BvS Zach Snyder plans to speak with Frank Miller for MoS Sequel

Don't be dramatic people. Miller has said himself that he only did that to Superman because he was appearing in a Batman story. This might actually be a little more Superman than batman or at least equal so Zack and Miller will talk about doing a version of his Returns story. Meaning Superman will be done different. And Bruce wont be in his 50s.

Also, it seems like some people are reacting like they are making Miller a writer. They are just consulting with him. Listening to a guys ideas and using them are not the same.

I do have to say I hope they treat Lois well in sequel, and give her a better role than in MOS. I definitely do not want anything approaching the horrible role she had in SR, where among other things she comes off as a reckless parent (although I guess with Clark as a dead-beat Dad who abandoned his child, Lois taking her son to the scene of the crime might not seem that horrible.)
 
The only issues I have with Synder talking to Miller is that I've largely felt everything Miller's done for the past 20 years has been pretty horrible.
 
That may be true. But I'm an educated, intelligent person trained to read and understand narratives and I'm not one of them.

I have a full understanding of Dark Knight Returns. I understand completely what Miller was trying to say about Superman and his place in the world. I don't like it nor do I agree with it. Even within the context of the story.

I don't care for Miller's racism or sexism either. So I don't support his work.


Kingdom Come has it's own problems and issues. And I could spend a full page listing them. It's a book with beautiful art that has been revered into iconic status with a lot of problems in characterization. Wonder Woman's characterization is particularly horrible in the book to the point that Mark Waid has apologized for it. The book has horrible gender problems. I'm not excusing Kingdom Come.



I've read thousands of comic books. For about 20 years. Thanks. Still don't like the book.




Actually, I don't think it's at all in line with the portrayal of Superman in comics at that time. Dark Knight Returns was published only a brief year after Superman's final bow in the pre-crisis era with "Whatever Happened to the Man of Tommorrow." The Superman in that book was also vulnerable and falliable but had full control over his choices and a strong will. He was no one's fool.

It was published the same year as John Bryne's Man of Steel reboot which portrayed Clark as again, falliable, vulnerable and yet....empowered and dignified and able to stand tall and make his own choices.

Then again, at this point, the book was written over 25 years ago. So whether it was on point for "that time" really has no bearing on whether it's appropriate to be used as inspiration today. It's certainly NOT on point with the way he's portrayed today nor the way he was portrayed in Man of Steel.

There are plenty of other books that ask challenging, thoughtful and valid questions about Superman's place in our world while keeping his personality and dignity intact. They also managed to be written by men who liked and respected the character.

I respect if you enjoy the book. I do not.

But how he is portrayed today is the New 52 junk where they have marginalized Lois Lane. Do we want them looking to the current comics?
 
Bleh to this news. I never cared for Miller, and TDKR is my most hated comic of all time.
 
All Star Batman & Robin is a work of comic genius.
 
It'll be fine. Superman wont be anyone's chump. Maybe for a moment with Batman but it wont last. He wont be a government puppet or look stupid.

Well, one more point goes to team "This movie is a cash grab".

Of course. :huh: You could say every single sequel of all time is a cash grab.

I swear, people are so naive when it comes to these things. It's not always about the auteur and his creative vision who gets what he wants. Unless you're Spielberg, Cameron, Nolan or Bay, studios are the bosses. Unless they make a billion a couple times for them, they're not really gonna back off.

So does this automatically mean it's gonna be bad? No. Hopefully Snyder can make the best movie possible and make it worth it. Then this "cash grab" will indeed be worth the cash grab for the studio. And good for them.
 
Last edited:
Except I honestly don't think Miller was writing it to be comedic. I think that's what he thought passed as good drama. Honestly.

It's impossible for me to tell. Same with Dark Knight Strikes Again. I don't know if he's lampooning himself or not.
 
Except I honestly don't think Miller was writing it to be comedic. I think that's what he thought passed as good drama. Honestly.

Oh I know. And that's what gives it that extra layer of humor. That Miller was actually writing that as a serious story.
 
". I looked at Silken Floss and, now, here's this beautiful, really uptight woman [who was a secretary in the comics]. And I was like, she had to have her bad old days. She had to have her crazy days where she got up at 6 at night every day and there was some kind of daddy taking care of her. And that's the Silken Floss that's in the movie."

In other words, another Frank Miller female ;)
 
Of course. :huh: You could say every single sequel of all time is a cash grab.

I swear, people are so naive when it comes to these things. It's not always about the auteur and his creative vision who gets what he wants. Unless you're Spielberg, Cameron, Nolan or Bay, studios are the bosses. Unless they make a billion a couple times for them, they're not really gonna back off.

So does this automatically mean it's gonna be bad? No. Hopefully Snyder can make the best movie possible and make it worth it. Then this "cash grab" will indeed be worth the cash grab for the studio. And good for them.

This argument again. Come on, you know what I mean. "Cash grab" is a common expression of something that's put together to make easy money instead of putting some effort and thought into it. No s**t every movie is being done for money, but "cash grab" is supposed to be the worst case scenario of studio execs' need to make a profit.

The fact is, MoS is divisive and it's not doing the money they were hoping for. Zack has said he wants a MoS2 before anything JL-related (that includes the B/S movie). Poni_Boy has stated why the SDCC announcement was put together last minute. Snyder consulting with a man who hasn't done anything reputable or respectable for a long long time.

So, please, let's not do semantics here. This sounds like a cash grab, more than any studio movie that's meant to bring said studio cash.
 
Man, Warner Bros. must have unrealistic expectations if they see MOS as a financial disappointment. I mean if over 600 million worldwide for a reboot isn't enough for them, then there's NO comic property that'll survive under their care. I mean what the **** where they expecting from it? A billion right away?
 
You don't plaster Nolan's name everywhere and expect 600. The whole deal just looks fishy to me. Damage control-y.
 
Despite the fact that Snyder has already said they are not adapting millers TDKR some people are still worried. There is no way we are are going to see a TDKR live action in MoS 2. "Youre scared of me coz you can't control me. You dont. And you never will." This quote negates any chance of that movie being adapted. And besides didn't Snyder and Co speak with Mark Waid and the likes for MOS? If the Waid's reaction to the movie is anything to go by, he had no influence on the movie.
 
Most people aren't worried about Miller because they fear a TDKRt adaptation, they're worried because Miller's suggestions will probably suck, for Batman, Superman, or the story.
 
Man, Warner Bros. must have unrealistic expectations if they see MOS as a financial disappointment. I mean if over 600 million worldwide for a reboot isn't enough for them, then there's NO comic property that'll survive under their care. I mean what the **** where they expecting from it? A billion right away?

Exactly :up: WBs needs to realise Rome wasn't built in a day
 
People who are far more qualified to be consultants than Frank Miller.

Denny O'Neil
Chuck Dixon
Tony S. Daniel
Grant Morrison
Scott Snyder
Jeph Loeb
Bruce Timm
Paul Dini
 
Add my grandma who has Alzheimer to that list.
 
Why are they consulting the director of The Spirit?

Frank Miller is now insane. He'll probably suggest Lucius Fox wear a nazi uniform with eye liner.
 
Even Alan Moore would be a better consultant. And he's as crazy as they come.
 
Why are they consulting the director of The Spirit?

Frank Miller is now insane. He'll probably suggest Lucius Fox wear a nazi uniform with eye liner.

:lmao:

That should have been the title of the headline on all the websites :oldrazz:
 
Moore isn't that crazy. He's just more cranky when they adapt his books. I can't blame the guy all that much. But if he's talking about other things beside his adaptations he's actually a pretty cool guy.
 
This argument again. Come on, you know what I mean. "Cash grab" is a common expression of something that's put together to make easy money instead of putting some effort and thought into it. No s**t every movie is being done for money, but "cash grab" is supposed to be the worst case scenario of studio execs' need to make a profit.

The fact is, MoS is divisive and it's not doing the money they were hoping for. Zack has said he wants a MoS2 before anything JL-related (that includes the B/S movie). Poni_Boy has stated why the SDCC announcement was put together last minute. Snyder consulting with a man who hasn't done anything reputable or respectable for a long long time.

So, please, let's not do semantics here. This sounds like a cash grab, more than any studio movie that's meant to bring said studio cash.

It's hard to differentiate an actual reasonable post like this from every poster on the Hype of internet who always complain about studios.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"