Superman: Man of Steel (2012)

[Ithekro]

I still believe that comic book characters work best in the cartoon format. Simply because you can get away with a who lot more in animation than you can with live action. While computers make it easier to get away with stuff in livev action these days, animation allows you to get around trying to force the audiance to by some actor's face in whatever roll it is or allows yoo to pull off more absurd villans and creatures without having to worry about if it will look fake. The 1990s-mid-2000s DCAU did a good job at making the superheroes seem viable on screen. Also the art style is closer to the source material to begin with.

Though sometimes superheroes on the big screen work. Other times they don't. It is just the nature of film.

[Kafriel]

I'm not expecting anything. I still don't see why it's been fad to revive old themes lately instead of creating something new...

[Xellos-_^]

Originally Posted by Kafriel

I'm not expecting anything. I still don't see why it's been fad to revive old themes lately instead of creating something new...

because it is easier to plagiarizer then to come up with original content.

[delirium]

Originally Posted by Xellos-_^

because it is easier to plagiarizer then to come up with original content.

because it is "cheaper" to "remake/adapt" than come up with original content.

Originally Posted by Kafriel

I'm not expecting anything. I still don't see why it's been fad to revive old themes lately instead of creating something new...

Because as Xellos said, albeit improperly, it is easier to adapt something to the screen than hire a writer to mesh out the details. It's cheaper to make a movie out of a comic book, teen fantasy novel, or an older/popular film. Half the story is already written for them that way. Trust me, I'd like to see some original movies that are worth my time, but I just don't see that happening often.

[qwertyuiopz]

superman again? theres other dc heroes too, why not wonderwoman or flash instead?

[delirium]

Originally Posted by qwertyuiopz

superman again? theres other dc heroes too, why not wonderwoman or flash instead?

There's some bullshit excuse for not making a Flash movie, so let's hope that the Green Lantern film does well and encourages Warner Brothers to give the go ahead for a Flash film. We could possibly see one by 2013 if Green Lantern does well.

[Ithekro]

If I understand thing correctly, this will be Warner Brother's last shot at a Superman anything (DC's as well)...or at least without having to consolt the creators' families first (rights to pass back to the two creators of Superman in 2013 I think...if I read things correctly). OR something weird like that. Could be nothing.

[Xellos-_^]

Originally Posted by Ithekro

If I understand thing correctly, this will be Warner Brother's last shot at a Superman anything (DC's as well)...or at least without having to consolt the creators' families first (rights to pass back to the two creators of Superman in 2013 I think...if I read things correctly). OR something weird like that. Could be nothing.

shouldn't the copyrights for superman and other dc stuff have expire by now? i know disney got the govt to pass a law extending their copyright. Did dc or marvel did something similar?

[james0246]

Originally Posted by qwertyuiopz

superman again? theres other dc heroes too, why not wonderwoman or flash instead?

Wonder Woman is getting a new television series coming later this fall, and Flash...well, Flash has always gotten the short-end of the stick. As delirium mentioned, though, if Green Latern does well enough (just to guess, probably somewhere around 225-250 million in America and at least equal outside of the US), you can expect to see more DC big budget superhero movies being made (personally, I wouldn't mind a Green Arrow film and there are plenty of others that would make interesting films).

As for the Man in Steel...well, I certainly love Superman, but so far this film seems a bit off. For all its fault's, Superman Returns had one really good thing going for it (and no, I am not talking about how cute Brandon Routh is/was), the film attempted to continue the original film series in an interesting and unique fashion (I will not argue that the film succeeded in its endeavor, but the fact that the director/writers still made the film better than a multitude of other superhero features). So, I have some amount of trepidation over Man of Steel being a complete re-launch (do we really need yet another re-launch to one of the most iconic character in American pop culture?). I will say that I find the idea of Superman being played by a "foreigner" to be interesting (and potentially enlightening), and Amy Adams as Lois Lane could be fun (though, she is a little...plain for the character...not to mention a red-head), but Michael Shannon as General Zod seems a little odd (not that Shannon is a bad actor (he has certainly gotten better over time), he just doesn't strike me as a physically imposing figure, something that is needed for Zod). The big problem is, of course, the director: Zack Synder. While I certainly enjoy much of his visual style (when not used to extreme exaggeration), Synder sucks at placing a writer's vision above his own. I can only hope that Nolan will be able to control his sufficiently enough...

[Ithekro]

Some sort of dispute over profits not paid to the families for Superman Returns and Smallville I think. It seems to mostly be a dispute to earn the lawyers money than anything else. I don't know if it ended or not, but this movie I think is being made on court order, or else Warner loses something or other.

[delirium]

Originally Posted by Ithekro

Some sort of dispute over profits not paid to the families for Superman Returns and Smallville I think. It seems to mostly be a dispute to earn the lawyers money than anything else. I don't know if it ended or not, but this movie I think is being made on court order, or else Warner loses something or other.

The dispute concerning the original creators of Superman goes far beyond Smallville & Superman Returns. Joe Shuster & Jerry Siegel were fucked out of a lot of money they should have gotten. Their families deserve every penny they can get from DC Comics/Time Warner.

[Ithekro]

Oh I agree, I just think the lawyers are drawing it out on Warner's side to net their law firms more money.

[Arabesque]

I apologize to everyone

Originally Posted by james0246

Flash Fact: Flash always gets the short-end of the stick.

Sorry, couldn't resist.

Originally Posted by james0246

Wonder Woman is getting a new television series coming later this fall

A miracle in itself

Originally Posted by james0246

I will say that I find the idea of Superman being played by a "foreigner" to be interesting (and potentially enlightening)

The most hilarious part about all of this is how the man they picked is English. One might think that David Prowse is mighty proud of this, after beeing rejected for the lead role in Superman The movie for not being American despite being told he was perfect for the role.

History sure has a wonderful sense of humor

Originally Posted by james0246

Synder sucks at placing a writer's vision above his own. I can only hope that Nolan will be able to control his sufficiently enough...

I foresee another interesting addition to the cinematic history of the last son of Krypton.

I actually think this movie will end up being a much stronger movie than Superman Return, if they manage to get down to the core of the character correctly. I do think that a Relaunch is needed in this case (I mean lets face it, the older Superman movies are better left as they are, since they weren't exactly the hight of cinematic direction (especially the last two) and Return had even ignored them as well, so in a since the superman movies continuity are in a need of a reboot to help deal better with the newer movies) I mean this isn't the comics were they need to reboot the characters history every couple of years due to some strange fascination with retelling his story in particular. The Superman movies are in need of an update to fit with current times.

Originally Posted by delirium

The dispute concerning the original creators of Superman goes far beyond Smallville & Superman Returns. Joe Shuster & Jerry Siegel were fucked out of a lot of money they should have gotten. Their families deserve every penny they can get from DC Comics/Time Warner.

That's ... arguable.

Now don't get me wrong, I do know that DC/Warner had screwed over a lot of creators over it's long history, but Superman in particular is a difficult case. Who's right and who's wrong isn't so clear cut here, though I tend to sympathize more with the families than with Warner.

[delirium]

Originally Posted by Arabesque

Now don't get me wrong, I do know that DC/Warner had screwed over a lot of creators over it's long history, but Superman in particular is a difficult case. Who's right and who's wrong isn't so clear cut here, though I tend to sympathize more with the families than with Warner.

Shuster & Siegal created Superman. They created the character prior to joining DC Comics as a writer & artist. They received no royalties for the character's appearances, merchandise, films, and so on for more than 40 years. The creators of one of the world's greatest fictional heroes lived very poorly for quite awhile. They should have been paid what was owed to them as the creators of DC Comic's most successful and popular character, and their families are finally getting what's due to them. We don't need to discuss it anymore, do we? If you feel the need, let's take it to private messages. This thread is after all, in regards to the upcoming Superman film.

Ithekro: Yeah, that's what they're doing for sure. I hope they don't fuck it up like they did with Superman Returns.

[Samari]

Originally Posted by delirium

He may not be as powerful as he was prior to Crisis on Infinite Earths, but he's still ridiculously strong. His weaknesses are red sun radiation, kryptonite, magic, and massive physical forces. The latter means he can be be temporarily injured through it. And by weakness to magic it is to say that his invulnerability offers no protection agains it, it affects him as it would anyone else. He's still vastly powerful over his Golden Age appearances, but less powerful than his Silver Age. The reason for that is because it grows to be problematic after awhile. It's why Jean Grey can't be apart of the Marvel Universe. They could depower her, or retcon the Phoenix Force, but her interactions with it have become so vital to her story. She'd be as dull as a rock without it. That applies for Superman too. They had to tone them down or else the only way he could appear would be in reality shaking events like their series of "Crisis" events.

But if you think about it, the DC Universe is littered with tons of villains and characters that are on par with Superman or flat out more powerful for him. Even members of the own JLA would give him a tough fight. Add that with his weakness from Kryptonite, and he's really not that powerful of a being we've seen in the last 30 years or so.

Originally Posted by Kafriel

I'm not expecting anything. I still don't see why it's been fad to revive old themes lately instead of creating something new...

They're both "in the works" apparently. I'd be surprised if DC let Marvel continue to release superhero movies and walk all over them.

Originally Posted by qwertyuiopz

superman again? theres other dc heroes too, why not wonderwoman or flash instead?

Because people love comic book characters and will see the movies. That's why Disney bought Marvel. They're milking the cow for all it's worth so to speak. Even Spiderman is being rebooted. Studios will release a movie even if it's shitty, because they know if it was a popular Superhero attached to it it will sell. It's probably the same reason why Warner Bros./DC is still planning to continue the Batman franchise (or reboot it yet again) when Nolan is finished. It's all about money.

Originally Posted by Ithekro

Some sort of dispute over profits not paid to the families for Superman Returns and Smallville I think. It seems to mostly be a dispute to earn the lawyers money than anything else. I don't know if it ended or not, but this movie I think is being made on court order, or else Warner loses something or other.

The studio had to start making a Superman movie by 2011, or else the families that hold the rights to Superman would be entitled to more royalties and/or Warner Bros. would be in a big hole of trouble.

[delirium]

Originally Posted by Samari

But if you think about it, the DC Universe is littered with tons of villains and characters that are on par with Superman or flat out more powerful for him. Even members of the own JLA would give him a tough fight. Add that with his weakness from Kryptonite, and he's really not that powerful of a being we've seen in the last 30 years or so.

The last part of your message is partly true in regards to the main series, although the 90s were a difficult time to tell what anybody's power level was. Also, Batman can give Superman a run for his money, although I have a feeling that may only be true to bolster the appearance of Batman's combat skill.

Originally Posted by Samari

It's probably the same reason why Warner Bros./DC is still planning to continue the Batman franchise (or reboot it yet again) when Nolan is finished. It's all about money.

The approach the director of the Batman reboot takes better be less realistic. :|

[RadiantBeam]

Hm.

On one hand, I can't say I didn't enjoy Superman Returns, though granted, it's been awhile since I saw it. On the other hand, though, I don't really see any point in trying to give the franchise another movie reboot.

[Samari]

Originally Posted by delirium

The approach the director of the Batman reboot takes better be less realistic. :|

What did you just say? I can't understand your grammar.

Originally Posted by RadiantBeam

Hm.

On one hand, I can't say I didn't enjoy Superman Returns, though granted, it's been awhile since I saw it. On the other hand, though, I don't really see any point in trying to give the franchise another movie reboot.

Well Warner Bros. wants to do it, or they're going to be paying bank to the families who own the rights.

[Elo the Blue]

Originally Posted by RadiantBeam

Hm.

On one hand, I can't say I didn't enjoy Superman Returns, though granted, it's been awhile since I saw it. On the other hand, though, I don't really see any point in trying to give the franchise another movie reboot.

I feel the same way. Hopefully, MoS is good.

[Samari]

Hopefully the costume won't be as bad as it was in Superman Returns. I really hated that design. I wonder if he'll have the yellow S on the back of his cape.