franchise to excite anyone. Lex was fine as a first movie villain but let's move on now to Brainiac or someone interesting and exciting.

 

[Captain Kirk]

Kind of funny is it not?I have not seen this many excuses since King Kong failed to topple Titanic like the rabid fanboys were predicting before that movie.

And another thing, I like how people who are defending the movie (SR) keep talking about how thoose who did not like it are a bunch action-loving freaks who can not enjoy a movie without seeing explosions. Like SR is some sort of esoteric, deep movie full of clever subtext. Get over yourselves, SR is a romantic action drama it is not Bergman´s "The Seventh Seal".

That hardly matters. What matters is, that it is a good character driven film that is a great reintroduction to Superman. There is plenty of action, but it takes its time with the character pieces. I don't know what the hell the "Seventh Seal", is (frankly I don't care) what I do know is I love SR and I still believe in Singer's direction for the series. And in my case, that is ALL that matters.

 

[el brujo138]

That hardly matters. What matters is, that it is a good character driven film that is a great reintroduction to Superman. There is plenty of action, but it takes its time with the character pieces. I don't know what the hell the "Seventh Seal", is (frankly I don't care) what I do know is I love SR and I still believe in Singer's direction for the series. And in my case, that is ALL that matters.

Why did you quote my post if you are not going to respond to anything in it? Because saying you don´t know what "Seventh Seal" is and talking about what a good movie SR is has nothing what so ever to do with the point I was making. I will just assume that it was important to you to talk about how you don´t give a crap about Bergman movies, which is sort of obvious since you think that SR was "a good character driven film" and wouldn´t know a good story if it came up and bit you in the ass. Idiots that can´t read go on the ignore list, bye bye.

 

[logansoldcigar]

if SR wil make a killing on DVD (like BB did) i think we can pretty much be assured of a sequel.

Holiday realease, just in time for Xmas?

wonder what the main competition will be?

Itll actually be interesting to see how sales go for the two at Xmas, assuming POTC comes out then, and doesnt just rumble on ala titanic (not that Im saying it will)

 

[WormyT]

I actually hope they DON'T make a sequel.
I'm hoping maybe 7-10 years will pass and WB will get some smart filmmakers and redo the whole bloody thing for a new generation. Plenty of great plot and romance but also filled with superheroics and ZERO natural disasters.
And most importantly write a story that makes Superman Masculine.

 

[Captain Kirk]

Why did you quote my post if you are not going to respond to anything in it? Because saying you don´t know what "Seventh Seal" is and talking about what a good movie SR is has nothing what so ever to do with the point I was making. I will just assume that it was important to you to talk about how you don´t give a crap about Bergman movies, which is sort of obvious since you think that SR was "a good character driven film" and wouldn´t know a good story if it came up and bit you in the ass. Idiots that can´t read go on the ignore list, bye bye.

Sounds to me like you are the one with first class issues. I did respond to you with an opinion of my own. You want to comment on my tastes, and you don't even know me. Pretty inmature of you. Go back and watch you're Seven seals or whatever. Next time respond in a more responsible manner and not as a child.

 

[SuperDaniel]

I admit, SR wasn't the best Supes film -- or as great as some of us expected -- but like many critics have said, this is far from a bad film. I honestly think the problem (if you can even call it that) is the nature of Superman itself -- it's not a dark, brooding mythos -- Supes is about hope and moral strength. Let's admit it, barring a straight-up religious movie, these themes aren't necessarily going to attract the biggest crowds -- and deep down, I think the numbers shouldn't be that surprising.

At the end, Singer delivered a critically successfull film -- and that'll help Supes draw in an audience now and later with DVD sales (like many here have said).

The sequel is actually already slated -- it was mentioned in Wizard, Premiere or EW (can't remember which) as heading for a 2009 release. I expect Singer and everyone else to be back -- Singer said in the Wizard interview that he sees this as a trilogy and has an inner meaning he wants to convey -- given he never wrapped up X-men, rest assured he'll be pushing to finish this one.

And on budget, the movie cost about $180 million -- Singer quoted that in Premiere/EW (again, can't exactly remember which) -- and did so to lay rest to all these phantom numbers lying around. This one will easily rake in that amount -- think about the licensing fees, DVD sales, advertising partnerships, and international gross -- $300 - 400 million easy.

No way will WB reboot the franchise again. I do agree with posters that Singer will have less creative control -- but that's not a bad thing at all. I think ultimately, though, it will still be his vision -- and while we can't predict the future, I suspect SR2 will be a much better movie than SR -- like X2 was compared to X1.

And finally, WB won't need to spend another $180 million (or whatever amount you guys want to believe) for a sequel. Routh, as well as Harris, have said in interviews that a sequel won't cost nearly as much -- since most of the set pieces and any special effects tools are done.

The general rule in movies and videogames is that a franchise launch will either break even or be slightly in the red -- the objective is to make a quality product, and then efficiently deliver 'cheaper' sequels that then shoot you clearly into the black.

Superman's sequel is in NO danger -- the reception may not have been Spider-Man worthy, but it was a good reception.

THat is bul****. The problem isn`t Superman itself. The problem is that Singer didn`t tell a Superman story. He just told AGAIN Superman the movie. Thats what is the problem. Superman has tons of great stories in the comics like Superman for all seasons, Kindgom Come, Whatever happened to the man of tomorrow, Action Comics #775 which could`ve served as a base for a great movie. Movie that truly shows Superman spirit and the reason of his longevity. Singer HASN`T touched ANY of this! Not even the main theme of the film, of outsiders, of Superman coming to a world(Except Lois) that has forgotten to learn without him wasnt touched at all. Add this to the silliest villain plot and we have just an ok Superman movie. Defnitely not what we were expecting or deserved. Superman deserved more.

 

[Jplaya2023]

The only way i'll allow them to make a sequal is if Doomsday, and Darkseid are in this one and batman makes a cameo and with the help of superman defeat them both instantly.

 

[Venom71]

The only way i'll allow them to make a sequal is if Doomsday, and Darkseid are in this one and batman makes a cameo and with the help of superman defeat them both instantly.

So you alone control if we get a sequel or not...hmm finding that hard to believe.

 

[Jplaya2023]

So you alone control if we get a sequel or not...hmm finding that hard to believe.

Well i speak for the majority of comic fans who are afraid to voice their opinions on the matter.

 

[DA Harvey Dent]

Just b/c the sequel is slated doesn't mean the studio will go through with it. If this movie doesn't make an acceptable profit for WB, they WILL pull the plug on the entire franchise. Superman Lives was well into pre-production and upwards of $20 million was already spent and WB still pulled the plug on it. What makes the SR sequel any different? Like I said, if this movie doesn't generate a set profit for WB, superman is GONE.

 

[Venom71]

Well i speak for the majority of comic fans who are afraid to voice their opinions on the matter.

Hmm I see....and what are they afraid of? Being in the minority?

 

[WTFwuzThT]

This things not getting a sequel. Live with it. It's not going to sell like hotcakes on DVD either. It's not even close to being good enough. As for Singer talking about "what's next", seriously **** that guy. What do you expect him to say yeah this POS is tanking so hard there's no way WB is going to give me and my dumbass partners another 300 million to throw down the toilet while it's still limping along in the theaters. Gimme a break here. A catwoman like second weekend and you're still thinking sequel, wow.

 

[Lestat74]

This things not getting a sequel. Live with it. It's not going to sell like hotcakes on DVD either. It's not even close to being good enough. As for Singer talking about "what's next", seriously **** that guy. What do you expect him to say yeah this POS is tanking so hard there's no way WB is going to give me and my dumbass partners another 300 million to throw down the toilet while it's still limping along in the theaters. Gimme a break here. A catwoman like second weekend and you're still thinking sequel, wow.

It's highly unlikely that Warners would bring Bryan Singer After the movie has come out to San Diego Comic Con, arguably the biggest media event of it's kind, to "talk about the future" so to speak, if they didn't have a future planned. Superman, along with Batman, are Warner's biggest Corporate Icons. They are not gonna let them drift away again. Bryan Singer may not have as much creative control next time, and Warners will likely demand more action for all the ADD 14 year old boys out there ( And all the grown men who are really ADD 14 year olds inside ) but the fact that he is going to Con under the Warner's banner shows that it's likely.

 

[el brujo138]

It's highly unlikely that Warners would bring Bryan Singer After the movie has come out to San Diego Comic Con, arguably the biggest media event of it's kind, to "talk about the future" so to speak, if they didn't have a future planned. Superman, along with Batman, are Warner's biggest Corporate Icons. They are not gonna let them drift away again. Bryan Singer may not have as much creative control next time, and Warners will likely demand more action for all the ADD 14 year old boys out there ( And all the grown men who are really ADD 14 year olds inside ) but the fact that he is going to Con under the Warner's banner shows that it's likely.

Yeah sure, everybody that did not like Singers take (or "vision" which seems to be the hot buzzword around theese parts) on Superman have ADD.

 

[SpandexFan]

THat is bul****. The problem isn`t Superman itself. The problem is that Singer didn`t tell a Superman story. He just told AGAIN Superman the movie. Thats what is the problem. Superman has tons of great stories in the comics like Superman for all seasons, Kindgom Come, Whatever happened to the man of tomorrow, Action Comics #775 which could`ve served as a base for a great movie. Movie that truly shows Superman spirit and the reason of his longevity. Singer HASN`T touched ANY of this! Not even the main theme of the film, of outsiders, of Superman coming to a world(Except Lois) that has forgotten to learn without him wasnt touched at all. Add this to the silliest villain plot and we have just an ok Superman movie. Defnitely not what we were expecting or deserved. Superman deserved more.

The way I look at it was SR was a good comic flick, but not a classic comic flick.

AND.... that's exactly the way I view X-Men, which stunned me after how good X2 was.

So here's hoping SR gets even better with a sequel.

 

[ChrisBaleBatman]

It will.

 

[DA Harvey Dent]

It's highly unlikely that Warners would bring Bryan Singer After the movie has come out to San Diego Comic Con, arguably the biggest media event of it's kind, to "talk about the future" so to speak, if they didn't have a future planned.

Sure it is b/c the movie is still in theaters. Right now WB is doing damage control and not bringning Singer out would be an admission that the movie is mediocre. If anything, having Singer out there will draw some spotlight on SR and bring in more people to see it. I can't figure out why people refuse to accept a simple concept - if a movie doesn't make a predetermined profit, it will not warrant a sequel. Film studios are corporations headed by directors and officers that need to answer to shareholders. Shareholders want a business that will grow and generate profits. Projects that fail to produce profits get terminated, its that simple. This is why we have movies that are complete crap fests generating sequels - why? b/c they made money! (seriously, did we need another fast and furious sequel? we got one b/c the second one made $50 million in profit domestic). Its hard to say right now if SR will get a sequel. But, if current trends continue, and SR falls short (IMO, WB wanted at least $300 million domestic in BO) you can bet your a** there won't be a sequel.

 

[el brujo138]

Sure it is b/c the movie is still in theaters. Right now WB is doing damage control and not bringning Singer out would be an admission that the movie is mediocre. If anything, having Singer out there will draw some spotlight on SR and bring in more people to see it. I can't figure out why people refuse to accept a simple concept - if a movie doesn't make a predetermined profit, it will not warrant a sequel. Film studios are corporations headed by directors and officers that need to answer to shareholders. Shareholders want a business that will grow and generate profits. Projects that fail to produce profits get terminated, its that simple. This is why we have movies that are complete crap fests generating sequels - why? b/c they made money! (seriously, did we need another fast and furious sequel? we got one b/c the second one made $50 million in profit domestic). Its hard to say right now if SR will get a sequel. But, if current trends continue, and SR falls short (IMO, WB wanted at least $300 million domestic in BO) you can bet your a** there won't be a sequel.

I agree with you, studios are not run by fans, I have seen people on this board talking about how the goal for SR was to return Superman to the public eye and stuff like that. Reasoning like that is just weird, that is what they want as fans, what the studio wants is profit. And this why people draw the conclusion that a sequal is already set in stone.

Regarding Singer at Comic Con he could also be there to annonuce that the DVD will contain all the deleted scenes, shilling the DVD since SR isn´t likely to make a profit from box office revenue.