Superman (casting, rumors, pix till release)

[Admiral Buzzkill]

I don't care what was not shown onscreen, that fact is that it should be impossible (and most likely is impossible) for flesh and blood beings to live that way.

It's impossible for Superman to exist.

Flat-out impossible, no ifs, ands or buts.

 

[davejames]

No, it doesn't and it didn't work for me as a boy of 8 seeing the first movie in 1978. That was lazy budgeting on the part of the Salkinds and lazy design on the part of John Barry.

You may not like the design they came up with, but I would hardly call it "lazy". It looked about a thousand times more sophisticated and expensive than anything we'd seen in a superhero movie before.

I agree the crystal sets look a bit on the cheap side now (as do the sets in the original SW movies, for that matter-- especially compared to what we see in movies today), but the concept they came up with is still as strong as ever, I think.

 

[sojourner]

It was the best way to go. If they had tried to do "futuristic city" it would have looked dated within 5 years. Using the crystal design made it look timeless and really drove home the "advanced technology as magic" aspect of Krypton.

 

[Broccoli]

And amazingly enough, it wasn't 'timeless' for the producers of Lois & Clark, as they didn't use any of it for the ship that brought Superman to Earth or for the episodes about the surviving Kryptonians.

Yeah, but according to you:

Lois & Clark was just nonsense and bullshit

So, are you implying that it was nonsense that they didn't use it?

I don't care what was not shown onscreen, that fact is that it should be impossible (and most likely is impossible) for flesh and blood beings to live that way. It's also extreme laziness on the part of the set designer, producers and director to do that design for Krypton with the millions of dollars it cost to make Superman The Movie.

Superman: The Movie was one of the most expensive films made at that time. I'd hardly argue they skimped on the budget for their opening scenes.

Anyway, the point of the matter is that the Krypton stuff looked so crazy and unrealistic to give it a sense of it being truly alien and advanced from anything Earth has without resorting to characters saying to the audience "We are an advanced alien race!" That would have been lazy. What the movie did was just good storytelling.

Now, if you didn't like the design, that's fine. But to claim that it was lazy is completely misguided.

 

[Dream]

The trailer for Superman: The Movie was incredible, there were a ton of scenes with Krypton in it. It wouldn't have worked if Krypton didn't feel so alien.

[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=twyYIPhSa3U[/yt]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=twyYIPhSa3U

 

[Snaploud]

Lois & Clark

On Lois & Clark: The New Adventures of Superman, the "Fortress" was conspicuously absent, presumably because the series' aim was to explore the idea of Clark Kent being the true identity and Superman merely being the disguise (therefore, the character would have no use for an otherworldly fortress). In the earlier issues of the John Byrne revamp of Superman, the Fortress was also absent so the show was probably following suit.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fortress_of_Solitude

 

[Dusty Ayres]

So, are you implying that it was nonsense that they didn't use it?[/url]

No, I'm complementing them on at least having the gumption to go with their own take on what Krypton looked like, and use it. The rocket and set design for the three-part episode I mentioned all look original while looking like what came out of the original comic book descriptions of Krypton, which was that of an Earth-like planet with an advanced civilization populated by humanoid aliens. Not the planet Tholia from Star Trek: TOS.

Superman: The Movie was one of the most expensive films made at that time. I'd hardly argue they skimped on the budget for their opening scenes.

They may not have skimped on the budget, but they sure made a ridiculous-looking Krypton. As I've said before, I've seen better set and planet design on the various Star Trek shows, and for a fraction of the cost of this one. I'd not be surprised that scientists and sci-fi authors would have found the set and the way Krypton was described to be similar to what I've said about it.

Anyway, the point of the matter is that the Krypton stuff looked so crazy and unrealistic to give it a sense of it being truly alien and advanced from anything Earth has without resorting to characters saying to the audience "We are an advanced alien race!" That would have been lazy. What the movie did was just good storytelling.

No, what the movie did made it look so removed from what we know humanoid beings evolve like that it still ended being unrealistic anyway. What we saw on BSG: TOS looked more real than that (too bad whoever did what brief glimpses of Caprica we saw in the two-hour pilot wasn't also the designer for Superman The Movie [or maybe somebody like Syd Mead]-that design looked like as was said in the show's opener about brothers and sisters of man from beyond the heavens.)

As for being 'dated', remember that such designs were how people saw the future then, no less 'dated' than how we see the future now from today, or more dated.

Now, if you didn't like the design, that's fine. But to claim that it was lazy is completely misguided.

I'll grant you the second part of your comment, but not the first-I still think that the design for Krypton is just crap, and that's that. We'll have to agree to disagree.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

What we saw on BSG: TOS looked more real than that (too bad whoever did what brief glimpses of Caprica we saw in the two-hour pilot wasn't also the designer for Superman The Movie [or maybe somebody like Syd Mead]-that design looked like as was said in the show's opener about brothers and sisters of man from beyond the heavens.)

Here's how BSG:TOS depicted an advanced civilization:

Remind you of anything?

 

[Dusty Ayres]

What we saw on BSG: TOS looked more real than that (too bad whoever did what brief glimpses of Caprica we saw in the two-hour pilot wasn't also the designer for Superman The Movie [or maybe somebody like Syd Mead]-that design looked like as was said in the show's opener about brothers and sisters of man from beyond the heavens.)

Here's how BSG:TOS depicted an advanced civilization:

Remind you of anything?

I was talking about Colonial civilization, not that one.

 

[Admiral_Young]

This thread continues to get more and more ridiculous! Going around in circles. We need some news to discuss!!!

 

[CorporalCaptain]

I thought Sunday was "the day" for news.

 

[JarodRussell]

Lois & Clark

On Lois & Clark: The New Adventures of Superman, the "Fortress" was conspicuously absent, presumably because the series' aim was to explore the idea of Clark Kent being the true identity and Superman merely being the disguise (therefore, the character would have no use for an otherworldly fortress). In the earlier issues of the John Byrne revamp of Superman, the Fortress was also absent so the show was probably following suit.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fortress_of_Solitude

You know I really liked that about Lois & Clark. Clark was a normal person, and a very competent journalist. Perfectly realistic since he grew up in Kansas and not on Krypton. It makes no sense that Superman was his true identity.

I don't care what was not shown onscreen, that fact is that it should be impossible (and most likely is impossible) for flesh and blood beings to live that way.

It's impossible for Superman to exist.

Flat-out impossible, no ifs, ands or buts.

Internal consistency/realism, anyone? Superman may be unrealistic, but still Kryptonians need food, water and air.

The Enterprise travels at FTL speed, we can hear sound in space and see laser beams, yet humans still can't breath in vacuum of space, need to eat, and fall down because of gravity.

 

[Admiral_Young]

Sunday has been the day for news but as I indicated in my response to captaindemotion when he brought it up there's been no chatter about casting. Almost every other Sunday casting news there was significant chatter regarding a rumored role. It's a long weekend next weekend so it's possible that we could get something.

 

[Captaindemotion]

^ Typical. I'll be away and won't have internet access. Will log back on to find another 70 pages of comments on the casting of Bruce Willis as Lex. Or something.

 

[Obiwanshinobi]

Couldn't they just cast Clancy Brown and take a Bic razor to his head?

 

[Kai "the spy"]

Actually, it's still over 18 months until the movie will be released. Do we really need some news now? I mean, yeah, the discussion is a little slow around, but I think that's okay with a movie that will be released in one and a half years. I don't know about you, but I don't want to be sitting in the theatre already knowing everything beforehand. Some, yes, but if we demand new news every few weeks until the movie comes out, we will know everything by winter 2012.

 

[Admiral_Young]

Tell that to the posters who insist on putting up these movie threads two years prior to the film's release. I personally think it's a little silly to be honest. Following the timeline of a production is fine, but when you have a discussion thread dedicated to it...there's no doubt going to be a sense of repetitiveness in it. Just the nature of the thread. Look at this very thread, I swear we have brought up th same old arguments about various things at least twice!!! Not to mention going off on tangents about off topic matters.

 

[Aragorn]

It's sort of funny though to see the irrational fanboys go off on unexplainable rants, jumping to nonsensical conclusions based on one tiny piece of information.

 

[Admiral_Young]

^ It's also very tiring.

 

[Captaindemotion]

^ You do have the option of not reading it ...