Re: poon
Posted by vonisgr8 on 2005/8/7 15:48:49
***Sound of enormous indrawn breath***
Quote:
Perhaps. Most of the pics I've seen of Routh aren't great; maybe I just haven't seen the right image yet.
I still don't think they got the suit right, though. It looks like Singer and co. made just enough of a change for it to be slightly off the iconic image we all have in our craniums, but not enough to really be a dramatic departure. Personally, I think a change of look might be good for Supes (I'm on record as saying elsewhere that I actually liked the briefly-lived "Blue Energy" look), I just wish they'd have gone big.
Of course, we are only speculating, here. (And it's fun, innit? I can happily bounce this back and forth for days. Man, why did I wait so long before I started posting?) The suit's effect might fail in a tiny, grainy jpeg, while totally working on the big, silver screen. Positive waves, baby, positive waves...
Quote:
Clark Kent? Yes, absolutely. Superman? Well ... not so much.
You seem to be saying that Routh is both a) not nearly as dorky as we're making him out to be, and b) dorkier than previous Supermen, but that it's a good thing. It's a good hedging of bets (you could be right either way), but it's tough to imagine that both are the case.
Quote:
Again, true ... but again, the "but": comic book movies aren't any more identical in tone and storytelling style than the comic books on which they're based, nor do I think they should be; and it's tough to imagine two comics more different in tone than are Superman and the X-Men. Yes, they're both about superhumans in tights, but beyond that? The X-Men books (and movies) work precisely because the eponyhmous characters are flawed, fallible, and human. Superman is much more iconic, which makes it more difficult to tell an angst-filled story with him. It's not impossible (Kingdom Come played Supes as quite conflicted, and to great effect), but most recent attempts to make Superman more flawed, fallible, and human were not well received.
***Gasp, pant, wheeze***
While I catch my breath, can I just say that I'd love to see Bryan Singer bring "Supreme Power" to the screen? You get the Superman-like character, without the worry about ruining his iconic qualities with all-too-human angst, and a world where we know most people hadn't seen a superhuman before he hits the scene. I smell a franchise!
Quote:
No he's not incompetent; he certainly knows a heck of a lot more about film making than I do. I vaguely recall the build-up to "X-Men," though, and I don't remember being concerned by anything I'd seen or heard or read up to its release. Every visual looked right, even the darker, spandex-less costumes, and every casting call seemed spot-on at the time. E.g. I didn't scratch my head, wondering why he'd cast Patrick Stewart as Professor X; from the moment I heard that Stewart had been tapped for the role, I had trouble imagining anyone else in the part.
God, I really am rambling, aren't I? Must be the running-off-at-the-mouth-itis flaring up again, so I'll wrap it up now by saying that, all trepidation aside, I'm actually more keen about the new Superman movie now than I was before we started this discussion. Last week, I didn't give a rat's; today, I'm actually arguing about it, and I'll most definitely go to see it, if only to see if any of the "predictions" made here are actually borne out. There really ain't no such thing as bad publicity.
And now, back to the positive waves...
***Phew***
Quote:
Shade wrote:
Personally, I think Routh looks eerily like Christopher Reeves. He has that intangible physical look that Reeves had that I think will serve the film well.
Perhaps. Most of the pics I've seen of Routh aren't great; maybe I just haven't seen the right image yet.
I still don't think they got the suit right, though. It looks like Singer and co. made just enough of a change for it to be slightly off the iconic image we all have in our craniums, but not enough to really be a dramatic departure. Personally, I think a change of look might be good for Supes (I'm on record as saying elsewhere that I actually liked the briefly-lived "Blue Energy" look), I just wish they'd have gone big.
Of course, we are only speculating, here. (And it's fun, innit? I can happily bounce this back and forth for days. Man, why did I wait so long before I started posting?) The suit's effect might fail in a tiny, grainy jpeg, while totally working on the big, silver screen. Positive waves, baby, positive waves...
Quote:
Shade wrote:
Someone noted that Routh looked 'dorky' as if that's a bad thing for the role. Isn't Clark supposed to be a bit of a dork?
Clark Kent? Yes, absolutely. Superman? Well ... not so much.
You seem to be saying that Routh is both a) not nearly as dorky as we're making him out to be, and b) dorkier than previous Supermen, but that it's a good thing. It's a good hedging of bets (you could be right either way), but it's tough to imagine that both are the case.
Quote:
Shade wrote:
Everyone should have a bit more trust in Bryan Singer. I mean, the guy's a professional film director who's already delivered two comic films that are regarded as being two of the best comic movies.
Again, true ... but again, the "but": comic book movies aren't any more identical in tone and storytelling style than the comic books on which they're based, nor do I think they should be; and it's tough to imagine two comics more different in tone than are Superman and the X-Men. Yes, they're both about superhumans in tights, but beyond that? The X-Men books (and movies) work precisely because the eponyhmous characters are flawed, fallible, and human. Superman is much more iconic, which makes it more difficult to tell an angst-filled story with him. It's not impossible (Kingdom Come played Supes as quite conflicted, and to great effect), but most recent attempts to make Superman more flawed, fallible, and human were not well received.
***Gasp, pant, wheeze***
While I catch my breath, can I just say that I'd love to see Bryan Singer bring "Supreme Power" to the screen? You get the Superman-like character, without the worry about ruining his iconic qualities with all-too-human angst, and a world where we know most people hadn't seen a superhuman before he hits the scene. I smell a franchise!
Quote:
Shade wrote:
The guy isn't incompetent and if he's made some calls for the film in regards to casting or story points, you can be sure there's a valid reason that won't be made evident until the film can be seen in it's entirety.
No he's not incompetent; he certainly knows a heck of a lot more about film making than I do. I vaguely recall the build-up to "X-Men," though, and I don't remember being concerned by anything I'd seen or heard or read up to its release. Every visual looked right, even the darker, spandex-less costumes, and every casting call seemed spot-on at the time. E.g. I didn't scratch my head, wondering why he'd cast Patrick Stewart as Professor X; from the moment I heard that Stewart had been tapped for the role, I had trouble imagining anyone else in the part.
God, I really am rambling, aren't I? Must be the running-off-at-the-mouth-itis flaring up again, so I'll wrap it up now by saying that, all trepidation aside, I'm actually more keen about the new Superman movie now than I was before we started this discussion. Last week, I didn't give a rat's; today, I'm actually arguing about it, and I'll most definitely go to see it, if only to see if any of the "predictions" made here are actually borne out. There really ain't no such thing as bad publicity.
And now, back to the positive waves...
***Phew***
This Post was from: http://heromorph.com/heromorph2/newbb/viewtopic.php?forum=15&topic_id=881&post_id=9888