"Superman Returns Again" still in limbo...

[Samurai8472]

Because Bosworth stinks, and Durance was the second best actress to play Lois.

Wrong and wrong.

I suppose that Smallville fans would tend to be toughest on Bosworth. It's bad enough that some of them won't stop pimping Tom Welling for the Superman film franchise.

Personally I'd reather see a film with the Lois& Clark cast.

Minus Lane Smith, of course.

And I maintain: Bosworth stinks.

Go the Mummy 3 route and have Lois, richard and the kid be novel characters that the new recast lois is writing about

 

[Bad Bishop]

I hope it's reliable, too.

At this point, I just can't see WB completely scrapping everything that went into Returns only to start again from scratch. Even if Singer doesn't return, I'd expect them to keep much of the design work and cast--especially Routh. Other rumors I've seen point to WB wanting to have a 'loose' sequel to SR, using the same cast but taking the story in more of a comic book oriented direction.

For the next film, changes in the art direction and production design could signal to the audience that it is not another continuation of SR's "Donnerverse." This way, Singer can get away with retaining his actors while still resetting Superman's universe. Fans who hate the kid will be placated. Fans who've warmed up to Routh (the vast majority of SR viewers, I'm sure) will also approve.

 

[Samurai8472]

I would change the set designs to actual locations. The rooftop scene with lois and Superman looked real cheap to me especially when you see the behind the scenes dvd feature

"you were suppose to make a working globe" lol

In 2006 I made a caption about it

Superman- so thats why I left for so.......lois? what are you looking at?

lois- shh! there are these two guys arguing on the next rooftop i want to hear what their saying

Goblin- ....and your a pathetic little spider too!!!

spiderman-geezs gobby could you at least lower your voice everyone is listening in!

gordon- batman can you believe out of those 2 films we have the most realistic looking rooftop?

batman- Indeed

 

[davejames]

^ I thought SR's Metropolis was probably a little darker and moodier than it should have been, but it all looked real enough to me.

I definitely preferred it to the bright and comic booky New York of the Spidey movies.

 

[Samurai8472]

Kevin Spacey has spoken; he's ready for the sequel.
http://splashpage.mtv.com/2008/08/1...e-water-either-way-kevin-spacey-stands-ready/

Now that the Bat-mania surrounding “The Dark Knight” is finally beginning to settle, fans are beginning to look towards the Man of Steel, and asking where the next film in the “Superman” franchise is…or if there will even be a franchise, that is.

Variety.com’s Anne Thompson just posted a vague update as to the film’s status, basically saying what fans and even some pro comic writers have been asking for all along — scrap the 2004 attempt and start fresh (hey, it kinda worked for “Hulk”). According to Thompson, rumor has it that “Superman” is priority #1 at Warner Bros., and although Bryan Singer is still attached to the project, he could find himself out if delivers another half-hearted attempt that Thompson labeled, “didn’t break the mold and wound up in some kind of middle limbo.”

Meanwhile, in an exclusive MTV interview with “Superman Returns” star Kevin Spacey, interest in returning to his Lex Luthor character remains high.

“Doing Lex Luthor was a remarkable experience. It was so much fun and such an iconic part,” he said. “Falling on the steps of Gene Hackman was a very, very big pair of shoes to fill, but I hope I get a chance to do a second one if they pull it off.”

The problem remains the script, which Spacey elaborated, “[Warner Bros. are] taking pitches, and I don’t know when they’re gonna find one that they really like, whether it’s gonna happen next year or the year after, but I know that their intention is to do it.” The wait could be a much longer one than Spacey anticipates, since Thompson also pointed out that there are currently no writers working on a “Superman” script.

So what say you, Big Blue fans? Think Singer can pull off a proper sequel, or is a clean slate approach sound like the best plan? Speak your mind in the comments.

 

[JacksonArcher]

Uhh, so Superman Returns came out in 2004? 2006 must have been one bizarre year then...

 

[Captaindemotion]

^Or bizzar-O year!

 

[Captain Craig]

Uhh, so Superman Returns came out in 2004? 2006 must have been one bizarre year then...

Fact checking...a lost art for some media people it seems.

 

[Norrin Radd]

Reboot confirmed?

 

[Samurai8472]

No sequel

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121936107614461929.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

Warner Bets on Fewer, Bigger Movies
By LAUREN A.E. SCHUKER
August 22, 2008; Page B1

Emboldened by this summer's success with "The Dark Knight," Warner Bros.' movie studio is setting a new strategy.

The Time Warner Inc. unit, like some other Hollywood studios, is planning to release fewer films into the crowded marketplace. But the studio, known for making more big, expensive movies than most rivals, plans to make even more of those -- some centered on properties from its DC Comics unit, such as Batman.
[Christopher Nolan directs actor Aaron Eckhart on the set of Warner Bros. hit 'The Dark Knight.' ]
Warner Bros/Everett Collection
Christopher Nolan directs actor Aaron Eckhart on the set of Warner Bros. hit 'The Dark Knight.'

Warner Bros. Pictures Group President Jeff Robinov wants the studio to release as many as eight such movies a year by 2011. "The long-term goal of the studio is to take advantage of what has become a very global market by focusing on bigger films that require a bigger commitment," he says. Warner Bros. films released last year grossed $2 billion internationally, about 42% more than their $1.4 billion domestic take.

Mining the comic-book franchise is central to the success of Warner Bros.' strategy. Its lineup of "tent poles" -- Hollywood-speak for big movies that are the foundation of a studio's slate -- has thinned. Warner Bros. has been slow to capitalize on DC, and it now faces a rival in Marvel Entertainment Inc.'s Marvel Studios, the company behind box-office gusher "Iron Man."

Superhero films based on comic-book legends, like "The Dark Knight," have emerged as some of the strongest players in the global market, in part because they're natural candidates for tie-ups with consumer products and games that can also be marketed globally.

"Superheroes are more global than ever in today's commercial world, existing in 30 languages and in more than 60 countries," says Paul Levitz, president and publisher of DC Comics. The characters are "a world-wide export," he says.
[Marvel's 'Iron Man,' was a big success at the box office.Warner has been slower to capitalize on its DC Comics characters.]
Paramount/Everett Collection
Marvel's 'Iron Man,' was a big success at the box office. Warner has been slower to capitalize on its DC Comics characters.

"Films with our DC properties have the opportunity to support other divisions in the company in a way that our other movies don't," Mr. Robinov says, for example, with products such as a Superman game or toys. By 2011, Mr. Robinov plans for DC Comics to supply the material for up to two of the six to eight tent-pole films he hopes Warner Bros. will have in the pipeline by then.

While big ambitions can result in a huge payoff, they can also end in huge losses. Warner's car adventure "Speed Racer" bombed at the box office in May. The film, said to have cost as much as $150 million, has taken in only $43.9 million in the U.S. Some other big-budget Warner films, such as spy comedy "Get Smart," also have failed to meet expectations.

Earlier this year, Warner Bros. shut its two art-house labels, Picturehouse and Warner Independent Pictures. The studio currently releases 25 to 26 films a year. By 2010, Mr. Robinov plans to pare production to 20 to 22 movies a year.

A movie referred to internally as "Justice League of America," originally said to be for next summer, was planned as one of the studio's major releases. With that film, starring a superhero team, Warner hoped to spark interest in DC characters like Green Lantern who haven't yet attained the level of popularity of Batman. But script problems, among other things, have delayed the movie.

The studio said last week that "Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince," originally slated for November release, would come out next July -- on the same weekend that "The Dark Knight" opened this year. The Batman sequel made more than $150 million in the U.S. that weekend. "We just needed a July movie," said Alan Horn, president of the studio, at the time.

Warner Bros. also put on hold plans for another movie starring multiple superheroes -- known as "Batman vs. Superman" -- after the $215 million "Superman Returns," which had disappointing box-office returns, didn't please executives. "'Superman' didn't quite work as a film in the way that we wanted it to," says Mr. Robinov. "It didn't position the character the way he needed to be positioned." "Had 'Superman' worked in 2006, we would have had a movie for Christmas of this year or 2009," he adds. "But now the plan is just to reintroduce Superman without regard to a Batman and Superman movie at all."

One of the studio's other big releases planned for 2009, "Watchmen," is the subject of a high-profile copyright lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court for the Central District of California by News Corp.'s Twentieth Century Fox.

Based on the premise that superheroes are real people grappling with their own problems, "Watchmen" is an apocalyptic vision of their world. Fox says it is seeking an injunction to enforce its copyright interest in the film. Last week, a federal judge ruled that it may have rights to the property. News Corp. is the parent of Wall Street Journal publisher Dow Jones & Co.

With "Batman vs. Superman" and "Justice League" stalled, Warner Bros. has quietly adopted Marvel's model of releasing a single film for each character, and then using those movies and their sequels to build up to a multicharacter film. "Along those lines, we have been developing every DC character that we own," Mr. Robinov says.

Like the recent Batman sequel -- which has become the highest-grossing film of the year thus far -- Mr. Robinov wants his next pack of superhero movies to be bathed in the same brooding tone as "The Dark Knight." Creatively, he sees exploring the evil side to characters as the key to unlocking some of Warner Bros.' DC properties. "We're going to try to go dark to the extent that the characters allow it," he says. That goes for the company's Superman franchise as well.

The studio is set to announce its plans for future DC movies in the next month. For now, though, it is focused on releasing four comic-book films in the next three years, including a third Batman film, a new film reintroducing Superman, and two movies focusing on other DC Comics characters. Movies featuring Green Lantern, Flash, Green Arrow, and Wonder Woman are all in active development.

Many of the studio's directors credit Mr. Robinov for taking Warner Bros.' films in a darker and deeper direction. Christopher Nolan, who directed "Batman Begins" and "The Dark Knight," says Mr. Robinov "really encouraged the logic of the villain" from "Batman Begins." That led to focusing heavily on the Joker in the sequel. "At the script stage, Jeff really wanted us to be very clear on the Joker's lack of purpose," he says.

 

[JacksonArcher]

I'm iffy on this news. I don't think every DC Comics character needs to be taken in a darker direction. It worked for Batman because he is a darker character. The Dark Knight was not a success because it was a dark movie -- it was a success because it was a good movie.

As for the Superman news, while I would have liked to have seen a continuation of Superman Returns under the direction of Bryan Singer I am more than open to a new interpretation. Now the biggest question is, since this is a reboot, will we see any of the cast from Returns -- including Brandon Routh -- or a completely new cast? I'm assuming that we'll see a new actor as the Man of Steel, which is something I'm not entirely convinced is the best course of action.

 

[Bad Bishop]

Like the recent Batman sequel -- which has become the highest-grossing film of the year thus far -- Mr. Robinov wants his next pack of superhero movies to be bathed in the same brooding tone as "The Dark Knight." Creatively, he sees exploring the evil side to characters as the key to unlocking some of Warner Bros.' DC properties. "We're going to try to go dark to the extent that the characters allow it," he says. That goes for the company's Superman franchise as well.

Robinov thinks he's found a magic formula, but I doubt that Nolanizing Superman is such a brilliant idea.

 

[JacksonArcher]

Like the recent Batman sequel -- which has become the highest-grossing film of the year thus far -- Mr. Robinov wants his next pack of superhero movies to be bathed in the same brooding tone as "The Dark Knight." Creatively, he sees exploring the evil side to characters as the key to unlocking some of Warner Bros.' DC properties. "We're going to try to go dark to the extent that the characters allow it," he says. That goes for the company's Superman franchise as well.

Robinov thinks he's found a magic formula, but I doubt that Nolanizing Superman is such a brilliant idea.

Exactly. I'm a bit worried now. One of people's biggest complaints towards Superman Returns was how brooding and dramatic it was. Wouldn't you think they'd want to lighten it up for another go-around?

 

[Out Of My Vulcan Mind]

The best news coming out of that article is confirmation that WB is planning a much bigger push to get more DC films made, with DC superheroes getting individual films that lead up to team films. The prospect of two DC superhero films per year is awesome (if, of course, it pans out).

As for WB aiming to make dark films, note that he says as dark as each character allows. Overall, I take that as good news, too, since it means they'll be concentrating on making serious superhero films and not getting into any Jack Black as Green Lantern malarkey.

 

[Harvey]

I liked Superman Returns, but we'll see, I guess. Worse comes to worse, WB will put out a number of comic book movies that I just don't care about and don't have to spend any money on to go see.

I'm just looking forward to another Nolan Batman film at this point. Anything else is gravy.

 

[TheArsenal]

Like the recent Batman sequel -- which has become the highest-grossing film of the year thus far -- Mr. Robinov wants his next pack of superhero movies to be bathed in the same brooding tone as "The Dark Knight." Creatively, he sees exploring the evil side to characters as the key to unlocking some of Warner Bros.' DC properties. "We're going to try to go dark to the extent that the characters allow it," he says. That goes for the company's Superman franchise as well.

Robinov thinks he's found a magic formula, but I doubt that Nolanizing Superman is such a brilliant idea.

Exactly. I'm a bit worried now. One of people's biggest complaints towards Superman Returns was how brooding and dramatic it was. Wouldn't you think they'd want to lighten it up for another go-around?

I enjoy Returns. But I can easily see how people have problems with it, particularly tonally. Instead of "dark and brooding" the concept should be "tone which best suits the character". I don't know that Superman lends itself readily to dark and brooding, or that it should. The character always struck me as being most effective when it is used to evoke a sense of wonder from the extent of all those impossible powers. It's the clear eyed optimism of a superpowered farm boy in the face of all that darkness, which I think is what makes the character unique.

The challenge is not to make him darker, but to make those aspects work without being corny.

 

[Captaindemotion]

WB seem to be missing the point here. As Jackson points out, dark worked for Batman because Bats is a dark character. Superman is the light to that darkness. One of the biggest complaints lobbed at SR was the downbeat mood. Not every movie needs to be as down or grim as TDK. Look at the success of Iron Man - a feelgood,light-hearted movie, which pleased pretty much everyone. Sure, no-one wants the next Superman movie to be like Batman and Robin or Superman III, but it has to find its own tone, not be a clone of TDK.

It's looking increasingly unlikely, but I still would like to see Routh return, albeit with a spunkier and older Lois and a more menacing, sinister Lex. Off the top of my head, Elizabeth Banks and Stanley Tucci?!

 

[davejames]

Ugh. As much as I wanted at least one followup to SR, I don't really have a problem with a fresh start. But "dark and brooding"? Isn't that the complaint most people already had with SR?

It's hard to get any darker than Superman getting the crap kicked out of him, watching him crawl through the muck, and then seeing him get stabbed in the back with kryptonite as he yells out in pain! Hell, I still find that scene in SR to be more powerful and disturbing than anything I saw in TDK.

If they want to give people a Superman movie they want to see, just make it light and fun and action-packed like Iron Man. It's not that hard to figure out.

(oops, looks like Captaindemotion beat me to it)

 

[Samurai8472]

A dark superman is not the way to go. That's why we never got those aborted plans of superman throwing knives, homicidal tendencies and choosing not to fly.

 

[Trent Roman]

Ugh. As much as I wanted at least one followup to SR, I don't really have a problem with a fresh start. But "dark and brooding"? Isn't that the complaint most people already had with SR?

I had the opposite complaint: that the film, amongst its many other faults, was corny, cheesy, and all-around impossible to take seriously. A dark Superman could work; my favourite version of the character is the JLU version, seasoned and perhaps a bit world-weary for it, concerned with the dynamic between his power, his notion of justice, and the free will of others. But then, my favourite 'Superman' concept is JMS' version of Hyperion in the Supremeverse, which squarely situates an entity of such power into the realpolitiks of the modern world.

Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman