View Single Post
Old August 11 2008, 04:45 AM   #123
Cary L. Brown
Rear Admiral
 
Location: Austin, Texas
Re: So is the pressure on Superman?

Captaindemotion wrote: View Post
Well, one quibble is that the Joker in the comics didn't paint his face or dye his hair. They were permanently coloured that way as a result of a chemical accident. So that wasn't faithful to the comics. However, TDK featured the BEST version of the above characters seen onscreen yet (IMH).
True enough, but this was never a real defining trait of the character... and I'm only aware of one time it was stated that this was a "chemical burn" (in "The Killing Joke") and I'm a fan. I thought the idea that it was permanent was great... but if it is a burn, it wouldn't be as vivid as you see in the comics anyway (probably more of a grey-scar-tissue-look to the skin, and as for the hair... any "dye job" would grow out anyway, huh?). But your point is taken.
Actually, I'd cite Kate Bosworth's somewhat dull and too young Lois as well as overly-slow pacing. And a rather uninteresting plot by Lex. Though I still like the movie a lot. And I take some of your points about the emphasis on the 1979 movie - the depiction of Luthor in particular.
Agreed on all points.
Did Christopher Reeve look like Alex Ross' Superman? Hmmm, not overly. But many people still think of him as the definitive Superman and he's still arguably the most popular depiction of him.
True, lots of people do... as many as think of George Reeves, probably.

The thing is, Chris Reeves didn't "look" the part so much either, to most people. One of the really interesting things is that apparently the studio folks didn't like him because he was too skinny, etc.

But Reeves totally inhabited the character. He got super-fit, and when he was playing Superman, he was extremely INTENSE and even threatening while never seeming "mean or nasty." He GOT IT.

Similarly, Christian Bale wasn't the idealized physical actor to play Bruce Wayne... but he's "inhabited" the character and he plays it better than just about anyone else has. I still think Clarke Bartram looks the part more than anyone I've ever seen, though.

As for who should be playing Superman... click this link (sorry, it's on IMDB and I can't "hotlink")
http://www.imdb.com/media/rm1499172864/nm0641380
The guy in those World's Finest fan trailers does, but Routh could out-act him anyday.
My sole experience looking at Routh act was in Superman Returns, and in THAT, his acting talents ... well, they weren't exactly impressive. I won't say it was just him (bad script and bad directing may be more significant than bad acting, I s'pose) but the character he played was AWFUL... and at least SOME of that is on his shoulders, as far as I'm concerned.

Michael O'Hearn may not be a fantastic actor either, but in his short appearance in the aforementioned trailer... the guy played a Clark character who was distinctly different from his Superman character... while not being the "goofy doofus" type. Honestly, that indicates a reasonably GOOD actor, in my admittedly "non-professional-actor" experience.

Oh, and the girl they had playing Lois in that trailer was orders of magnitude better than "Teeny-bopper-Lois"...
And to me, he captured the essence of Superman, even if he looked a little too young. But that problem will be solved, given the time that's elapsed since SR.
Possible... got a recent picture?
I think if the sequel to SR contains more action, gives Superman more to do, more sparring and interaction with Lois and a worthy opponent, it'll generate as much goodwill as any reboot. Let's face it, a lot of people won't care if it's a sequel or a reboot. Just as long as the bloody thing entertains.
That's central... absolutely. But what makes for an "entertaining" film is always subject to differences of opinion.

I'm sure Schumacher thought that he was making an "entertaining" film with "Batman and Robin" and I'm SURE he thought it was just uber-kewl to put Alycia Silverstone into a plastic body-cast (coincidentally, the only one WITHOUT the "bat-rubber-nipples!").

So, the trick isn't "make it entertaining" so much as "what makes for a good film and what doesn't?"
Cary L. Brown is offline   Reply With Quote