Go Back   Movie Fan Central Discussion Forums > Movie Talk! > Upcoming Movie Talk
MOVIE FAN CENTRAL FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #201  
Old 09-28-2010, 01:25 AM
I agree with Jon Hamm. An excellent choice. This is Superman after all, not Superi'm old enough to say i'm a man but still could pass for a college kid. We have 9 seasons of a show about Superman at the beginning. I'd lke to see him in his prime.

The only reservations i've heard about casting Hamm has been his age. Many people don't see a franchise future with Hamm. I think that fear is kind of ridiculous. He'd be in his 50's when the most optimistic run of the new franchise would fade out. So many studios want kids playing superheroes. Get em young and cheap, thinking they can live decades with a successful franchise. this has always been a pipe dream. Not even the most successful superhero franchises last that long. I'd rather have 2-3 great superman movies with a guy like Hamm.
Reply With Quote
  #202  
Old 09-28-2010, 01:35 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by APzombie View Post
I agree with Jon Hamm. An excellent choice. This is Superman after all, not Superi'm old enough to say i'm a man but still could pass for a college kid. We have 9 seasons of a show about Superman at the beginning. I'd lke to see him in his prime.

The only reservations i've heard about casting Hamm has been his age. Many people don't see a franchise future with Hamm. I think that fear is kind of ridiculous. He'd be in his 50's when the most optimistic run of the new franchise would fade out. So many studios want kids playing superheroes. Get em young and cheap, thinking they can live decades with a successful franchise. this has always been a pipe dream. Not even the most successful superhero franchises last that long. I'd rather have 2-3 great superman movies with a guy like Hamm.
Absolutely. Hamm also isn't a movie star yet, so when he isn't filming Mad Men - he could literally film Superman 1 and 2 back to back, if there are concerns about his age. They could easily do a Superman trilogy at Hamm's age and it would be fine.
Reply With Quote
  #203  
Old 09-28-2010, 01:46 AM
I'm not sure if Hamm is the guy, but he certainly looks the part.

As long as it isnt Nic Cage.

Reply With Quote
  #204  
Old 09-28-2010, 03:59 AM
Hamm would be fine as Supes but could he play Clark Kent? Could he pull off the awkward and clumsy and slightly nerdy Clark Kent?
Reply With Quote
  #205  
Old 09-28-2010, 04:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ilovemovies View Post
Hamm would be fine as Supes but could he play Clark Kent? Could he pull off the awkward and clumsy and slightly nerdy Clark Kent?
based on what i've seen of him on 30 Rock and SNL, i think he could be capable. Though who knows until he tries.
Reply With Quote
  #206  
Old 09-28-2010, 04:26 AM
So apparently at one point Ben Affleck was a contender to direct the Superman reboot but no longer is. That's kind of a shame. I think it would be kind of cool to see him direct a Superman movie since he played George Reeves in the movie Hollywoodland.
Reply With Quote
  #207  
Old 09-28-2010, 05:22 AM
Superman reboot. Im all for it.
Reply With Quote
  #208  
Old 09-28-2010, 10:32 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by adamjohnson View Post
AGAIN? Damn, that shit is so old. You know the problem with Krytpon? Natural resources - it doesnt seem to have any.

The biggest hole in Lex's plan to build a new continent was a big one - there was no water or vegetation of that rock, and couldnt possibly support life. Oops, I guess.


Krypton is boring, in every aspect. Without Zod, they are a Utopian society with no problems. BOOOR-HING.

Let it die. People in third world countries know Superman's origins. We do NOT need to go back and rehash it for the fifth time.
I'm sorry, but not everyone was born in the 70s and has seen the original Reeve's films, not everyone has picked up the origin of Superman, and not everyone has seen Smallville. It would be nice to see the destruction of Krypton instead of dropping the audience off in Metropolis like they're suppose to know who the hell everyone is and how Superman came into existence.
Reply With Quote
  #209  
Old 09-28-2010, 10:57 AM
I say dump Tony Scott from this director list and add Michael Mann instead.
Reply With Quote
  #210  
Old 09-28-2010, 12:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by River Dog View Post
I say dump Tony Scott from this director list and add Michael Mann instead.

Mann shooting a Nolan script?


Aaaaaaaaaand I came
Reply With Quote
  #211  
Old 09-28-2010, 12:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ilovemovies View Post
Hamm would be fine as Supes but could he play Clark Kent? Could he pull off the awkward and clumsy and slightly nerdy Clark Kent?
The "nerdiness" of Kent also needs to go. It worked fine in the 70's because that movie was slightly more humorous, but it should stop.
Reply With Quote
  #212  
Old 09-28-2010, 12:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jig Saw 123 View Post
I'm sorry, but not everyone was born in the 70s and has seen the original Reeve's films, not everyone has picked up the origin of Superman, and not everyone has seen Smallville. It would be nice to see the destruction of Krypton instead of dropping the audience off in Metropolis like they're suppose to know who the hell everyone is and how Superman came into existence.
No, really, starving children in Ethiopa know who Superman is AND know his origin story. So, yeah, you're wrong.

Not EVERY movie needs a backstory, you know. The new Judge Dredd movie that is being made drops Dredd into a high rise full of criminals and locks the door - and we never learn a single thing about Dredd. He never even takes off his helmet. And it's one of the coolest things about the script.

I stand by my notion that the film needs to open in Metropolis and stay there.
Reply With Quote
  #213  
Old 09-28-2010, 12:16 PM
Hamm can't play Superman, he's already Lex Luthor: http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/f26...amm?rel=player
Reply With Quote
  #214  
Old 09-28-2010, 12:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by docholiday_13 View Post
Mann shooting a Nolan script?


Aaaaaaaaaand I came
Is this you?

http://tvjunior.files.wordpress.com/..._park_stan.jpg
Reply With Quote
  #215  
Old 09-28-2010, 12:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by adamjohnson View Post
No, really, starving children in Ethiopa know who Superman is AND know his origin story. So, yeah, you're wrong.

Not EVERY movie needs a backstory, you know. The new Judge Dredd movie that is being made drops Dredd into a high rise full of criminals and locks the door - and we never learn a single thing about Dredd. He never even takes off his helmet. And it's one of the coolest things about the script.

I stand by my notion that the film needs to open in Metropolis and stay there.
I think the world needs to the see the backstory of Otis and Ms. Tessmacher - who were they as children up until they became adults. How DID they hook up with Lex. Do you want to know?
Reply With Quote
  #216  
Old 09-28-2010, 02:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by adamjohnson View Post
No, really, starving children in Ethiopa know who Superman is AND know his origin story. So, yeah, you're wrong.

Not EVERY movie needs a backstory, you know. The new Judge Dredd movie that is being made drops Dredd into a high rise full of criminals and locks the door - and we never learn a single thing about Dredd. He never even takes off his helmet. And it's one of the coolest things about the script.

I stand by my notion that the film needs to open in Metropolis and stay there.
"Everybody" knew Batman's backstory but that didn't stop Nolan from putting the best origin story on the screen in Begins. All I know about Superman's origin is that his planet was destroyed and he was Fed-Exed to Earth where he lived with simple farm folk. So that's probably the jist of it, and you could say that I know Superman's origin. That doesn't mean I wouldn't enjoy a dramatic depiction of it in a new film. Knowing an origin story isn't the same as experiencing it in a great film.
Reply With Quote
  #217  
Old 09-28-2010, 02:27 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveyJoeG View Post
"Everybody" knew Batman's backstory but that didn't stop Nolan from putting the best origin story on the screen in Begins. All I know about Superman's origin is that his planet was destroyed and he was Fed-Exed to Earth where he lived with simple farm folk. So that's probably the jist of it, and you could say that I know Superman's origin. That doesn't mean I wouldn't enjoy a dramatic depiction of it in a new film. Knowing an origin story isn't the same as experiencing it in a great film.
I agree. Superman's origin is very interesting. Who cares if everyone knows the basic story, it still makes for great drama. If they are going to reboot it, then they need to start from scratch.

The Superman origin story from the novel It's Superman is my favorite. I'd love to see that story told on the big screen. It's proof that there is plenty of room to create an entertaining & fresh origin story without destroying the familiar mythology.
Reply With Quote
  #218  
Old 09-28-2010, 03:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by adamjohnson View Post
No, really, starving children in Ethiopa know who Superman is AND know his origin story. So, yeah, you're wrong.
Of course starving children in Ethiopia know the origin of Superman because they obviously taught themselves how to read while they were continuing to be malnourished throughout the course of their life.

Quote:
Originally Posted by adamjohnson View Post
Not EVERY movie needs a backstory, you know. The new Judge Dredd movie that is being made drops Dredd into a high rise full of criminals and locks the door - and we never learn a single thing about Dredd. He never even takes off his helmet. And it's one of the coolest things about the script.

I stand by my notion that the film needs to open in Metropolis and stay there.
Judge Dredd hasn't had multiple sequels, Superman Returns is the last memory in audiences' minds. You're acting like I'm saying the entire 2 hrs. should be dedicated to the life of your average Kryptonian, all I'm saying is show a brief 15-20 minutes of how the shit happen instead of it simply being Superman is the last son of a planet that randomly just blew the hell up.
If anything they can take a queue from Star Trek and display it through a memory.
Reply With Quote
  #219  
Old 09-28-2010, 04:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveyJoeG View Post
"Everybody" knew Batman's backstory but that didn't stop Nolan from putting the best origin story on the screen in Begins. All I know about Superman's origin is that his planet was destroyed and he was Fed-Exed to Earth where he lived with simple farm folk. So that's probably the jist of it, and you could say that I know Superman's origin. That doesn't mean I wouldn't enjoy a dramatic depiction of it in a new film. Knowing an origin story isn't the same as experiencing it in a great film.
+1.

See, here's the thing, people say that, by having a story set on Krypton, you wouldn't have powers (FYI: its the yellow sun that gives Kryptonians Superpowers, and Krypton orbits a red sun, so Kryptonians on Krypton are "normal") you wouldn't have Superman, himself, for a lot of it. However, balance that against the fact that, in Batman Begins, you have pretty much the same set-up: no suit, for half the film, batman doesn't even show up for much of it, lots of scenes of a very young Bruce Wayne, way before he even thought of being Batman.

Everyone knew the basics of the Batman origin story, even people in Ethopia, rich kids son, prince of gotham, parents got shot, dedicated his life to avenging their murder, and saving his city. Straight forward, same as Superman's, but the way Nolan re-told that origin was distinct, while, at the same time, in step with the mythology.

How could this be incorporated into Superman? I was watching the season premier of Smallville the other night, and there was a scene that really moved me, because it cut to the heart of what I would want to see in a Krypton movie: the scene where Jon Schiender As Jonathan Kent, comes back and gives Clark a talking to. Clark is kind of at odds with what his biological father, Jor-el, wants for him, and Pa Kent essentially tells Clark: you don't know much about fatherhood, your fathers, both of them, are trying to help you become who you should be.

It occurred to me, as I was watching, that one of the premises of Smallville has been that Jor-el is the "bad cop", and the Clark doesn't want to accept Jor-el's verion of "his destiny". Those of us who read comics, and who have gotten to know the character of Jor-el, in the flesh, know that this perception is not even close to what the reality of the situation was. As Marlon Brandow famously summed up: "but, for above all other things, their propensity for good, I give them you, my only son."

I think that's very interesting, as a story. What makes a man send his infant son in a rocketship to an alien world to be raised by strangers? How much love, compassion, and above all else, faith does an act like that take? How is it that things got so bad on Krypton that this was the best alternative available? ("I can't save my home, but I can at least give another world a fighting chance, and a great hero.")

Remember in Superman 2, when Zod gets out of the Phantom Zone? He barely acknowledges Superman, instead calling him by one name, above all others: "son of Jor-el." and "son of our jailor", its obvious (and the comics bear this out), that Zod and Jor-el knew each other on Krypton, and that Zod believes Jor-el betrayed him by imprisoning him and Ursa and Non in the Phantom Zone. From what we know, Zod was a great Kryptonian war hero, a general, and the leader of the military guild, what event caused an honorable soldier to turn on his people in such a way that he would be punished to an eternity of oblivion?

Again, I get that my idea has a huge amount of risk, and the way studos are these days, that's not likely to fly. You would need a pro writer, producer and director to make a story like this work. It certainly presents a challenge, no question there, because it seeks to do what Batman Begins did for Batman: redefine what a character is about, while at the same time, tying into the best of what has come before. Back in 2004, there was a whole generation of fans who only knew the campy batman, from the Adam West TV show, and the schumacher movies, and, to an extent, even the Burton movies. Nolan changed that, by, pardoxiacally, going back to the source material, but re-inventing it in his own image. That's what great story-tellers do, and I think the time is ripe for that with Superman.
Reply With Quote
  #220  
Old 09-28-2010, 06:10 PM
I would love to see a director create their vision of of Superman's origin, but unfortunately I think most audiences were so pissed off with Superman Returns, that they just want a Superman action movie where he gets his ass kicked in the first 10 minutes and not a whole lot of drama or romance this time.

Plus fans are already pissed off that Spiderman is going to be origin again and the same will happen for the Daredevil and FF reboots. People seem to hate origin stories more than ever these days.

People don't want long epic origin stories for superheroes and I don't think Superman The Movie would work with today's ADD audiences. They just want to see numerous action scenes strung together with a half decent story.
Reply With Quote
  #221  
Old 09-28-2010, 06:20 PM
well the rumor is Natalie Portman is somehow gaining interest in the role of Louis Lane.

This could mean one of two things.

1. It's an origin story and will chronicle his start at The Daily Planet, along with a young Lane.

2. They've muted the complaints of Kate Bosworth's age issue in Superman Returns (a Louis who is supposed to be a mother and a Pulitzer price winning reporter... in the form a a mid twenty something Bosworth??) and again are grossly miscalculating the necessity of an older woman in the role.

Frankly I don't buy it. Not just because she is attached to another comic franchise, but because it is far too soon to cast this thing. Land a director, land a first draft, then start reading actors.
Reply With Quote
  #222  
Old 09-28-2010, 07:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by River Dog View Post
I would love to see a director create their vision of of Superman's origin, but unfortunately I think most audiences were so pissed off with Superman Returns, that they just want a Superman action movie where he gets his ass kicked in the first 10 minutes and not a whole lot of drama or romance this time.

Plus fans are already pissed off that Spiderman is going to be origin again and the same will happen for the Daredevil and FF reboots. People seem to hate origin stories more than ever these days.

People don't want long epic origin stories for superheroes and I don't think Superman The Movie would work with today's ADD audiences. They just want to see numerous action scenes strung together with a half decent story.
If you had made this post before we saw The Dark Knight, there's a chance I might have agreed with you. One of the things that, I hope against hope, the Dark Knight did was to begin the change of people's perceptions when they hear the words "Superhero movie" from what you indicated (Action sequences, with a half decent plot) to something that's a lot more than that.

Now, granted, as a comic book fan, I do have to guard against the conceit of taking my stuff a little too seriously. On its best days, Comics can be high art, on its pretty okay days, its escapist entertainment. I just picked up my stuff at my local store today, and I both saw, and purchased, a copy of Green Lantern Corps #52 (they had me at the cover, Ganthet battling Cyborg Superman, Hank Hanshaw, cooooooool!) So, I'm certainly a fan of blowing stuff up, with a bit of dialogue to ease things along.

However, Superman, as a character, has the potential to be so much more. I really believe that Nolan gave other filmmakers the template to use with such things, and I think he can do the job with this film. We'll see.
Reply With Quote
  #223  
Old 09-28-2010, 11:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by soda View Post
+1.

See, here's the thing, people say that, by having a story set on Krypton, you wouldn't have powers (FYI: its the yellow sun that gives Kryptonians Superpowers, and Krypton orbits a red sun, so Kryptonians on Krypton are "normal") you wouldn't have Superman, himself, for a lot of it. However, balance that against the fact that, in Batman Begins, you have pretty much the same set-up: no suit, for half the film, batman doesn't even show up for much of it, lots of scenes of a very young Bruce Wayne, way before he even thought of being Batman.

Everyone knew the basics of the Batman origin story, even people in Ethopia, rich kids son, prince of gotham, parents got shot, dedicated his life to avenging their murder, and saving his city. Straight forward, same as Superman's, but the way Nolan re-told that origin was distinct, while, at the same time, in step with the mythology.

How could this be incorporated into Superman? I was watching the season premier of Smallville the other night, and there was a scene that really moved me, because it cut to the heart of what I would want to see in a Krypton movie: the scene where Jon Schiender As Jonathan Kent, comes back and gives Clark a talking to. Clark is kind of at odds with what his biological father, Jor-el, wants for him, and Pa Kent essentially tells Clark: you don't know much about fatherhood, your fathers, both of them, are trying to help you become who you should be.

It occurred to me, as I was watching, that one of the premises of Smallville has been that Jor-el is the "bad cop", and the Clark doesn't want to accept Jor-el's verion of "his destiny". Those of us who read comics, and who have gotten to know the character of Jor-el, in the flesh, know that this perception is not even close to what the reality of the situation was. As Marlon Brandow famously summed up: "but, for above all other things, their propensity for good, I give them you, my only son."

I think that's very interesting, as a story. What makes a man send his infant son in a rocketship to an alien world to be raised by strangers? How much love, compassion, and above all else, faith does an act like that take? How is it that things got so bad on Krypton that this was the best alternative available? ("I can't save my home, but I can at least give another world a fighting chance, and a great hero.")

Remember in Superman 2, when Zod gets out of the Phantom Zone? He barely acknowledges Superman, instead calling him by one name, above all others: "son of Jor-el." and "son of our jailor", its obvious (and the comics bear this out), that Zod and Jor-el knew each other on Krypton, and that Zod believes Jor-el betrayed him by imprisoning him and Ursa and Non in the Phantom Zone. From what we know, Zod was a great Kryptonian war hero, a general, and the leader of the military guild, what event caused an honorable soldier to turn on his people in such a way that he would be punished to an eternity of oblivion?

Again, I get that my idea has a huge amount of risk, and the way studos are these days, that's not likely to fly. You would need a pro writer, producer and director to make a story like this work. It certainly presents a challenge, no question there, because it seeks to do what Batman Begins did for Batman: redefine what a character is about, while at the same time, tying into the best of what has come before. Back in 2004, there was a whole generation of fans who only knew the campy batman, from the Adam West TV show, and the schumacher movies, and, to an extent, even the Burton movies. Nolan changed that, by, pardoxiacally, going back to the source material, but re-inventing it in his own image. That's what great story-tellers do, and I think the time is ripe for that with Superman.
The problem with the Batman parable is that Batman NEVER had an origin story in a film. Hence, Batman Begins. Superman already has had an origin - and it wont be done better. As you've already said - aint getting better than Brando.
Reply With Quote
  #224  
Old 09-29-2010, 12:34 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by adamjohnson View Post
The problem with the Batman parable is that Batman NEVER had an origin story in a film. Hence, Batman Begins. Superman already has had an origin - and it wont be done better. As you've already said - aint getting better than Brando.
Quote:
Originally Posted by soda View Post
Everyone knew the basics of the Batman origin story, even people in Ethopia, but the way Nolan re-told that origin was distinct, while, at the same time, in step with the mythology.
Think of the parallel as expanding on the Krypton scenes in the original Superman the same way Nolan expanded on Batman's origins even though we had the Joker killing Bruce Wayne's parents in Batman(89). Technically, they covered Batman's origin story in Buton's film, despite your CAPS. Soda provided some original ideas for how they could approach an original story in a new Superman film without repeating what's been done previously.
Reply With Quote
  #225  
Old 09-29-2010, 12:36 AM
A krypton film i believe can work perfectly.I dont think we will see it but i do think it can be done very well.

Marlon Brando as jor-El was good.But i think every role can be done over after time.This role is no different.Im sure some one can knock it out of the park.I wanna see how krypton is destroyed.I wanna see the decision where jor-el decides that he MUST stay and die trying to save his planet but he want his son to live and become a great man.He had to have a lot of love for his son to make this decision.

As for not having any powers.I do understand thats a big thing to some people.But all the creatures and invention that the kryptonians had would make for a interesting film.In my mind that could take up the viod the super powers leaves.Krypton has tons of beast and creatures that would be amazing.And it is also a beautiful place and if captured correctly on screen could be a vivid beaty of a sight to behold.

Also imagine the cameos (most likely very quick) that could occur.Lobo?Supergirl?Braniac (probly the main villain)ZOD?Darkseid even?ofcourse jor-el and all of supermans family.Hell even a GL Corps member could make a cameo.

When i think of a krypton film i think of the dragon ball z film with gokus fathers story.Jor-El is fighting to save his people.You can see the fall of the beauty of krypton and the problems among the people arise.Jor-El tries to save his people and his home world.Almost in a patriotic way he doesnt want to give up on them. His decision to send his son to earth so he can be brought up in a place where he will be loved and also can do good for the people of the planet in interesting.Why?Why did he decide to send his son.Why earth of all planets?had he visited before?And if he did why?and what did he see to make him feel it was a good place for his son?All good questions the film can answer.with a good writer and director i feel this film would be amazing!!!!
Reply With Quote
  #226  
Old 09-29-2010, 01:28 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by venom718 View Post
A krypton film i believe can work perfectly.I dont think we will see it but i do think it can be done very well.

Marlon Brando as jor-El was good.But i think every role can be done over after time.This role is no different.Im sure some one can knock it out of the park.I wanna see how krypton is destroyed.I wanna see the decision where jor-el decides that he MUST stay and die trying to save his planet but he want his son to live and become a great man.He had to have a lot of love for his son to make this decision.

As for not having any powers.I do understand thats a big thing to some people.But all the creatures and invention that the kryptonians had would make for a interesting film.In my mind that could take up the viod the super powers leaves.Krypton has tons of beast and creatures that would be amazing.And it is also a beautiful place and if captured correctly on screen could be a vivid beaty of a sight to behold.

Also imagine the cameos (most likely very quick) that could occur.Lobo?Supergirl?Braniac (probly the main villain)ZOD?Darkseid even?ofcourse jor-el and all of supermans family.Hell even a GL Corps member could make a cameo.

When i think of a krypton film i think of the dragon ball z film with gokus fathers story.Jor-El is fighting to save his people.You can see the fall of the beauty of krypton and the problems among the people arise.Jor-El tries to save his people and his home world.Almost in a patriotic way he doesnt want to give up on them. His decision to send his son to earth so he can be brought up in a place where he will be loved and also can do good for the people of the planet in interesting.Why?Why did he decide to send his son.Why earth of all planets?had he visited before?And if he did why?and what did he see to make him feel it was a good place for his son?All good questions the film can answer.with a good writer and director i feel this film would be amazing!!!!
It's a cool idea to Superman fans but for general audiences, it would bomb. Most people already think Superman is one of the most boring superheroes out there, so the last thing they would want is Krypton film with no powers.

This is what people want in a Superman movie: They DON'T want Lex Luthor, but they do want a villian that has the ability to kick the living shit out of Superman and leave him to die. Superman's powers have never really been tested to the absolute limit in the movies, including Superman II with Zod.

Superman has to fight someone stronger than he is and there needs to be a scene where we see Superman turned into a bloody pulp from having his face smashed in. If it's just another movie where Superman can overcome anything, it will fail.

Last edited by River Dog; 09-29-2010 at 01:32 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #227  
Old 09-29-2010, 01:58 AM
The biggest problem with the Krypton movie is the same problem with ALL prequels - you know how it ends. Somehow, someway, no matter what variables you change, the fucker blows up.

All drama is gone. Everyone dies, except Kal El. It is unchanging. Great for a comic run, but one of the worst ideas for a summer blockbuster I have heard.

Audiences want Darkseid, or at least Brainiac. They dont want another natural disaster Superman has to save people from.

Superman is a hard sell. They have never EVER given Superman an antagonist more powerful than he. A huge no-no in storytelling terms. Superman needs to be outmatched for us to care, and he is simply too powerful and doesnt have the rogues gallery for that to happen. Personally, I think Superman should be de-powered by, like, ALOT. Back in the day, Superman could move planets. In the films, he can lift falling helicopters and the Statue of Liberty without a grimace. Even surrounded by - and impaled by - kryptonite, he could STILL lift a large island into space.

Come on. It should be difficult for him to lift a semi. Nearly impossible to lift a building or half a cruise liner. And his other powers - ice breath, super hearing, even x-ray, possibly even heat vision - should hve gone a lot time ago. He cant have EVERY superpower. He has no identity - he's just... the most powerful. At everything.

Boring.

Superman in his first appearance couldnt even FLY. He DODGED bullets, they didnt ricochet off his eyeballs. Find a middle ground - make him the most powerful thing a human has ever seen, but not unstoppable. He really needs to think twice before stepping in front of a moving train or large explosion.

Take away his strength and you make him more human. More relateable. That's precisely what he's always needed.
Reply With Quote
  #228  
Old 09-29-2010, 02:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by adamjohnson View Post
The biggest problem with the Krypton movie is the same problem with ALL prequels - you know how it ends. Somehow, someway, no matter what variables you change, the fucker blows up.

All drama is gone. Everyone dies, except Kal El. It is unchanging. Great for a comic run, but one of the worst ideas for a summer blockbuster I have heard.

Audiences want Darkseid, or at least Brainiac. They dont want another natural disaster Superman has to save people from.

Superman is a hard sell. They have never EVER given Superman an antagonist more powerful than he. A huge no-no in storytelling terms. Superman needs to be outmatched for us to care, and he is simply too powerful and doesnt have the rogues gallery for that to happen. Personally, I think Superman should be de-powered by, like, ALOT. Back in the day, Superman could move planets. In the films, he can lift falling helicopters and the Statue of Liberty without a grimace. Even surrounded by - and impaled by - kryptonite, he could STILL lift a large island into space.

Come on. It should be difficult for him to lift a semi. Nearly impossible to lift a building or half a cruise liner. And his other powers - ice breath, super hearing, even x-ray, possibly even heat vision - should hve gone a lot time ago. He cant have EVERY superpower. He has no identity - he's just... the most powerful. At everything.

Boring.

Superman in his first appearance couldnt even FLY. He DODGED bullets, they didnt ricochet off his eyeballs. Find a middle ground - make him the most powerful thing a human has ever seen, but not unstoppable. He really needs to think twice before stepping in front of a moving train or large explosion.

Take away his strength and you make him more human. More relateable. That's precisely what he's always needed.
I think you are totally on the right track, but I think you are reducing his powers too much. He should still be impervious to pain - SO FAR. But something like stepping in front of a train or explosion shouldn't even phase Superman. I think by reducing Superman's powers too much, you run the risk of having a lame villian who can't be too powerful either. Superman needs to face someone who could take on all The Avengers at once if you know what I mean. This has to be more than just the street battle in Superman II. There Will Be Blood.
Reply With Quote
  #229  
Old 09-29-2010, 03:20 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by River Dog View Post
This is what people want in a Superman movie: They DON'T want Lex Luthor, but they do want a villian that has the ability to kick the living shit out of Superman and leave him to die. Superman's powers have never really been tested to the absolute limit in the movies, including Superman II with Zod.

Your memories can run but they can't hide!
Reply With Quote
  #230  
Old 09-29-2010, 07:05 AM
Superman needs to die. I mean literally. There needs to be a movie where Superman dies. The Death of Superman comics were awesome (from what I remember - it's been a while). soda's going to need to help me out with this, but I believe he died in an epic fight with Darkside. I think the circumstances following his death would have to be changed to be more cinematically fitting, but it's a good start.

I don't have a problem with Lex Luthor being in future movies, but I agree with River Dog, he's been done to death. He shouldn't be the main villain, but more of a side character like Scarecrow/Rahs Al-Ghul was in Batman Begins. He's Superman's archnemesis so I don't have a problem with him being in Superman movies, but the movie cannot be about him trying to rule the world through some kind of natural disaster or bomb or something.
Reply With Quote
  #231  
Old 09-29-2010, 07:49 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by adamjohnson View Post
The biggest problem with the Krypton movie is the same problem with ALL prequels - you know how it ends. Somehow, someway, no matter what variables you change, the fucker blows up.

All drama is gone. Everyone dies, except Kal El. It is unchanging. Great for a comic run, but one of the worst ideas for a summer blockbuster I have heard.
The second highest grossing film is Titantic. Do you know one single person who didn't know the fuckin' ship was gonna sink?

Also, I wish those whose primary source of reference for Superman's mythology come from the Donner films would please stop suggesting ideas.

You know who you are.

Last edited by Smiert Spionam; 09-29-2010 at 08:16 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #232  
Old 09-29-2010, 12:34 PM
OK here goes...
Enough with Lex. The guy is lame. An old bald rich guy is the best they can throw at the most powerful super hero??

NO Krypton, I would be ok if they did like the Incredible Hulk and had the story in the opening credits.

Villians. Nothing short of Darkseid, Lobo, or Doomsday would cut it. Brainiac is lame. If it's not one of those three, the movie would fail-again. And please, no bosworth with her 5head and superbaby. That killed Returns.
Reply With Quote
  #233  
Old 09-29-2010, 12:43 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigred760 View Post
but I believe he died in an epic fight with Darkside.
Doomsday, actually.
Reply With Quote
  #234  
Old 09-29-2010, 12:54 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Fred Krueger View Post
Doomsday, actually.
Thanks. I knew it began with a 'D'.
Reply With Quote
  #235  
Old 09-29-2010, 02:51 PM
Few things:

-yes, it was Doomsday who beat Superman to death. One interesting thought is that, for me, what was really interesting about that story was not the whole "death of" storyline, but the fact that, immediately after Superman was gone, two of the most interesting characters in the Superman mythology made their first appearance: John Henry Irons (Steel) and Cyborg Superman, Hank Hanshaw. With regard to the later, there is something very, very cool about a suicidal half man, half andriod, completely twisted MoFo (who can recruit the manhunters to battle the green lantern corps) who just wants to be put out of his own misery, and who wants to take the rest of the universe with him.

-A point that has been made is that I don't think people knowing the ending would be a huge deal, but its a consideration. If that post had been made before people saw Titanic, you'd have more of a point (Spoiler alert: the boat sinks in the end, it hits an iceberg, in case you didn't know), also, the point would carry more weight if it had been made before the Star Wars prequels (spoiler alert: anakin turns to the dark side, and the emperor enslaves the galaxy, in case you didn't know). Back in ancient Greece, for example, this type of entertainment was the NORM, rather than the exception. Of course, today's audiences are different, but I do think something can be enjoyed while still knowing how it ends, it is the journey after all. If you want to get all technical about it, pretty much most mainstream movies are this way, how many romantic comedies have you seen where, after some wacky hijinks, the girl falls for the male lead?

-I do think, FWIW, that Hollywood needs to get off the teats of reboots/retelling origins. If every other comic book was a brand new retelling of the origin story, comics would go out of business very quickly. I guess its because studio execs and directors have their own egos, and they all think they could do it so much better than the other guy could. Nolan re-inventing Batman in his own image, into something hugely popular got the ball rolling in a copycat town. However, sometimes, it is justified. When was the last big screen retelling of Superman's origin? Hint: when Nolan made Batman Begins, the last retelling of Batman's origin had taken place much later than the last retelling of Superman's. Batman's last re-telling was in Batman 89, Superman's was in the first Superman movie, which dates back to the 1970's. Every generation, or so, I think such a move is warranted, especially when the last time was a generation ago, Superman's origin story, as told in the original movie, is a VERY 1970s take on the character (watch it again, stuff in it is dated)

This is especially true of Krypton. The 70s film portrays Krypton as a baren, icy world, not at all the kind of place where advanced technology and wonder would be found. Comics have done a lot to rectify this over the ages, but, for many scribes, the 70s movie sticks. The most influential person in DC comics today, Geoff Johns, got his start as an intern on the first Superman movie, and if I have one critic of Johns, its that he's wedded to that version of the origin, and that version of Krypton.

My idea is much more vast. I've said it before and I will again, the main villian of my movie would be Darkseid. Of all of Superman's villians, IMHO, Darkseid is the most interesting by far (not even close). Krypton obviously would be a movie where Lex Luthor doesn't appear at all (unless he's played by Michael Rosenbaum, I absolutely despise Lex in his TV/movie incarnations.) Why Darkseid? Because he's got the muscle, and the horde of evil minions, to take on anyone and everyone. Darkseid is one of those supervillians whose job is supervillian. There is definitely a room somewhere on Apocalypse that's nothing but TV monitors where Darkseid monitors everything that's going on across the entire multi-verse, and where his evil plans are made and refined. Think Emperor Palpatine, but with much cooler dialogue, better powers, and an army of immortal, superpowered, god-like beings who obey his every command.

If Krypton was on the brink, and they are as technologically advanced as they are supposed to be, what do you think someone like Darkseid does? Stand back and watch? Of course not, Darkseid has his hand in it, and he's trying to push it towards his own agenda. That's the way he works. There are some things that movies do, like the Joker killing Batman's parents, and the retcon of the death of Uncle Ben in Spidey three, that are completely unnecessary because they seek to make a tie where the universe the characters don't have the capacity to support it. I know Tim Burton thought "wouldn't it be cool if the Joker murdered Bruce's parents? Wouldn't that give the movie more of an edge/be a cool tie-in?" The point is, the Batman universe doesn't work that way, just like the Spiderman universe, Uncle Ben's murderer has to be "just a thug". Darkseid doesn't have that restriction, as, within the plot, it makes perfect sense that he'd be behind Krypton's destruction, or at least, that he would have pushed it in the right direction.
Reply With Quote
  #236  
Old 09-29-2010, 08:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by adamjohnson View Post
Come on. It should be difficult for him to lift a semi. Nearly impossible to lift a building or half a cruise liner. And his other powers - ice breath, super hearing, even x-ray, possibly even heat vision - should hve gone a lot time ago. He cant have EVERY superpower. He has no identity - he's just... the most powerful. At everything.

Boring.

Superman in his first appearance couldnt even FLY. He DODGED bullets, they didnt ricochet off his eyeballs. Find a middle ground - make him the most powerful thing a human has ever seen, but not unstoppable. He really needs to think twice before stepping in front of a moving train or large explosion.

Take away his strength and you make him more human. More relateable. That's precisely what he's always needed.
They tried what you suggested in the animated series and everyone just complained about how weak Superman was, calling him a pussified version of Superman. So the series fixed that problem in the later seasons.

A good Superman story needs to be told by someone with a strong imagination for the sci-fi. Someone who CAN imagine a villain who is stronger stronger, or superior in some way to Superman.
Reply With Quote
  #237  
Old 09-29-2010, 10:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by River Dog View Post
I say dump Tony Scott from this director list and add Michael Mann instead.
As long as he uses a real camera and not the one he's been using for the past few years, why not.
Reply With Quote
  #238  
Old 10-04-2010, 06:07 PM
word is that Zach Snyder got the gig....


..... fuck.
Reply With Quote
  #239  
Old 10-04-2010, 06:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by APzombie View Post
word is that Zach Snyder got the gig....


..... fuck.
Details, now!!!
Reply With Quote
  #240  
Old 10-04-2010, 06:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jig Saw 123 View Post
Details, now!!!
http://www.deadline.com/2010/10/zack...ting-superman/

deadline has a good track record. now slashfilm and aintitcool are running the story.





........ fuck.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump