• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Superman (casting, rumors, pix till release)

^^ Nolan hired Zack. If Nolan was interested in directing the film himself...he would have done so. Snyder also originally refused the offer, he had to be convinced.

The director is probably the most influential person on a film production during the production and post production periods. The fact that you've now asked twice why everyone puts so much importance in the director...indicates to me that you have a lack of understanding how a film production works. Snyder is an accomplished and established film director...you may disagree with his films or dislike his style and that's fine...but to totally dismiss him is wrong. You just continue to overestimate the kind of power and control Nolan has right now. He'd be directing the film himself if he was interested in doing so. He's not and has long since moved on to focusing on "Interstellar".

Chris Nolan only did a few re-writes on the film...this is another thing that I've repeated and you've ignored. Jonah Nolan and David Goyer wrote the script. Even Zack's writing partner did a brief re-write I believe. So yes while Nolan does and has had considerable influence on the film, he isn't the all seeing figure you seem to think he is on this project.
 
^^ Nolan hired Zack. If Nolan was interested in directing the film himself...he would have done so. Snyder also originally refused the offer, he had to be convinced.

The director is probably the most influential person on a film production during the production and post production stance. The fact that you've now asked twice why everyone puts so much importance in the director...indicates to me that you have a lack of understanding how a film production works. Snyder is an accomplished and established film director...you may disagree with his films or dislike his style and that's fine...but to totally dismiss him is wrong. You just continue to overestimate the kind of power and control Nolan has right now. He'd be directing the film himself if he was interested in doing so. He's not and has long since moved on to focusing on "Interstellar".

Chris Nolan only did a few re-writes on the film...this is another thing that I've repeated and you've ignored. Jonah Nolan and David Goyer wrote the script. Even Zack's writing partner did a brief re-write I believe. So yes while Nolan does and has had considerable influence on the film, he isn't the all seeing figure you seem to think he is on this project.

Excellent points. His hatred has blinded him to reason. At this point his posts are feeling like he's trolling.
 
Admiral Young, you may as well try to talk to the wall. He clearly has made up his mind and closed it firmly. Nothing is going to disabuse him of his prejudices about this film and its various makers.
 
I'll totally admit I'm not an expert on film making, but its still a Nolan movie. Remember, not only is he working on it, but the writer of TDK and Rises also wrote it with him (and wrote the screen play). Most of the producers are also from the Nolan BM movies. Its not just Nolan alone who is doing this, he has a whole Legion of Morons who are making this movie. By himself, he probably couldn't out influence Snyder. but, he has a lot of lackys on the movie, working in important roles.

Besides which, if Nolan did decide to not direct it, that probably means he helped pick snyder. As much as I'll give Snyder credit for working on a Watchmen movie that actually made the story something i could get through, he's probably a huge Nolan fan, and will do things Nolan's way. I won't go so far as to call him a puppet of Nolan or anything, but he's probably going to go with Nolan's style.
 
I give up. On to more important things...I totally agree about Zimmer's track there...it's amazing. Any hesitations or concerns that I might've previously had are long since vanished. I can't wait to get the deluxe edition! Next month must hurry!
 
Unrecognizable? Hardly. I've been reading Batman comics since the early 70s (and I've read numerous stories going back to the first appearance of Batman). In fact, I suspect I've read more Batman than you've had hot meals. And I had no trouble at all recognizing the character in Nolan's films.

As for the movies being like the comic Batman, I've never heard of a Batman book where Batman fights crime for about 2 years (fighting exactly 2 villains, one being an idiotic couselour and one being a psyco cosplaying as Joker), retires for 8 years and becomes a hermit, then returns just to defeat a vilainess who doesn't reveal she even exists until its just the right time to sabotage any thoughts that the supposed main villain was the least bit threatening. Then, he retires from what was supposed to be a life long crusade to screw a Catwoman so bad she made Hallie Berry's version no longer the worst catwoman ever. Don't forget having alfred constantly complain about Bruce being batman throughout the book. If that exists, i'd honestly like to read it just because it sounds like the worst Batman comic ever.

I didn't say it was based on an actual comic. I said the character was perfectly recognizable. Movie adaptations of literary sources (novels, comics, short stories, non-fiction books) are never exactly the same as the source material (nor should they ever be--they are different media with different constraints). Batman in Nolan's films is orphaned as a child, inherits a lot of money, spends a great deal of time wandering the globe (acquiring various skills along the way) before deciding what to do with his life. Alfred most certainly expresses reservations about Bruce Wayne's Batman persona in numerous storylines. All of these characteristics are there in the movies and they are sufficient to make the character clearly recognizable. You are free to dislike the particular form of the adaptation, but it is absurd to claim that the movie Batman is not recognizable in relation to the comics character.


Again, I have to ask why people think the director has so much influence, when almost every single other person in charge of the movie is Nolan or one of his cronies. Snyder means less than nothing at this point, Nolan has been in charge of writing and producing it. It wouldn't matter if Steven Spielberg were directing it, its a Nolan movie. One man is not going to beat out Nolan and his legion of minions. Snyder isn't going to be a factor, at all. I truley wish he was, because he worked on Watchmen and it turned out to be watchable (and I hate the Watchmen comic, its easily one of the worst comics I ever read, I couldn't even finish it, and I tried twice). If nolan was just the producer, or just the writer, and none of his minions were working on the film, I'd say Snyder would have a achance at making the movie watchable. But, even if he had a different style/different ideas than Nolan, he's more outmatched and outnumbered than the Spartans in 300.

Clark Kent wasn't born a reporter. He didn't pop out of his escape pod and just start working for the newspaper as an infant. He's allowed to do other things with his life.

High school-college-reporter has been Superman's path in every incarnation I've read, or something close to that. Wandering around as a random guy doing manual labor is just stupid. Its just adding extra angst into the movie (there is no way he's just having a day job or something, an event probably happened and he went away to dissappear and brood for awhile).

Ok. "Minions"? Really? That just severely undermines any form of legitimate criticism you might have to offer. As for Clark Kent's journey of self-discovery, there are, again, numerous examples from the comics of this kind of thing (the details differ, but the general idea is consistent). Your conception of "proper" Superman and Batman stories seems stuck in the 1950s-60s versions of each character. That is your right, but I'm afraid it is…unrealistic to expect such a vision of either character to be sufficiently appealing to today's audiences and readers. The kind of complexity of character you appear to disdain has been around in the comic versions of the characters since the 1970s in its earliest forms and rather uninterruptedly since then to today. It's as if you resent the filmmakers taking inspiration from storylines and general themes from anytime after the Nixon administration. I recommend the Adam West and George Reeves versions, if that is truly the case.
 
Probably should, but this is more fun than marking the pile of papers sitting on my desk (yes--marking is that bad :lol:).
 
One man is not going to beat out Nolan and his legion of minions.

One man can.
aOMdpQN.jpg


... and I hate the Watchmen comic, its easily one of the worst comics I ever read, ...

And at this point everybody should realise that this argument is pointless. He thinks "Watchmen" is the worst comic ever, you're not going to change his opinion.
 
I've been hoping this thread would have some great talk about the movie and insider insights... but the back and forth argument is tiring... who would want to convince someone to like what they are too closed minded to like? I'll have to look to a more mature forum for this subject it would seem.

To add something of some substance, I think from what I've seen this movie looks great! Great casting, the music (from the bit I've heard) sounds great. The last movie was... just bad (had some good parts). This should redeem Superman. Even the updated S suit looks great, can't wait!
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top