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
  #121  
Old 02-27-2010, 02:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MovieBuff07 View Post
I heart the Nolan's. Let em have a shot after Chris does his 3rd Batman entry. I don't know how a Justice League movie would work with Chris at the helm, Superman does not fit at all with the universe he's set up in BB and TDK.
Lets not pretend Nolan's Superman is going to be all realistic and broody. Nolan has simply said that he approached Batman as though he were the first costumed hero to ever come out, IE Superman hasnt come out of the Fortress of Solitude yet.

I like the idea of Johnathan directing. Im sure its not his REAL directorial debut, hes certainly made short films before. And theyre such amazing storytellers. That level of talent trumps other things, in my book.
Reply With Quote
  #122  
Old 02-27-2010, 02:49 PM
Jumping from short films to a Millions of dollar Superman movie is still a daunting task.
Reply With Quote
  #123  
Old 02-27-2010, 03:00 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brendan M. View Post
Jumping from short films to a Millions of dollar Superman movie is still a daunting task.
John has been on set with Chris on every film. If need be, Chris can be a producer and help him in the day to day stuff.

Worse filmmakers have leaned on their assistants for a lot more.
Reply With Quote
  #124  
Old 02-27-2010, 03:01 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by adamjohnson View Post
Lets not pretend Nolan's Superman is going to be all realistic and broody. Nolan has simply said that he approached Batman as though he were the first costumed hero to ever come out, IE Superman hasnt come out of the Fortress of Solitude yet.

I like the idea of Johnathan directing. Im sure its not his REAL directorial debut, hes certainly made short films before. And theyre such amazing storytellers. That level of talent trumps other things, in my book.
I'd like it if we could not pretend Nolan's Batman is all that realistic either. Convincing? Yes. But all science fiction can be convincing. Dealing with a potential crossover you do not have to sidestep Nolan's Batman by coming up with solutions to problems that DC solved a long time ago
Reply With Quote
  #125  
Old 02-27-2010, 03:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by adamjohnson View Post
John has been on set with Chris on every film. If need be, Chris can be a producer and help him in the day to day stuff.

Worse filmmakers have leaned on their assistants for a lot more.

So I wonder if this could end up like a slightly similar ordeal as the one with Tobe Hooper and Steven Spielberg on Poltergeist.
Reply With Quote
  #126  
Old 02-27-2010, 03:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brendan M. View Post
So I wonder if this could end up like a slightly similar ordeal as the one with Tobe Hooper and Steven Spielberg on Poltergeist.
Or co-directors.
Reply With Quote
  #127  
Old 02-27-2010, 04:15 PM
I think with this reboot they need to look to Geoff Johns' work with Action Comics and Secret Origins on Superman he been able to both be relevant and relatable while maintaining all the great thigns Superman has been throughout the years
Reply With Quote
  #128  
Old 02-28-2010, 09:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brendan M. View Post
Jumping from short films to a Millions of dollar Superman movie is still a daunting task.
And writer turned director worked out so well for Goyer on Blade Trinity! I can't wait to see fans explode when the follow up to TDK falls WAY below expectations. Nolan will go from an ace to a hack overnight just like Sam Raimi did in too many eyes. It's the nature of the beast.
Reply With Quote
  #129  
Old 02-28-2010, 09:42 PM
Nolan >>>> Raimi
Reply With Quote
  #130  
Old 02-28-2010, 11:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeChar4321 View Post
And writer turned director worked out so well for Goyer on Blade Trinity! I can't wait to see fans explode when the follow up to TDK falls WAY below expectations. Nolan will go from an ace to a hack overnight just like Sam Raimi did in too many eyes. It's the nature of the beast.
a bit presumptuous.

previous to the possibility that John will be directing Superman and that it will be over 130 million, the largest budget production for a first time filmmaker was MI:3 with J.J. Abrams. J.J. knew what he was doing on set, i assume John knows enough too.
Reply With Quote
  #131  
Old 02-28-2010, 11:19 PM
They wouldn't place a big movie in the hands of a inexperienced director for nothing, I think J. Nolan just has enough experience to do this film, and if he can't, he has his brother to fall back on. besides, David Goyer just plain fucking sucks.
Reply With Quote
  #132  
Old 03-01-2010, 08:24 PM
I think Goyer is a great lubricator. He's great to have around when you're planning out your comic book film because he'll throw in idea from past comics and fill you in on the details while you come up with the actual characters and story. That's why I think he works well with the Nolans because he is a geek, whether or not he's a great writer is a different matter, but he knows his subject well enough to help them make a better film. So I'm looking forward to what they all cook up because you know if Jonathan Nolan is writing it, his brother will also have hand in it somewhere and it's almost impossible for them to make a terrible movie.
Reply With Quote
  #133  
Old 03-01-2010, 09:07 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeChar4321 View Post
And writer turned director worked out so well for Goyer on Blade Trinity! I can't wait to see fans explode when the follow up to TDK falls WAY below expectations. Nolan will go from an ace to a hack overnight just like Sam Raimi did in too many eyes. It's the nature of the beast.
A_ I dont know what TDK has to do with anything since Chris Nolan is still doing that one

B) It amazes me when people say "I cant wait" for someone to fail and a movie Im looking forward to will bomb.
Reply With Quote
  #134  
Old 03-02-2010, 09:20 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by CosmicPuppet View Post
I think Goyer is a great lubricator. He's great to have around when you're planning out your comic book film because he'll throw in idea from past comics and fill you in on the details while you come up with the actual characters and story. That's why I think he works well with the Nolans because he is a geek, whether or not he's a great writer is a different matter, but he knows his subject well enough to help them make a better film. So I'm looking forward to what they all cook up because you know if Jonathan Nolan is writing it, his brother will also have hand in it somewhere and it's almost impossible for them to make a terrible movie.
This.
Reply With Quote
  #135  
Old 03-02-2010, 03:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by adamjohnson View Post
A_ I dont know what TDK has to do with anything since Chris Nolan is still doing that one

B) It amazes me when people say "I cant wait" for someone to fail and a movie Im looking forward to will bomb.
Word. AJ, you and I have disagreed on many things, many of them in this very thread, but this is something that you and I agree on. I don't begrudge other people their success, and I don't say that I hope someone or other fails. I think its bad Karma, for one thing. To me, the negativety of the net, in general, is amazing.

I've been a long time poster on CBR, a place cited by some who post here, and the reason why I don't post so much there anymore is because there are hundreds of people on that site who have 200+ IQs, who are utterly brilliant and eloquent, and who do nothing but post all day about how bad the comics they're reading are. If the comics you're reading are that bad, why don't you stop and spend your money on comics that you like? The business doesn't change unless consumers change their habits. Back in the nineties, Marvel trotted out every tom, dick and harry to do the art/writing on x-men, why, because no matter who was creating it, the marvel zombies would buy the issue. Didn't matter how bad it was, it sold. So, why does marvel have any incentive to make it better?

I guess my point is that its okay to gripe, and its okay to have a problem with someone's work, if that problem can be supported with rational reasons (my problems with Bond's position on Death of Superman and Doomsday are well documented). If I don't think a movie looks particularly interesting, I won't see it, and I won't post on it. I try hard not to take away the joy that someone else got out of something, even if I don't see what the fuss is about (Avatar is that movie for me).

I also, for the record, have an issue with people who think a director or writer is done after one flick that didn't perform to everyone's expectations. I understand the nature of Hollywood, and I understand that, with so much money on the line, one bomb and you're probably done. I don't think rami has lost his touch as a filmmaker, I know SM 3 didn't perform as well as, or was as well heralded, as the previous two, but, as a filmmaker in general, Rami is a stud. I too tend to chalk up a lot of the problems with SM 3 to suits (it makes sense) who wanted venom in the movie, despite Rami's insistence against. Anyone whose heard Kevin Smith tell the "giant mechanical spider" story at con knows that a lot of the movie business is politics.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, sometimes, people with tons of money on the line grossly overthink things. Ten years ago, Disney was going the way of the dinosaur, because their product wasn't good or particularly entertaining. The mouse figured it out in time to save itself: partner with (SquareEnix), or buy (ESPN, Marvel, Pixar), people who are good at what they do, and let them do what they do, and get out of the way.
Reply With Quote
  #136  
Old 03-09-2010, 08:52 PM
Just thought I'd give this topic a bump.

I was thinking the other day about some of the stuff that Bond said in his posts (he's probably the single most convincing advocate for doomsday that I've ever come across, in real life or the net, so congrats!), and I had a couple more thoughts to add onto this, take them for what they are:

I was thinking about Bond's idea for a Doomsday movie, and I was thinking about Planet Hulk, and it struck me the the two are very similar, conceptually. I compared, if you will remember, the doomsday story in the comics to a Dragonball Z story, and while that might or might not be a gross simplification (ie, Bond would probably argue that I'm missing the subtely), that is the kind of story that Planet Hulk actually is. Planet Hulk has a lot of other things going on with it, but the essence of the Story is the following premise: "what if we put the Hulk on a planet where everyone is just as strong as he is?"

Now, I am a fan of Greg Pak's writing (I think Marvel missed the boat with World War Hulk, which I felt was really lame) and I felt like Planet Hulk was the kind of simple story, flawlessly executed, that the Iron Man movie was. It was a Superhero story, true and true, with a similar tragic twist at the end like Death of Superman. I won't spoil it for those who want to watch the DVD (I haven't seen the DVD yet, but I hear its good, I read the books when they were coming out, and I posted about them at the time on this site). Suffice it to say I feel like Hulk had something that Superman lacked, both of them have a very definitive ending: you know Superman is coming back, and won't stay dead, likewise, you know the Hulk is coming back to earth, he won't stay away, that's comics, they always come back, yet, I feel like Planet Hulk had a cripness of execution that Superman lacked.

I don't know if that makes any sense, but, at least in the comics, I felt for the oldscare, and for the people of the planet who were oppressed. I loved the fight between the Hulk and the silver surfer, as dragonball z-like as it was in its execution. panel for panel, page for page, I felt like planet hulk was bursting at each panel. I didn't feel like the sequel, world war hulk, had that same pace and rythm, that same energy, and I feel the same way about Death of Superman. The premise of the story is not bad: big bad alien being "kills" Superman, and the drama is in how the people of earth react, both in comics and, strangely enough, in reality. What I didn't like about Death of was the execution, was in how utterly un-built up the villian was other than as a two dimensional killing machine. That can sometimes work, but its obviously a tale that works far better when the hero is someone like the Hulk than it is when the hero is someone like Superman. I love them both, but its obvious that different kinds of stories fit the profile of each character.

All of this is to say that, after much thought, I still wouldn't be totally against a Death of Superman story, Bond has succeeded in at least getting me to look at the possibility as reasonable. However, the story, as told in the comics, would need to be rewritten to get the desired effects. I'd need to see more backstory on Doomsday, for one thing (please, not smallville backstory, one of the things that just about everyone agrees on is that doomsday on that show sucked), and I'd need to see more depth to the story-line.

Here's one idea, right now, in comics, in both the marvel and the DCU (at least was in the marvel U) one of the big things is the absence of a great hero. In the marvel U, its captain america, and in the DCU, its batman. Seeing Dick Grayson, the original boy wonder, put on the mantle of the bat has been intensely interesting, the uniform doesn't fit, in the first couple of issues, it looked like Dick was a kid putting on his dad's clothes. In the marvel U, you see the utter, huge, gaping hole that the death of Captain America left. There was panel after panel, where I just knew that if Steve were there, he's show up, say the right thing, and punch the bad guy in the face. In the DCU, the absence of Batman has created a situation where an entire city has gone insane, as all the crazys that were formally held at bay by Batman's sheer presence now no longer have anything holding them back. That's the kind of nuinced story-telling I would have wanted from a death of superman story, supes is gone, show me how he was the thing that was keeping things together, show me how he was the glue that held metropolis together.

Anyway, those are my thought, now, how about yours.
Reply With Quote
  #137  
Old 03-09-2010, 09:11 PM
I'd have to say this thread has made me very interested in a Superman movie that has a large chunk of it devoted to Krypton. I'm not really much of a comic book reader, the occasional Batman book from time to time. So all I know about Superman is from his appearances in Batman books I've read, and the movies(and I haven't even seen any of them in years). I never saw Superman Returns. I don't really have much interest in watching the original films anytime soon. It just seems like a story that's been done so many times. If they reboot Superman and it's about Supes saving Metrolpolis from Lex Luthor, I probably won't watch it. However some of your descriptions of story lines such as the destruction of Krypton, and villains such as Brianiac, have me very intrigued. That is something I'd be interested in seeing. It's a whole new aspect of Superman that I never knew existed, and it's something I hope they explore.

I can understand the argument that people want to see Superman doing his thing, flying around and lifting heavy shit. They could easily follow a structure similar to Batman Begins and tell a lot of story about Krypton and then show Superman being badass on Earth within a 2.5 hour time frame.
Reply With Quote
  #138  
Old 03-10-2010, 09:35 AM
Just posted on Comingsoon.net:

Quote:
Geoff Boucher of L.A. Times' Hero Complex had a chance to visit Christopher Nolan in the editing suite for his upcoming sci-fi thriller Inception, and of course, he couldn't pass up an opportunity like that without asking about Nolan's plans for his Superman reboot and Batman.

There was a lot of excitement a few months back when Nolan's name was mentioned as the "godfather" of a Superman reboot at Warner Bros., and speaking on the decision for the first time, Nolan told Boucher that his involvement with the Superman franchise came about from them having reached an impasse on what to do with their third Batman film and David Goyer having an idea of what could be done with the Man of Steel:

"He basically told me, 'I have this thought about how you would approach Superman. I immediately got it, loved it and thought: That is a way of approaching the story I've never seen before that makes it incredibly exciting. I wanted to get Emma and I involved in shepherding the project right away and getting it to the studio and getting it going in an exciting way.

As mentioned previously, Nolan would act as a producer for another director, which has yet to be determined as they develop the script. From there, Nolan's involvement may be similar to Peter Jackson's on District 9 as he moves onto the third Batman film. He didn't have a lot more to say about the Superman reboot except that he did have an appreciation for what Singer tried to do in connecting his film to those of Richard Donner:

"A lot of people have approached Superman in a lot of different ways. I only know the way that has worked for us that's what I know how to do."

It's suggested that like his two Batman movies, the Superman story will take place in a world where Superman is the only superhero, so one probably can't expect this Superman to meet Christian Bale's Batman or either character to be involved with a future Justice League movie.

"Each serves to the internal logic of the story. They have nothing to do with each other," Nolan told them.

Eventually, the Nolans and Goyer got over the earlier impasse with a second Batman sequel, and things are certainly moving forward on that third movie. Nolan wouldn't confirm any of the dozens of internet rumors about who might play the villain but he did say:

"Without getting into specifics, the key thing that makes the third film a great possibility for us is that we want to finish our story, and in viewing it as the finishing of a story rather than infinitely blowing up the balloon and expanding the story. We have a great ensemble, that's one of the attractions of doing another film, since we've been having a great time for years."
Sounds exciting.
Reply With Quote
  #139  
Old 03-10-2010, 10:49 AM
Glad he's keeping his Batman away from Superman.
Reply With Quote
  #140  
Old 03-10-2010, 11:25 AM
Interesting to see what he said about the ensemble cast thing for Batman. Maybe they're planning on bringing back Two Face and/or Scarecrow?
Reply With Quote
  #141  
Old 03-10-2010, 12:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveyJoeG View Post
Interesting to see what he said about the ensemble cast thing for Batman. Maybe they're planning on bringing back Two Face and/or Scarecrow?
I'm sure he was referring to Bale, Oldman, Caine, Freeman, and Murphy. I don't want to see the return of Two-Face.
Reply With Quote
  #142  
Old 03-10-2010, 12:26 PM
i'm much more exited about the fact that for the first time he has confirmed Batman 3. And even more exited to hear that

1. they wrote themselves out of a creative hole they got for the direction of Batman 3
2. they see it as a conclusion (!- hopefully the series won't be beaten to death)
3. his batman and the potential superman aren't in the same universe.

concerning the third point, i'm actually really happy about that. they aren't weighed down by association, they aren't using it as a benchmark for a potential JLA movie (i.e. making a movie a teaser for "greater" things ala marvels recent batch). I really appreciate how they want self contained stories, because more often then not that means they are vastly more rewarding.
Reply With Quote
  #143  
Old 03-10-2010, 01:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Fred Krueger View Post
Just posted on Comingsoon.net:



Sounds exciting.
I knew Nolan couldnt let Batman go unfinished. His "continuing the story" about Batman becoming Batman, always has been.
Reply With Quote
  #144  
Old 03-10-2010, 05:02 PM
I find Nolan to be quite close-minded when it comes to comic films. Issues go by without characters meeting in their solo books only to meet in team books with little to no reaction in solo piece.

I still see absolutely no reason Nolan's Batman couldnt team up in a JLA movie.
Reply With Quote
  #145  
Old 03-10-2010, 05:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by cerealkiller182 View Post
I find Nolan to be quite close-minded when it comes to comic films. Issues go by without characters meeting in their solo books only to meet in team books with little to no reaction in solo piece.

I still see absolutely no reason Nolan's Batman couldnt team up in a JLA movie.
Close-minded?

Nolan is a true artist. He doesn't believe in cashing in on characters by having them crossover in each others separate stories. First, his Batman is not even the "full" Batman yet;he's still a learner. Second, Nolan only plans on making one more Batman film,so I don't think he needs to do anything about bringing his Batman to a JLA movie. Furthermore, Superman needs to get his shit together before a JLA movie is even thought of being made. Did you forget the other characters that need movies first? Wonder Woman, Flash, and Green Lantern needs to be established in an audience's mind.

Like I said in my earlier post, people need to stop looking at what Marvel is doing and be thankful Warner Brothers is trying to make individual superhero films that are just as powerful with one film; as they are as a set depending on the sequel or collaboration of other superheros to get more asses in seats.
Reply With Quote
  #146  
Old 03-11-2010, 12:01 PM
Few thoughts:

The whole "crossover" thing was something that was created by marvel in the 60s (when Stan Lee and Jack Kirby were running the show). Before then, there was only one kind of crossover, individual characters had their own book, in the DCU, and would crossover in a Justice League book. Lee and Kirby took this and created a world where individual characters crossed over into other character's books. That hadn't been done before, and, for marvel, it was one element (amongst many) that led to them passing DC as the #1 comic book company. More recently, DC started doing this a few years ago, and marvel, initially, didn't follow suite, and DC briefly, overtook marvel as the industry leader. Marvel quickly corrected itself, and retook the throne it has had since the 60s.

I hear a lot of people, in a lot of places, scream out that they want individual stories, and that things shouldn't crossover. My reaction to that is that, from a sales and marketing standpoint, there's a reason why it happens. However, it is a double-edged sword: if the "guest appearance" is good, and well done (like Nick Fury in the Iron Man movie, or Tony Stark in the Hulk movie) it creates buzz about the other character, and gets people interested. I see nothing wrong with that, and, in fact, its become a pillar of what comic books are all about. The other edge of the sword is that if the "guest appearance" looks thrown in to simply promote the character, and there's no real reason why that character is where he/she is, then it could really doom the character's own book/project/movie. For me, the classic example is the doom patrol/JLA crossover done by Chris Claremont and John Bryness a few years back. It was highly hyped by DC, but it was an incredible letdown (the story was incomprehensible, something to do with vampires, and then, they lost me). The story was supposed to serve as a launching pad for Bryness' Doom Patrol reboot, a book which was so awful it was cancelled, mercifully, after a few issues.

To me, the idea that Superman and Batman wouldn't meet, eventually, and that Metropolis and Gotham both exist on the same "earth" is a bigger stretch of imagination than that they exist on separate earths. Maybe we could call one earth-1 and the other earth-2? (If you don't get the joke, don't worry, you aren't alone) Again, one of the hallmarks of comics is the shared universe, the idea that everyone of these characters is in the same relative earth. This line of story-telling obviously has advantages and drawbacks, and, for movie makers, who are investing millions of dollars, and who have their own egos, I can see how it would be unteneable. Far be it from me to impose a creative vision on someone else's project, as I do think that's how you get into trouble.

Final point is that I think there can be a balance. Nick Fury in Iron Man is the ideal for what we're looking for. Favearu used Fury just perfectly, the character was exactly what marvel had in the ultimate universe, and, plot-wise, it made perfect sense that Fury would show up at the moment that he did, and act the way that he did. I didn't feel like anything was forced, or that it detracted from the storyline (I don't see how it could, as it was at the very end). I'd like to Favearu's version of it, I'd like to know how for or against adding Nick Fury he was, or, if it was his idea to begin with.
Reply With Quote
  #147  
Old 07-13-2010, 07:47 PM
Interesting rumor on the joblo news page:

Jonathan Nolan is rumored to be directing the next Superman project, which would explain Chris Nolan's involvement as producer.

While that would make sense, it's hard to believe Warner Bros. would be okay with a first time director directing this big a project. I'm not sure how excited I'd be if this turned out to be true, since it would be his first directorial gig, even with Chris Nolan helping out.
Reply With Quote
  #148  
Old 07-13-2010, 08:33 PM
I truly hope it's as good as "Superman Returns" no doubt. I'm anxious for another Superman on-screen.
Reply With Quote
  #149  
Old 07-13-2010, 09:55 PM
It would be hard for Jonathan to screw up, with his brother as producer watching his back.

Furthermore, Jonathan is a natural story teller. He and Christopher are two of the absolute most gifted writers working in hollywood today. On a big budget feature like this, everyone around the director is the best of the best, from the DP to the Interns. With that kind of support system, I seriously doubt Jonathan will just fall on his face. He might LEAN on others, especially his brother and assistant director, but his talent will still guide him.
Reply With Quote
  #150  
Old 07-14-2010, 10:08 AM

Giving this to Jonathan Nolan is a terrible idea. The guy is not a director, nor does he have any experience in directing. Anyone would be an idiot to put such a large complicated production in the hands of a complete newbie.

Also, I very much question Jonathan Nolan's ability as a writer. His short story that Memento was based off of was mediocre at best (far from the greatness of the film), and his rewrite of the Terminator Salvation script was terrible. And Christopher Nolan's scripts all have the same quality and style whether or not Jonathan is involved. I just think that this dude is seriously riding his bother's coattails.

Handing such a big & beloved franchise over to a non-director just because of who his brother is would be an insult to filmmakers everywhere.
Reply With Quote
  #151  
Old 07-23-2010, 08:15 PM
I would rather see Jonathan Nolan direct it than David Goyer. He's also a great writer, but everything he has directed has absolutely sucked.
Reply With Quote
  #152  
Old 07-24-2010, 03:37 AM
Krypton

I honestly believe that if they do another story of superman saving the day from a lex luthor plan that the next superman film WILL fail.Im sorry but people are tired of that story.and people also have a hard time connecting with superman being that he is the man of steel who seems like he cant be killed by any1.He is almost unbeatable and has a picture perfect image.

I think if they make the film about krypton that the film will help connect fans to superman in a way never done previously.They will see his family and his people.They will see the beauty of his planet and the great things that where created and accomplished there.Then they will see its downfall.How supermans father tried to stop its destruction but no one would heed his warnings.Then they will see how they decided to send there son to a place where he can learn to be a good man and can be cared for (earth).And how braniac caused the downfall of krypton.

This will be great because they can show all of the wild and crazy creatures on krypton.They can also show the advanced technology.The can show how supermans race was a great advanced planet of people who where killed.And they can finnaly feel how superman might feel....alone...with no one who can understand him because all the people from krypton (mostly) are dead.They can also possibly give a glimpse of the creation of Doomsday to possibly forshadow the epic fight between him and superman in the future.

This is a great idea because it brings the viewers emotionally closer to superman because they see his past and feel more emotionally invested in the character.and they can develop characters like zod,braniac,and etc way better by showing where the history began.It also can help develop superman/Clark Kents character better.He is a gy who feels out of place becasue he is an alien with abilities no human has.He wants to be like any1 else.But at the same time...he wants to know more about where he came from and what he is.Its a inner struggle between being what he wants to be and who he is.And the struggle of feeling no one understand him and feeling alone without any1 to answer all the questions he must have about his past.I believe this is great drama.

I also want to say....Soda's post rule!lol.there long when you look at them but when you read them he really does make good points that are very well made.....Just saying
Reply With Quote
  #153  
Old 07-24-2010, 10:53 AM
I have two predictions.

1. Jonathan Nolan or someone other then David Goyer will direct this.

2. Superman is going to be played by an older actor.
Reply With Quote
  #154  
Old 07-24-2010, 10:04 PM
I hope you are right Jig Saw, any expectations would be shot if Goyer directed. He is a really swell idea's guy, but not so hot behind the camera. I would love to see an older actor take the role. I think studios like to get their superheroes as young as they can because

a. they are less experienced usually, thus cheaper
b. they have a longer life in front of the camera as the character, so sequels don't have to be rushed.

but this is superman.

i want a man.

i forget which schmoe suggested it, i give all credit to that particular schmoe for suggesting a great casting choice in Supes: Jon Hamm. It may be obvious, but i don't care, it's a winner. Maybe they could only get 2 or 3 Superman films with him on a steady schedule before he begins to age beyond the parameters of a believable Superman, but shit man... it's not like every superhero/comic book franchise doesn't just burn out in two or three installments (if they are even that lucky) anyway before they have to refresh the brand.
Reply With Quote
  #155  
Old 07-24-2010, 10:10 PM
Suppose we can prob go ahead and rename this thread Man of Steel.
Reply With Quote
  #156  
Old 07-24-2010, 11:49 PM
How do you go about doing that? I tried changing it in my opening post (Even going Advanced) but it didn't change.

Last edited by drc5145; 07-24-2010 at 11:52 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #157  
Old 07-25-2010, 10:39 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smiert Spionam View Post
Suppose we can prob go ahead and rename this thread Man of Steel.
Is that official now? I haven't been keeping up. But I'm totally psyched that they decided to use my suggestion for the name of this film.

DC I expect a big check is in the mail on the way to me?
Reply With Quote
  #158  
Old 07-25-2010, 11:20 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by drc5145 View Post
How do you go about doing that? I tried changing it in my opening post (Even going Advanced) but it didn't change.
Pretty sure a mod has to do it.
Reply With Quote
  #159  
Old 07-27-2010, 07:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by venom718 View Post
I honestly believe that if they do another story of superman saving the day from a lex luthor plan that the next superman film WILL fail.Im sorry but people are tired of that story.and people also have a hard time connecting with superman being that he is the man of steel who seems like he cant be killed by any1.He is almost unbeatable and has a picture perfect image.

I think if they make the film about krypton that the film will help connect fans to superman in a way never done previously.They will see his family and his people.They will see the beauty of his planet and the great things that where created and accomplished there.Then they will see its downfall.How supermans father tried to stop its destruction but no one would heed his warnings.Then they will see how they decided to send there son to a place where he can learn to be a good man and can be cared for (earth).And how braniac caused the downfall of krypton.

This will be great because they can show all of the wild and crazy creatures on krypton.They can also show the advanced technology.The can show how supermans race was a great advanced planet of people who where killed.And they can finnaly feel how superman might feel....alone...with no one who can understand him because all the people from krypton (mostly) are dead.They can also possibly give a glimpse of the creation of Doomsday to possibly forshadow the epic fight between him and superman in the future.

This is a great idea because it brings the viewers emotionally closer to superman because they see his past and feel more emotionally invested in the character.and they can develop characters like zod,braniac,and etc way better by showing where the history began.It also can help develop superman/Clark Kents character better.He is a gy who feels out of place becasue he is an alien with abilities no human has.He wants to be like any1 else.But at the same time...he wants to know more about where he came from and what he is.Its a inner struggle between being what he wants to be and who he is.And the struggle of feeling no one understand him and feeling alone without any1 to answer all the questions he must have about his past.I believe this is great drama.

I also want to say....Soda's post rule!lol.there long when you look at them but when you read them he really does make good points that are very well made.....Just saying
Thank you so very, very much for the kind words, its really appreciated. I know that what I write is sometimes tough to get through, but I try to bring a perspective to everything I post. Thanks again!

With regards to the film, I think the biggest problems with going Krypton are what some on this thread have already pointed out: its a HUGE creative risk. I freely admit this. However with the success of Batman Begins and Smallville, I think a complete Superman origin story, heavily focused on Krypton, could really work, and knock some proverbial socks off.

Part of the appeal is that the origin story of Superman, told in full, is, in many ways, a variation of the Christmas story. This is quite ironic, as Superman was created by two Jewish boys from the heartland, and the origin was added years after they left the property. Its got all the makings of a good story, it just needs someone to mine it. These are the things which, in particular, fascinate me:

-every time we have a reference to Zod, whether it be in the comics, on TV or in the movies, he always has a military rank (his Kryptonian rank is "dru" which translates to "Admiral" or, as is used more frequently, "General") According to the comics, on Krypton, Zod wasn't just a soldier, he was the leader of the military guild, or the Kryptonian military, and he inspired a fanatical following and loyalty amongst his troops. Such a soldier was loyal to a fault to his homeworld. The one thing we have from Zod, in every incarnation (although it wasn't spelled out as such in the film) is that Zod loved Krypton, and would do anything to defend it. What turned such an honorable soldier to treason? (the crime for which he was punished by being sent to the Phantom Zone) To me, Zod is the benedict Arnold of comics. It is well known that the Battle of Saratoga, during the revolutationary war, was largely won by Arnold's leadership. In that battle, he was struck in the leg by a bullet. If the bullet had hit a few inches higher up the leg, it would have punctured an artery, and Arnold would have died a great hero and matyr to the revolution. He'd probably still be remembered to this day as a great hero. I picture Zod as being kind of the same. He led a cue de atat against his people, was he simply driven by a lust for power? Or did he act to fight the corruption of his government? Its a story worth telling.

-Also worth telling is the story of Brainiac and the battle of Kandor. As is well known from the comics, Brainiac shrunk the city and placed it aboard his ship, intending for it to be all that survived of Krypton. Apparently, he was successful in destroying the planet, but could there have been other causes? In every incarnation of the story, Jor-el fights to save Krypton from destruction, which implies that the source of the planets death were foreseen, and Jor-el thought, preventable. Its an interesting question, in that everyone knows Krypton is destroyed, but nobody knows how. Again, its a creative risk to do a Superman movie without Superman in it, but Batman Begins paved the way by doing over half a Batman movie, for the most part, without Batman in it. The story, done well, could be really interesting.

-Finally, I do think there's a very, very strong possibility here to do a movie that features a lot of characters from the broader DCU. As has been mentioned, Krypton was a very technologically advanced race. Jor-el refers, in the original Superman movie, to the 25 known galaxies (forget the exact number), that's a lot of space travel, and its tough to go that far in the universe without bumping into other races, and other beings with an agenda. It would be cool to see what they had in store, and there are several I'm thinking of. Actually, just one, Darkseid. One of Superman's greatest future enemies. He would definitely have his hand in the fate of a planet with Krypton's technology. How could he not?

I have several story ideas for a movie based on Krypton, which retells the back-story to Superman's origin, but I have polished it into a screenplay, or anything. I actually have never written anything approaching a screenplay, so I don't even know if I could do it. If enough people around here are interested, I would be willing to give it a try, and post the results here on this forum. Let me know if there's any interest (cue Homer Simpson being early for "Lisa's big day" and having enough time to work on his Superman novel. "Make way for Superman, said Superman!")
Reply With Quote
  #160  
Old 08-14-2010, 11:54 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jig Saw 123 View Post
Close-minded?

Nolan is a true artist. He doesn't believe in cashing in on characters by having them crossover in each others separate stories. First, his Batman is not even the "full" Batman yet;he's still a learner. Second, Nolan only plans on making one more Batman film,so I don't think he needs to do anything about bringing his Batman to a JLA movie. Furthermore, Superman needs to get his shit together before a JLA movie is even thought of being made. Did you forget the other characters that need movies first? Wonder Woman, Flash, and Green Lantern needs to be established in an audience's mind.

Like I said in my earlier post, people need to stop looking at what Marvel is doing and be thankful Warner Brothers is trying to make individual superhero films that are just as powerful with one film; as they are as a set depending on the sequel or collaboration of other superheros to get more asses in seats.
Nolan is certainly talented, but yeah still close-minded. IF he doesnt want to cash in, than don't. But he constantly makes shitty excuses for problems that already have solutions. At the end of the day Nolan can do what he WANTS, but he has to stop acting like he CAN'T.

I also didnt say JLA and crossovers should start production tomorrow. The individual movies will have to be invested in before they can get a crossover off the ground. Thats a given.
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