Superman Returns
- Thread starter Loofster
- Start date
sexy asian
New member
Safe haven? Try lunatic asylum. I just had a quick look at their forums, and I have rarely seen such hateful, vindictive rhetoric outside a 700 Club convention. There are literally people wishing guys like Roger Ebert great bodily harm, and that his recent health problems will be the end of him, and they have, of course, divided the world into SR-haters and believers with the simple-minded, child-like, embarrassingly un-nuanced methodology you would expect from religious extremists.
We can certainly all agree that Ebert is a horrid little toad, but that is about as far as my dislike for him stretches, and his SR review was remarkably accurate, if a little bit harsh, and to actually wish him harm, or even suggest that his negative review was an early symptom of his recent health problems, is quite disturbing to me.
We can certainly all agree that Ebert is a horrid little toad, but that is about as far as my dislike for him stretches, and his SR review was remarkably accurate, if a little bit harsh, and to actually wish him harm, or even suggest that his negative review was an early symptom of his recent health problems, is quite disturbing to me.
zenmaster4
New member
It's a great film. Singer did a fantastic job. But it's a proven fact that more people will want to see a dumb action movie. Spiderman is more popular because Peter Parker is (or is supposed to be) a teen, and much more of an 'everyman' with powers. Plus, there was a rock video to promote Spiderman. Kirsten Dunst was a big selling point. The 'ccolness' factor is higher with Spiderman.
I honestly don't think that everybody got it wrong.
I went to see the film on Saturday and really enjoyed it, as did my wife.
Rather than the slam bam action film that they could have come out with I thought they produced a more thoughtful film and it was all the better for it.
In terms of the almost re-cycled Lex plot, surely this is (in a way) staying true to the character as developed in the first film. That plan didn't work, so he tried notching it up a level (after all his dad did tell him that land is the only thing they aren't making any more of).
Also its not just the the exitsing fans they had to please, due to the amount of time that has passed they had to re-introduce the main characters and their motivations to a new audience.
The biggest problem I have had is with the quality of the tv spots for the film. Given the fanatastic second trailer and its excellent use of the Superman Music, the TV spots I saw instead used a generic rock track and didn't really sell the film that well.
Where were the initial teaser spots, with a bit of the music and just the symbol. Follow these with somethin more like the second trailer, making the film look like the epic return of the worlRAB greatest hero rather than a rocked out action film. Bad advertising if you ask me.
In terms of a sequel, I think it would be very difficult to make use of the too fantastic villians such as Darkseid, as I can not see how they would have these on screen without them looking ridiculous. Although this is Superman, for the films I think it will always work best to keep it more grounded in the real world.
Perhaps they could introduce a plot where Lex wants Supes dead and hires Metallo or maybe the Parasite to help do the deed. Villians that while offering more of a challenge and threat don't require too much of a leap from a real setting (as opposed to boom tubes and hordes or para-demons).
Cheers
Stu.
I went to see the film on Saturday and really enjoyed it, as did my wife.
Rather than the slam bam action film that they could have come out with I thought they produced a more thoughtful film and it was all the better for it.
In terms of the almost re-cycled Lex plot, surely this is (in a way) staying true to the character as developed in the first film. That plan didn't work, so he tried notching it up a level (after all his dad did tell him that land is the only thing they aren't making any more of).
Also its not just the the exitsing fans they had to please, due to the amount of time that has passed they had to re-introduce the main characters and their motivations to a new audience.
The biggest problem I have had is with the quality of the tv spots for the film. Given the fanatastic second trailer and its excellent use of the Superman Music, the TV spots I saw instead used a generic rock track and didn't really sell the film that well.
Where were the initial teaser spots, with a bit of the music and just the symbol. Follow these with somethin more like the second trailer, making the film look like the epic return of the worlRAB greatest hero rather than a rocked out action film. Bad advertising if you ask me.
In terms of a sequel, I think it would be very difficult to make use of the too fantastic villians such as Darkseid, as I can not see how they would have these on screen without them looking ridiculous. Although this is Superman, for the films I think it will always work best to keep it more grounded in the real world.
Perhaps they could introduce a plot where Lex wants Supes dead and hires Metallo or maybe the Parasite to help do the deed. Villians that while offering more of a challenge and threat don't require too much of a leap from a real setting (as opposed to boom tubes and hordes or para-demons).
Cheers
Stu.
MoparMaxivan
New member
Yeah I heard that too and apparently the cast only got to see the release version the Friday BEFORE general release in the States which seems a bit strange as they were already promoting the film but had no idea what would be in it!!
Oh come on you have to tell now about Michael Bays propsed idea. Personally I cringed at the mention of McG and JJ Abrams!!!!!!!
I actually like the last part of the movie!!! Again it humanises the character and makes you realise that nobody can save the man who saves you because his strenghts become flaws (needles, surgery and electric shock etc all fail!) BUT I can see why you wouldnt like it, and my heart bleeRAB for Martha standing outside while her son may be dying inside(in the cinema I was like "how come she aint with him?" then it hit me DUH!!!)
I comletely agree Superman Returns actually looks like a remake of Superman The Movie at a lot of times which dissapoints me in the fact that they give the original film sssooooo many noRAB IM SURE THEIR NECKS HURT!!!I understand the original movie was and still is amazing but isnt this a new era of Superman?? Why couldnt they acknowledge the first movie and then move on to the here and now?
As much as there is a lot in it how the hell did this movie cost that much????????? Im still shocked that this is an accurate estimate but wit all the cuts maybe we missed something expensive?
Oh come on you have to tell now about Michael Bays propsed idea. Personally I cringed at the mention of McG and JJ Abrams!!!!!!!
I actually like the last part of the movie!!! Again it humanises the character and makes you realise that nobody can save the man who saves you because his strenghts become flaws (needles, surgery and electric shock etc all fail!) BUT I can see why you wouldnt like it, and my heart bleeRAB for Martha standing outside while her son may be dying inside(in the cinema I was like "how come she aint with him?" then it hit me DUH!!!)
I comletely agree Superman Returns actually looks like a remake of Superman The Movie at a lot of times which dissapoints me in the fact that they give the original film sssooooo many noRAB IM SURE THEIR NECKS HURT!!!I understand the original movie was and still is amazing but isnt this a new era of Superman?? Why couldnt they acknowledge the first movie and then move on to the here and now?
As much as there is a lot in it how the hell did this movie cost that much????????? Im still shocked that this is an accurate estimate but wit all the cuts maybe we missed something expensive?
lucey lu lu
New member
Well, when you put it like that...
renee70466
New member
Long before the final script, Singer was supposedly toying with the idea of using Zod as the villain, in which case he would obviously have had to reference S2. The story goes that he wanted Jude Law for the role, who had previously been linked to the lead role as well, but when it turned out he wasn't available/interested, Singer supposedly cut all ties with S2, and in just about every interview he has done, he has stated that he wanted to follow Donner's original Superman, not Lester's. Here's just one quote, but there are many variations from interview to interview...
"If I was going to tell a return story, I had to pick a place to jump off so I chose Donner
"If I was going to tell a return story, I had to pick a place to jump off so I chose Donner
thorrnydevil
New member
At least it seem like we will be getting a Superman Returns sequel but it is still 3 years off untill the planned release date. So it plot for Super Returns again or whatever it will be called offical then?
Hi I just seen the movie last night and Im not sure how I feel.
I am a fan of Suoerman he is my favourite hero but I just cant help how I feel. The plane sequence was truly amazing and had me on the edge of my seat with Lois inside and Superman making a balls outside, and I did like where the plane ended up as it symbolised that Superman had really returned to help these people.
The story was good and I enjoyed it as a whole.
BUT (and this is quite a BIG but..)
I dunno it just really dented my enjoyment it was such a dampner after that and now I want him to die in the next one for it to regain what it lost for me. He isnt alone anymore and thats the big appeal but hopefully they might bring it to a better place in the sequel.
The fx wasnt all that good and at times it made me cringe how bad it was (mostly flying with another person or against landmarks as well as a scene on Luthor Island that really seemed they were running against green screen!!!)
I did love everything else (mostly because I wanted to) the time issue wasnt a problem (it could have been longer as it will be years before the next film) Spacey was better than Hackman Routh dazzled in the role IMO but I thought it was hillarious that he had all of 6 pages of dialogue as Clark AND Superman together and most of it was repeats (eg Hello Ms Lane Goodnight Miss Lane). This aint the same gobby Superman that we have in Smallville!!
And it was no surprise that they got him to have his top off I was wondering how long it would take and how (all of 5 mins!!)
Is it really doing bad business at the box office??? Because it aint that bad it deserves sucess because I need MORE SUPERMAN MOVIES!
All in all I will go see it again!!! But can somebody clear this earlier question up? Thanks
I am a fan of Suoerman he is my favourite hero but I just cant help how I feel. The plane sequence was truly amazing and had me on the edge of my seat with Lois inside and Superman making a balls outside, and I did like where the plane ended up as it symbolised that Superman had really returned to help these people.
The story was good and I enjoyed it as a whole.
BUT (and this is quite a BIG but..)
The kid thing what was with that? For me that totally ruined the film. I was so embarassed when my friend was saying "oh thats his kid" and I said no of course Superman cant mate with humans can somebody PLEASE verify this please!
I dunno it just really dented my enjoyment it was such a dampner after that and now I want him to die in the next one for it to regain what it lost for me. He isnt alone anymore and thats the big appeal but hopefully they might bring it to a better place in the sequel.
The fx wasnt all that good and at times it made me cringe how bad it was (mostly flying with another person or against landmarks as well as a scene on Luthor Island that really seemed they were running against green screen!!!)
I did love everything else (mostly because I wanted to) the time issue wasnt a problem (it could have been longer as it will be years before the next film) Spacey was better than Hackman Routh dazzled in the role IMO but I thought it was hillarious that he had all of 6 pages of dialogue as Clark AND Superman together and most of it was repeats (eg Hello Ms Lane Goodnight Miss Lane). This aint the same gobby Superman that we have in Smallville!!
And it was no surprise that they got him to have his top off I was wondering how long it would take and how (all of 5 mins!!)
Is it really doing bad business at the box office??? Because it aint that bad it deserves sucess because I need MORE SUPERMAN MOVIES!
All in all I will go see it again!!! But can somebody clear this earlier question up? Thanks
prunkgurl69
New member
OK thanks, my childhood memory is failing me. In any case... that's the most stupid plan a villain has had that I can recall, because it doesn't even make sense! (weather satellites controlling weather? Hacking into computer terminals by typing "Hack In" or something?) 
From what I've read the $260 million figure does not include the misfires. It does not include any of the marketing costs. So if you take the lowest estimate - you are looking at a $200 - $260 million dollar production cost, plus the mis fires - $60million is the figure I've seen quoted, plus marketing - I've seen an estimate of $40million. You are looking at an estimated $300 million movie minimum. To date SR has made $188 million worldwide. I think the studio gets half of that, so its neeRAB to make a minimum of $600 million just to break even.
OOOOOOOHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!
I like the idea of that A LOT!!!!
Ive done a bit of reading and I think Superman Red Son has jumped to the front of the queue in my reading list! It looks ssssssssssssssoooooooooo good!!!
Just to ask is it true that they made Clark vegeterian in an elseworld comic or is that just a joke???
Thanks
I like the idea of that A LOT!!!!
Ive done a bit of reading and I think Superman Red Son has jumped to the front of the queue in my reading list! It looks ssssssssssssssoooooooooo good!!!
Just to ask is it true that they made Clark vegeterian in an elseworld comic or is that just a joke???
Thanks
That's actually not very uncommon. Movies are often in editing until days before the release, I remember one of the Star Wars movies was in editing until after release, and with the stars busy promoting their movies, they often don't get to see the final product until the red carpet premiere.
I don't think Michael Bay's Superman plans ever made it past the negotiation table, but I think we can all imagine what it would have been like.
I think it works on paper, and as a nod to Death of Superman, which was also the initial premise for Superman V, about 10 years ago, when this movie was first being considered. My problem was no so much with the idea of Superman in the hospital, but more that it broke the momentum and robbed the movie of a real climax, and stylistically speaking, it felt oddly out of place with the rest of the movie. As did Luthor's opening scene with Gertrude Vanderworth (Noel Neill - the 50s TV Lois Lane, btw). For a moment, I thought I was watching a Tim Burton movie.
I maintain this is at most a $200 million dollar movie, not $260. This has been confirmed by Singer too, which sounRAB pretty realistic. Spider-Man 2 was in the same price range, and I think Team Superman did more with their visuals, particularly in terms of sets. The Daily Planet interior and exterior are magnificent, and would have been quite expensive, and they also spend a ridiculous amount of money on the CGI Jor-El, which ended up only being on screen for seconRAB in the final cut.
They also spent a lof of money experimenting and coming up with new techniques, which can be re-used in the sequels.
I don't think Michael Bay's Superman plans ever made it past the negotiation table, but I think we can all imagine what it would have been like.
I think it works on paper, and as a nod to Death of Superman, which was also the initial premise for Superman V, about 10 years ago, when this movie was first being considered. My problem was no so much with the idea of Superman in the hospital, but more that it broke the momentum and robbed the movie of a real climax, and stylistically speaking, it felt oddly out of place with the rest of the movie. As did Luthor's opening scene with Gertrude Vanderworth (Noel Neill - the 50s TV Lois Lane, btw). For a moment, I thought I was watching a Tim Burton movie.
I maintain this is at most a $200 million dollar movie, not $260. This has been confirmed by Singer too, which sounRAB pretty realistic. Spider-Man 2 was in the same price range, and I think Team Superman did more with their visuals, particularly in terms of sets. The Daily Planet interior and exterior are magnificent, and would have been quite expensive, and they also spend a ridiculous amount of money on the CGI Jor-El, which ended up only being on screen for seconRAB in the final cut.
They also spent a lof of money experimenting and coming up with new techniques, which can be re-used in the sequels.
rajarshi s
New member
Im sure you are right for me this is a marathon not a sprint- I define sprint as once a day!If I see it again it will be the first movie I will have seen more than twice in a cinema and the way its looking it could be 5 times before Im done! )
Seriously I gotta start taking what you are! I must be hanging out in the wrong places! Ive been signing petitions emailing WB and panicking over the extended cut being relaeased or not whilst you think it will (and I honestly do take what you say in the highest regard!) I think there is a thirst for it thus making great business sense (and and from what I hear a lot of Brandons lines were cut as well as premises re-jigged and I for one wanna see the Kryptonian graveyard and the space shuttle and lots of Smallville and(you....... get the picture!)
I dunno Im still not convinced on the whole Jesus thing (Though its kinda ironic as Superman was created by two Jewish men!) And if its true at least hes campaigning for the obvious good of the people (I have my suspicions of Jesus sometimes!
) But if your in Lex Luthors camp then of course hes a God! I dunno for me it aint a factor that bothers me (though we all know how I feel/felt about the kid!) Is it just too self righteous or am I missing something?
As to wheter Ottman will be allowed enter Superman Returns... I dont know I sure hope so!
As regarRAB to Reeves I know that he has been Superman for 25years but all Im saying is that now people not so familiar of Reeve has a Superman of their own (who aint in a wussy adaptation!) I for one like all Ive seen of Routh so far and I hope he can keep it up!
POTC2 getting all that cash has to be one of the biggest injustices of recent movie times but at least Superman Returns had the widespread critical acclaim POTC2 lacks!
I must admit Id love to take a list of things with me to the cinema to see what certain things are that are causing a lot of debate amongst fans eg
Is Jason wearing a cape and glasses in the picture he gives Lois of Superman, Richard, Lois and Jason
What does that mic say?
What is Superman shouting during the stabbing scene?
Its great fun! It adRAB a bit of spice to things!
)Seriously I gotta start taking what you are! I must be hanging out in the wrong places! Ive been signing petitions emailing WB and panicking over the extended cut being relaeased or not whilst you think it will (and I honestly do take what you say in the highest regard!) I think there is a thirst for it thus making great business sense (and and from what I hear a lot of Brandons lines were cut as well as premises re-jigged and I for one wanna see the Kryptonian graveyard and the space shuttle and lots of Smallville and(you....... get the picture!)
I dunno Im still not convinced on the whole Jesus thing (Though its kinda ironic as Superman was created by two Jewish men!) And if its true at least hes campaigning for the obvious good of the people (I have my suspicions of Jesus sometimes!
) But if your in Lex Luthors camp then of course hes a God! I dunno for me it aint a factor that bothers me (though we all know how I feel/felt about the kid!) Is it just too self righteous or am I missing something?As to wheter Ottman will be allowed enter Superman Returns... I dont know I sure hope so!
As regarRAB to Reeves I know that he has been Superman for 25years but all Im saying is that now people not so familiar of Reeve has a Superman of their own (who aint in a wussy adaptation!) I for one like all Ive seen of Routh so far and I hope he can keep it up!
POTC2 getting all that cash has to be one of the biggest injustices of recent movie times but at least Superman Returns had the widespread critical acclaim POTC2 lacks!
I must admit Id love to take a list of things with me to the cinema to see what certain things are that are causing a lot of debate amongst fans eg
Is Jason wearing a cape and glasses in the picture he gives Lois of Superman, Richard, Lois and Jason
What does that mic say?
What is Superman shouting during the stabbing scene?
Its great fun! It adRAB a bit of spice to things!
Hang on a second - If the "superkiss" never happened, then why does Lois not remember that Clark is Superman?
Kate Bosworth is a huge casting mistake. She is piss-takingly young to play the character, never mind winning the Pulitzer. Lois Lane was an established journalist when Superman first came to Metropolis, which is something like 8 years prior to Superman Returns, given that he's been away for 5 years. So by the time frame of the new film she was what, 17 at the time of the first film? A little internal logic wouldn't have gone amiss, I feel.
Kate Bosworth is a huge casting mistake. She is piss-takingly young to play the character, never mind winning the Pulitzer. Lois Lane was an established journalist when Superman first came to Metropolis, which is something like 8 years prior to Superman Returns, given that he's been away for 5 years. So by the time frame of the new film she was what, 17 at the time of the first film? A little internal logic wouldn't have gone amiss, I feel.
MummyToThomas&TTC
New member
I've never seen Superman IV. Is it not shown on TV for some reason?
Got into a fight with Frank Miller as well!
I don't know about the silver age, but... Yup. Byrne did it too.
I was wondering if I should have kept the "without a brain" comment!
I don't mean that he's stupid. The problem Byrne had with Frank Miller's Superman was that he was basically a government slave. Byrne was saying that that was a nonsense and if the President even suggested that then the next second the White House would be on the Moon with Superman saying "Now let's talk about this."
Byrne gave him a 'brain'. Frank (I'll borrow what you said here) romanticised him and actually gave him a relationship with 'mother' Earth.
Batman calls him "An overgrown boyscout."
(which I think is very accurate!)
I haven't seen the film yet. But from what I've heard and clips I've seen... I'll probably be in the Byrne, Dini camp.
I don't know about the silver age, but... Yup. Byrne did it too.
I was wondering if I should have kept the "without a brain" comment!
I don't mean that he's stupid. The problem Byrne had with Frank Miller's Superman was that he was basically a government slave. Byrne was saying that that was a nonsense and if the President even suggested that then the next second the White House would be on the Moon with Superman saying "Now let's talk about this."Byrne gave him a 'brain'. Frank (I'll borrow what you said here) romanticised him and actually gave him a relationship with 'mother' Earth.
Batman calls him "An overgrown boyscout."
(which I think is very accurate!)
I haven't seen the film yet. But from what I've heard and clips I've seen... I'll probably be in the Byrne, Dini camp.
cowboy_fan
New member
OK I dunno where to start.
First of all Hi, Im from the asylum *waves*
Secondly I dont know actually where those comments are about Ebert. Yes I dont like him, Yes I think he looks like an acidic little (feminine) troll. NO I dont wish him any harm whatsoever nor do I anybody. I think that just like here you get the fruitloops and extremists etc but I can only speak for myself. I personally find BT a great way to talk to Superman fans from around the world. Of late the only thing that I have been posting here has been on the Supeman threaRAB and I think if you are after more, there are plenty of people to have debates with.
Well thats my opinion and I have been spending quite a bit of time there (600 posts G!!!)
Anyways more Superman stuff before Mothus beats me to it AGAIN!!!!
Heres an interview with Singer
http://www.mediablvd.com/magazine/Magazine-Home/MBMag_20060420237.html
Im not loving the talk of Return To Krypton being in an Imax only release because thatd mean Id have to hop on a plane to london (and after Lost and Superman Returns its something I dont wanna do!!) So singer is starting to piss me off BIG TIME!
Its a good interview though, worth a read!
First of all Hi, Im from the asylum
*waves*Secondly I dont know actually where those comments are about Ebert. Yes I dont like him, Yes I think he looks like an acidic little (feminine) troll. NO I dont wish him any harm whatsoever nor do I anybody. I think that just like here you get the fruitloops and extremists etc but I can only speak for myself. I personally find BT a great way to talk to Superman fans from around the world. Of late the only thing that I have been posting here has been on the Supeman threaRAB and I think if you are after more, there are plenty of people to have debates with.
Well thats my opinion and I have been spending quite a bit of time there (600 posts G!!!)
Anyways more Superman stuff before Mothus beats me to it AGAIN!!!!
Heres an interview with Singer
http://www.mediablvd.com/magazine/Magazine-Home/MBMag_20060420237.html
Im not loving the talk of Return To Krypton being in an Imax only release because thatd mean Id have to hop on a plane to london (and after Lost and Superman Returns its something I dont wanna do!!) So singer is starting to piss me off BIG TIME!
Its a good interview though, worth a read!
Molly Casey
New member
I dont care that its 3 years away!
It certainly beats waiting 18 years for a new one!
BRING IT ON!
It certainly beats waiting 18 years for a new one!
BRING IT ON!
lindseyp1977
New member
But you can see the "Thats a bit stupid how can that happen?" statement makes no more sense in itself if it's explained when or how the conception happened? The movie clearly states what the situation is, and they don't need a diagram showing them how kryptonian physilogy interfaces with humans to accept it. If they want to nitpick, flying and heat vision makes a lot less sense. Let them start there and work their way down the list