Superman: The Reboot --- Its official

[suarezguy]

I'm not sure people would accept a older, established Superman that's not a sequel to anything-it's certainly a trend with X-Men, Spider-Man and Batman to have a more-connected series, while most of the James Bond films aren't about characters, people go for action and fun without caring too much, so that's not the best model.
Some of the 40s cartoons had dark villains, high drama in a way that worked well; to get depth, you probably do have to include a degree of isolation or the limits of the powers and his role.

 

[Guy Gardener]

I liked it how that lady in the crowd (metaphorically) stuck her hand down her pants to pleasure herself as she said "The big one is stronger than Superman" in Superman II as if might = popularity. Fickle fucking humans.

Jon Hamm is impressive. But he looks more like Captain Marvel... or give him a tan and you have Black Adam. Either way, I'd love to see him hammering it out with some Superman which makes it onto the silver screen.

 

[Ben Sisko3]

You know, responding to that is like trying to teach a rabbit to fetch a ball -- a lot of effort on your end but absolutely nothing going on upstairs on the other end.

A very valid point and an apt analogy. My hat is off to you.

 

[Samurai8472]

Someone said that Lex Luthor shouldn't be allowed to be on movie screens for at least ten years.

The problem with Lex was that he wasn't used properly in the movies. If someone would write a Clancy Brown/Rosenbaum Luthor then probably all hesitations would go away

With the reboot its most likely going to be business man luthor influenced a little bit by Rosenbaums performance or just businessman luthor if they want no influences from any tv show

 

[zenophite]

Re: Superman: The Reboot --- Its offcial

That's fair. Do you think the studio has to replace Routh in order to accomplish their goals for Superman?

I think that sort of thinking is par-for-the-course in hollywood. when the execs want new-new-new they will want to replace the major player(s) because they want to remove the chance that anyone would mistake it for a sequel to the previous one.

I didn't mind Superman: returns but I also thought it was a bit off... in any case the point is moot now but I don't think making "darker" superman really makes any sense. I know its trendy and a classical goody-two-shoes hero is "corny" to the sensibilities of too many cynical modern people but I think it's a rather sweet notion to have a heroic hero instead of having a brooding pain-giver all the time. oh well - we'll see what comes of it.

 

[Aragorn]

You know, responding to that is like trying to teach a rabbit to fetch a ball -- a lot of effort on your end but absolutely nothing going on upstairs on the other end.

A very valid point and an apt analogy. My hat is off to you.

When there's no debate or exchange of ideas, really, what's the point? When your idea gets dismissed without a reason, then that person gives you his idea and says it's better but doesn't explain why, it's a brick wall. How do you respond to, "I hate you because you suck"?

 

[firehawk12]

Re: Superman: The Reboot --- Its offcial

My question is... this means that Justice League is pretty much never going to come out?

 

[JacksonArcher]

Re: Superman: The Reboot --- Its offcial

My question is... this means that Justice League is pretty much never going to come out?

Pretty much. This Superman relaunch puts aside the planned Justice League film and the supposedly previously in development Batman/Superman project. Robinov wants to focus on releasing singular character films and then most likely building up to a JLA movie, much like Marvel is doing now with The Avengers.

 

[The Old Mixer]

^And if that doesn't work, the Warner execs plan to fling their poo at Marvel Studios, and then enjoy some bananas.

 

[Lapis Exilis]

^And if that doesn't work, the Warner execs plan to fling their poo at Marvel Studios, and then enjoy some bananas.

Best post of the day.



Sorry about the misquote earlier.

 

[Captain Craig]

Re: Superman: The Reboot --- Its offcial

Robinov wants to focus on releasing singular character films and then most likely building up to a JLA movie, much like Marvel is doing now with The Avengers.

If you can't beat them, join them.

 

[Captain Craig]

From the Superman Homepage

Jack O'Halloran, who starred as Non in "Superman: The Movie" and "Superman II", says the decision to reboot comes down to money. "Warner's weren't happy with the returns on Superman Returns." As for who he'd like to replace Bryan Singer if the director decides not to continue on with the Man of Steel, O'Halloran says, "I hope if they are rebooting Superman they hand the reins to Richard Donner. It would be the salvation of the series. Dick has such a passion for the series, the fan base would finally get what they have been waiting for someone with the passion to light up the screen."

I don't think Jack gets it. We are done with the Donner verse.
Returns was an attempt at Donner-verse 2.1 we don't want to see an attempt at 2.2 with the reboot.

 

[Bad Bishop]

People who want to be rid of Bryan Singer should be careful of what they wish for. It's not as though we're going to get James Cameron or Ridley Scott to replace him.

 

[Galactus]

Just give it to Michael Bay or George Lucas and we can all go home.

 

[davejames]

People who want to be rid of Bryan Singer should be careful of what they wish for. It's not as though we're going to get James Cameron or Ridley Scott to replace him.

My thoughts exactly. If people want a quality Superman movie (and not just a dumb action flick with flashy special effects), then there aren't a lot of directors out there to choose from.

Most of the ones out there are, like Ratner and Leterrier, are just craftsman with no real vision and no ability to tell a story.

Unfortunately I have a feeling that's the kind of director we're going to end up with.

 

[Samurai8472]

Just give it to Michael Bay or George Lucas and we can all go home.

atleast we'll have big explosions and lots of CGI

 

[Captain Craig]

Me thoughts are that majority didn't like the tone and direction the script took.
Its tone was sullen and melancholy. The direction of Luthor as still a "genius unto himself" land grabber was soooo outdated it felt one step above parody. Then the big mis-direction was Jason aka superkid. Those are the primary things I've read here and about the net that people didn't like.

I've read very, very few who out right didn't/don't think Bryan Singer is a good director. His shooting script was just full of errors. The script, which I know he was involved in on some level, was where the direction went wrong.

If Singer has a script with a better tone and the characters are more alive and fresh then I've no doubt his skill as a director will turn out a good product.

Singer wasn't the problem.

 

[Guy Gardener]

Seriously... How did Luthor think he was going to defend that continent? And after BILLIONS of people die, exactly what definition of humanity or economy would still be around to applaud him to... What? The idea that super weapons and tech would just magically appear to defend him against the incumbent NUKING from China and Russia and even America that was going to day glow his ass is laughable.

In the 70s movie, Arizona Bay, despite the calamity was going to make lex a mint, sure a couple years down the line after Martial law had subsided and currency had changed colour 8 times and the Government had seized all the property it needed to deal with disaster relief...

In either case it's 911 times a billion. You have to be a hell of a lot more subtle to profit off the misery of carnage.

Singer approved the script. it's not like there is not THOUSANDS of half decent Superman comics in the DC archives worth pinching substance from that it should have been impossible to make a script that didn't have all the good lines from a 25 year old earlier vision of the same project.

 

[ClayinCA]

Man, it must suck to be Brandon Routh right now.

Yeah, I feel really bad for him. The problems Superman Returns had (and I say that as a fan of that film, but not a blind one) were definitely not his fault.

It's not hopeless yet. They're supposed to be discussing superhero movie issues more closely with DC people (including writers, hopefully). Maybe WB will actually get some good advice and heed it.

Well, DC has Gregory Noveck working on these sorts of things, and I know that he's working very hard to make sure that things like Catwoman don't happen again.

I actually enjoyed Superman Returns. I enjoyed it so much I watched it five times in the theater (dragging different people with me each time). But what it gave me most was a sense of closure on the Donner universe - something I didn't realize I was missing over the 25 or so years since I'd seen the original in the theater. Now that that I got that, I'm interested in seeing a new take on Superman.

Yeah, I see that. It's definitely a better ending for the "Donnerverse" (or "Reeve-verse" if you prefer) than, say, Superman IV was.

That's fair. Do you think the studio has to replace Routh in order to accomplish their goals for Superman?

I don't know that they have to, but they probably ought to if they want a whole new take on the character. Having everything be different (supporting cast, back story, setting, character relationships) and the actor playing Superman be the same could confuse people. Having said that, I maintain they could pretty much have Gerard Christopher come play the part and get away with it, so long as the script and the director were good.

PERRY WHITE: Martin Sheen

I really, really like that. I'm stealing it.

SUPERMAN: Peter Krause (Six Feet Under, Dirty Sexy Money)
LOIS LANE: Cate Blanchett (I'm Not There, The Aviator)
LEX LUTHOR: Clancy Brown (Carnivale, The Shawshank Redemption)
PERRY WHITE: Martin Sheen (The West Wing, The Dead Zone)
JOR-EL: Lance Henriksen (MillenniuM, Aliens)
LARA: Joan Allen (The Contender, Nixon)
JONATHAN KENT: Patrick McGoohan (The Prisoner, Braveheart)
MARTHA KENT: Rita Moreno (Oz, West Side Story)
JIMMY OLSEN: Jared Padalecki (Supernatural, Gilmore Girls)
JOHN HENRY IRONS: Mathew St. Patrick (Six Feet Under, Reunion)
EMIL HAMILTON: Hugo Weaving (The Matrix, V for Vendetta)
ZOD: James Marsters (Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Smallville)
JOHN CORBEN: Terry O'Quinn (Lost, MillenniuM)
BRAINIAC: Callum Keith Rennie (Battlestar Galactica, The X-Files: I Want To Believe)
PARASITE: Garrett Dillahunt (Deadwood, The 4400)
MERCY: Lena Headey (300, Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles)
MANCHESTER BLACK: Jamie Bamber (Battlestar Galactica, L&O:UK)
MORGAN EDGE: Michael Emerson (Lost, The Practice)

I could see a lot of this cast working (I've wanted Krause for Superman since Sports Night), but in today's youth-obsessed studio climate, I'd imagine an awful lot of these people would be dismissed by studio heads as too old. Which would be a shame, 'cause if I want to see a Superboy movie, I'll watch three or four episodes of that awful old Superboy show back to back (and even that would have Stacy Haiduk in it ).

I don't want to see another Superman movie for atleast 10 years, if one comes out around 2010, it will suck because it will be rushed. Am I crazy?

Sounds like you just know your Hollywood.

Seriously, here's a question: what directors do people think would be good for Superman? I've always thought that Robert Zemeckis would be a good choice, if he could be pried away from his fascination with digital-motion-capture. After all, Superman is basically an American folk hero, and since Zemeckis basically treated Forrest Gump as one, he would seem a natural fit. I agree with whoever it was that said that Superman needs a Capra-style director, and I think Robert Zemeckis could pull that off very nicely. Maybe Tom Hanks could play Pa Kent or something.

 

[davejames]

Seriously... How did Luthor think he was going to defend that continent? And after BILLIONS of people die, exactly what definition of humanity or economy would still be around to applaud him to... What? The idea that super weapons and tech would just magically appear to defend him against the incumbent NUKING from China and Russia and even America that was going to day glow his ass is laughable.

In the 70s movie, Arizona Bay, despite the calamity was going to make lex a mint, sure a couple years down the line after Martial law had subsided and currency had changed colour 8 times and the Government had seized all the property it needed to deal with disaster relief...

In either case it's 911 times a billion. You have to be a hell of a lot more subtle to profit off the misery of carnage.

Singer approved the script. it's not like there is not THOUSANDS of half decent Superman comics in the DC archives worth pinching substance from that it should have been impossible to make a script that didn't have all the good lines from a 25 year old earlier vision of the same project.

Well I think Luthor was using the island more to lay a trap for Superman (hence his lacing it with kryptonite). And possibly also to mock his Kryptonian heritage a little bit. The financial opportunities were probably just a nice side benefit.

But yeah, even though I had no trouble buying that the island had enough technology to protect itself, it probably would have been good to see some of that displayed a little bit in the movie, and see it fend off a missle attack or something.

Also, in his defense, I don't think he expected the island to be such a dark and dreary looking place. He probably expected the same gleaming white structure as the FoS-- which would have made his "condo" idea seem a lot less ridiculous.