Yikes. Parker Posey? I guess Hollywood didn't care how hard Blade III sucked. La Femme Nikita -- as a nameless flight attendant? Poor, poor Peta, I guess the Extraordinary Gentlemen hurt her carrer worse than I thought. And if they were going to include Frank Langella, why not cast him as Lex Luthor?
And, badly as the suit sucks (and it really does suck), it's not nearly as wrong as the guy wearing it. Christopher Reeve looked like Superman the first time I saw him in the tights; Dean Cain was too pretty as Clark Kent, but looked just fine as Supes. Brandon Routh looks like a dork, and I don't think the suit is entirely to blame.

Yikes, lol. Man, you guys are way too hyper-critical of the movie. How about waiting to actually see it, THEN make your judgments? I'm a huge fan of Superman but I don't see how anyone can make such judgments of the thing.

I mean, all of the elements of what make Superman are apparently evident in the production. The suit, the villains, the city, the origin, the supporting cast, .etc.. It's not like they made Superman a gay-black guy from the year 2525 who has hooves for feet.

Take it easy boys and girls, and let's actually see the film first before lambasting the living bejeezus out of it.

Quote:
Oddly, I'd just finished watching Kelly's Heroes before reading this, so I guess I'm in an "Oddball" state of mind. So, OK, no more negative waves. I'll even lay off poor Brandon, at least unless/until he actually does screw it up. Who knows? Maybe they can pull it off. It's just not the most auspicious of possible beginnings, is all...

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. 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?

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. 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.

What he said...

***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***

I think that comic book movies are just about the worst kind you can take on if you don't want a lot of stress. Comic book fans are the worst types to have to contend with if you're a director adapting a comic.

I'd rather have rocks drenched in poison dropped onto my nutsack than have to direct a comic movie. It's just nigh-impossible to please us. But there's always massive backlash with every comic movie. Everyone bitched about Batman's costume in Batman Begins, but, dammit, there was logic behind the costume then. The movie, in my opinion, was incredible and it was because of the melding of innumerable elements.

You have to consider the CONTEXT in all of these things and not just take them at face value. The X-Men costumes didn't really look anything like the comic versions, but the movies were still very profitable and critically acclaimed by critics and fans.

I think once you see Superman Returns with the motion and the music and sound effects and narrative progression, the movie will probably please most if not all of the naysayers.

I'm just glad they went with casting an unknown because the iconic nature of Superman is bigger than any individual.

I agree with Shade, I think Superman Reurns will be executed very well. I have great faith in Singer, mainly because he made the X-men movie good whereas I expected a piece of crap. He stuck to the main ideas of the X-men of racial inequality and the whole Malcolm X/Luther-King dynamic. Batman begins also stuck to the main idea of the character, unlike the Burton Batmans which were Gothic not Dark..there is a difference Tim.

A lot of people are saying that Warners are copying Marvels method of making films ie: serious superhero movies. That is not exactly correct, Superman the Movie was the first "Serious" Comic movie of which Superman Returns is a direct continuation of, and Marvel just used Warners original template.

As for the suit Sure the S could be bigger but it's still Superman, all Singer has done is pay homage to all the Superman suits through fleischer to Reeve. I mean hell I hate the way Jim Lee draws Supermans S-shield but it's still Superman.

And to help you warm to Rouths' suit here is a look at what might have been...

WTF!!

You actually think I am going to wait until the movie is made to bitch and complain. Ha, that will be the Day.

I didn't wait to see Catwoman before I ripped it apart. Now I don't think it will will suck to the extent of that but I don't have that much faith in Singer just because he is Singer. Crappy movies are made every year. lots and lots of them, some of them are *gasp * even made by people who have made real good movies in the past.
Anyway, It is soo going to blow..

You're forgetting that I actually enjoy a bid of Bad Cinema now and again. Can you imagine the reaction "Borg Superman" would've received? Worth the price of admission all by itself.

It's just the game of low expectations: Go in thinking it'll be Great, and if it turns out to be just so-so, you're crushed. But if you go in thinking it might suck hard? If Singer knocks it outta the park, how awesome is it gonna feel? And if it flops, well ... at least you get to look prescient. Not only is there no downside, there's tons o' fun to be had in the meantime.

SUCK!!! It is going to SUCK... WTF... is that Bizarro in the picture below. Superman doesn't need anything but his red and blue. He is Superman... he doesn't need armor... he doesn't need Metal ribs on his suit... dumb. (that is just the comments on that suit beloew)

And yeah, I too will stick to my guns (plus I am not about to read all the stuff that y'all wrote... wow... y'all got serious) Suck... I mean, lik,. worse than Superman 3...

So from that picture, I'm gathering the Borg went back in time and assimilated planet Krypton.

Funny thing is that everyone saying it will suck will be there opening weekend. Hah!

I'm just against pre-judging anything where people are putting their time, heart and effort into something. It's really not fair. Imagine that before ANYTHING you did, people were off to the side saying how much it was going to suck. With that logic, why should anyone do anything? It's already been determined it's going to fail. Turn that frown upside down, people.

Quote:
Ha, Just for that I'll wait until the second weekend.

Quote:
That, in a nutshell, is what's wrong with the Hollywood Hype Machine -- everything gets leaked, hyped, analyzed, and focus-grouped to death, and not just by us. We see so many retreads of old movies and TV shows, and ever fewer attempts at something new and different. Coincidence? I think not.

Personally, I wouldn't want the public at large talking about the details of my project until it was done, to a level that I was totally satisfied with (which is probably why none of my creative efforts are on public display -- I do try, but Gawd has is ever all sucked so far). Regardless of whether I like or dislike the final result, I do respect the cojones of anybody who actually throws their cherished creation into that grinder.

That said, we are talking about well paid professionals here, and it's not like any of 'em can't see the grinder coming. I can still respect them, without feeling any particular need to go easy on them, especially a veteran who's already proven he can take the heat. With all due respect, if Mr. Singer's skin ain't thickened up enough after two X-films to handle a few pessimistic Heromorph posts, then something's wrong the man.

So to continue where Vonny left off. On with the show! THIS MOVIE'S GONNA SUCK BIG HAIRY GIANT GIRAFFE NUTCAKES DIPPED IN COCONUT OIL!!!

Quote:

Or just Chef's Chocolate Salty Balls.

unoriginal bastich you!

personaly I hope singer pulls a 180 and, as winter put it (and I'm paraphrasing), "Pull another Keyser Soze out of his ass". Singer directed The Usual suspects, -staring Kevin Spacey.

Actually I would prefer he took a break from the whole superhero genera to make more of the same.

Anyhew.
I'm not going to bet against this one (yet).

I have an idea... how about if Hollywood did an original movie. If it isn't a remake of a TV series, it is a remake of an old movie... or a spin off of an old movie... Hollywood blows....