Super Sequel a No Go?

[The Batman]

Here's (http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/film/news/e3if727c623f03c782b8ad564866c828796) an article from the Hollywood Reporter that talks about the future of the studios' frachise film, including the sequel to Superman Returns, assuming one ever even gets made.

Here's the important bit.

The future of the studio's recent comic book adaptation, 2006's "Superman Returns," is somewhat more dubious. That film cost $209 million (even after various tax rebates) and marketing costs sent

expenses upward of $300 million, but director Bryan Singer's Man of Steel picture made only $201 million domestically. While insiders say the movie was profitable, the studio mandated major cost cuts before proceeding with a sequel.

"If we do a sequel to 'Superman,' we want it to be less expensive," Horn acknowledges. "I have to see a screenplay before I say yes to anything. But the studio would be willing to spend as much as $175 million if the screenplay and other factors warranted it."

Still, Singer has announced that he plans to direct a second "Superman" project.

Are we being premature in worrying about who and what will be in Singer's next Superman film? Is it going to be another 20 years before we see the Man of Steel on the silver screen again? Are the haters having a field day right now?

[IamtheRock3]

175 mill aint that bad


lot of the cost were the pass superman movie that didnt get off the ground (whic kind of a BS cost to put on singer shoulders) and the big Krypton scene that singer didnt put in the final movie for some reason

now they know better

[Citizen V]

Ive heard for a while that a Superman Returns sequel is in doubt,and i can understand why.The film was just not that good.

[Paul Dee]

To be honest, the general reception of SR was fairly positive.


I'm sure a sequel is inevitable. The studio'll risk it on a franchise as big as Superman. It's not like Superman Returns was a Batman and Robin (which, as I recall did ok at the box office to be honest, just not as well as the previous movie) and they're bound to give it one more shot. I also remember reading that the proposed sequel was automatically going to cost less due to the fact they'd be using a lot of the same sets, which is obviously going to be a factor.

[Ryan K]

Ive heard for a while that a Superman Returns sequel is in doubt,and i can understand why.The film was just not that good.

When has a film being "not that good" by itself ever prevented a studio from making a sequel?

[DaeJi]

I see the sequel happening. Now, the question is are they going to actually have a superpowered fight in it or are they going to do more the same "Superman uses his powers to save stuff."

[spidervenom]

Cant wait for the next movie I just love the concept of superman vs land maybe superman will have to fight a living radioactive landfill with laser eyes now that be a movie. /sarcasm

[Sean Whitmore]

I don't see a problem here. The $209 million budget of SR's factors in all the false starts the movie had, does it not? The various directors and scripts, even all the stuff that was shot and then not used in the movie.

Lowering the budget to $175 mil isn't bad at all when you figure contracts are already signed, a director's already placed, etc. All a producer needs to do now is slap Singer on the wrist and tell him not to waste time on a long, expensive space sequence that never gets used.


SEAN

[Bored at 3:00AM]

I don't see a problem here. The $209 million budget of SR's factors in all the false starts the movie had, does it not? The various directors and scripts, even all the stuff that was shot and then not used in the movie.

Lowering the budget to $175 mil isn't bad at all when you figure contracts are already signed, a director's already placed, etc. All a producer needs to do now is slap Singer on the wrist and tell him not to waste time on a long, expensive space sequence that never gets used.


Mark my words, that 10 million dollar sppce sequence will be incorporated into the sequel. Remember the reasoning that Singer used for not including it on any of the DVDs? "The Krypton sequence felt like it belonged in a different movie" was the quote he gave if I recall correctly.

I can understand Horn being cautious about greenlighting the sequel without a script, given that the clearly unfinished script they had for Superman Returns was the primary source of the first film's problems.

[Sean Whitmore]

Mark my words, that 10 million dollar sppce sequence will be incorporated into the sequel. Remember the reasoning that Singer used for not including it on any of the DVDs? "The Krypton sequence felt like it belonged in a different movie" was the quote he gave if I recall correctly.

Even better. Using it as a flashback scene, it'd be a great way to introduce several possible villains, from Brainiac to Zod.


SEAN

[Binker]

Guys, you do know this is NOT NEWS. Not even new news. This was learned last year. And the sequel is happening. Yesterday, it has been revealed that Kevin Spacey is set to play Lex Luthor again in MOS, Mike Dougerty is now writing the script, and Bryan Singer is "about to" pitch his sequel to WB.

So its coming.

[Bored at 3:00AM]

Guys, you do know this is NOT NEWS. Not even new news. This was learned last year. And the sequel is happening. Yesterday, it has been revealed that Kevin Spacey is set to play Lex Luthor again in MOS, Mike Dougerty is now writing the script, and Bryan Singer is "about to" pitch his sequel to WB.

So its coming.

The very fact that Singer has to pitch the sequel rather than it being greenlighted right away is proof enough that WB isn't exactly certain about the future of the franchise. There will most certainly be another Superman movie, but whether or not Alan Horn will be receptive to what Singer has in mind for the sequel is another matter altogether.

[Samuraixsithlord]

It would be nice for Superman to actually fight a super villian this time around

[Captain Smith]

It will be about changing Superbaby while Lois complains about her career. She and Wonder Woman talk about that time of the month.

Do what they did with the Hulk - Ang Lee adios as a paradigm! Drop the continuity with this film and start from scratch. Also we don't need a skinny yuppie as Supes.

[Rattlehead]

Honestly, the attitude towrads Superman Returns is basically what's wrong with superhero movies. It was a nice story, and was an attempt to show movie-goers not familiar with the comic books the more human side of the Man of Steel. I thought it was a little too long, but it was a good story. And yet all anybody says about the movie is that Superman didn't beat anybody up, and then you wonder why crap like Ghost Rider, and the Punisher is what passes for comic book movies. Those two movies had absolutely no substance what-so-ever, but I guess that's what people want.

[PatrickG]

Kevin Spacey signed for the sequel this week.

[Shellhead]

I love All-Star Superman, and I really enjoyed the WB Superman cartoon from several years ago. But Superman Returns was just awful, easily one of the most tedious superhero movies ever. I refuse to see any sequel unless they get a new team and start over without referencing Superman Returns or any of the old movies. The early Reeves movies were good, but it's just stupid to require audiences to see movies made before half the audience members were alive.

[itsyaboy]

Honestly, the attitude towrads Superman Returns is basically what's wrong with superhero movies. It was a nice story, and was an attempt to show movie-goers not familiar with the comic books the more human side of the Man of Steel. I thought it was a little too long, but it was a good story. And yet all anybody says about the movie is that Superman didn't beat anybody up, and then you wonder why crap like Ghost Rider, and the Punisher is what passes for comic book movies. Those two movies had absolutely no substance what-so-ever, but I guess that's what people want.

I don't mind a good story, but the movie was just boring. It's not too much to ask that a movie that was supposed to be a Summer Blockbuster be action packed. Look at Spider-Man.....action packed and a decent story with the human feel thrown in.

I thought I tricked my girl into seeing what I thought was gonna be a kick ass movie.....turns out I was tricked into seeing 2 hours of melodramatic boredom.

[Black Atom]

Honestly, the attitude towrads Superman Returns is basically what's wrong with superhero movies. It was a nice story, and was an attempt to show movie-goers not familiar with the comic books the more human side of the Man of Steel. I thought it was a little too long, but it was a good story. And yet all anybody says about the movie is that Superman didn't beat anybody up, and then you wonder why crap like Ghost Rider, and the Punisher is what passes for comic book movies. Those two movies had absolutely no substance what-so-ever, but I guess that's what people want.

The Spider-Man franchise is full of humanity and is the most successful superhero franchise going. For that matter, the original Superman movie didn't have anybody getting beaten up and had Superman crying in it, and was still successful and lauded. Maybe the problem is that Superman Returns just blows.

I do think a sequel will be made eventually but I think it's very much like the Hulk situation. While SR wasn't a failure, response from movie-goers was very luke-warm, which is not what you expect from a Superman movie. It didn't leave people wanting more. I don't think it would be a mistake to take the movies in a new direction, like they're doing with Hulk (which is funny, since both movies sucked for the same reasons)

[Eliseu Gouveia]

I think the production increase is ludicrous, not long ago a good director could squeeze masterpieces out of less than a 100 mil.
Now we have King Kong, Spider-Man, Superman costing in the region of the upper 200 to 300 mil.
It´s insane, no system can endure this without breakign apart.
Was there any need for Routh to have a CG cape?

Directors have to learn to cot costs and film smart.
Take lessons from the B series where you have people creating movies with minimal resources.

[riftt]

spacey signing on the the sequel is disheartening news. his Luthor is one of the reasons the movie failed so badly

[Eliseu Gouveia]

I had hopes this next movie would be Luthor-free as well.

I want to see a director come up and throw such an exquisite interpretation of Superman´s rogues, I want to see such a cool take on Brainiac, Toyman, Bizarro, Darkseid or Lady Maxima that filmgoers will actualy forget that Lex Luthor is alledgedly the be-all end-all of Superman villains.

And since I´m on a wishfullfilment ride, I actually want to hear this word as they leave the theatre completely swept away:

"- LexWHO?"

[shyguy]

I thought it was a little too long, but it was a good story.

I thought it was a god-awful story. Not only was it a retread of a twenty five-year-old movie, it did some absolutely insane things to the character of Superman ("See you in five years! Hope you don't mind all the people who die in disasters that I could have averted had I stuck around instead of going off to investigate the rubble of my long-destroyed home planet that I don't remember for absolutely no reason. Oh, and let's all hope no more all-powerful supervillains from said planet show up either. Okbye!").

What's more, it's beyond silly to chastize fans for wanting some action in their big summer blockbuster starring a superhero. The superhero.

I'll probably see the sequel on DVD or watch it on HBO or something once it's available that way, but I'm definitely not spending money on a ticket after being seriously burned by SR. I'd much rather they just pull a Hulk and sweep SR under the rug; the return of Spacey's Luthor isn't a good sign.

[Eliseu Gouveia]

I thought it was a god-awful story. Not only was it a retread of a twenty five-year-old movie, it did some absolutely insane things to the character of Superman ("See you in five years! Hope you don't mind all the people who die in disasters that I could have averted had I stuck around instead of going off to investigate the rubble of my long-destroyed home planet that I don't remember for absolutely no reason. Oh, and let's all hope no more all-powerful supervillains from said planet show up either. Okbye!").

The part alone where Luthor goes free because Supes wasn´t around to testify was enough to get my blood boiling.

[Sean Whitmore]

I think the production increase is ludicrous

De-crease.


SEAN

[The Batman]

I hope a sequel happens.

I think a sequel should happen.

Spacey making an announcement that he'll appear in a sequel is a good sign that there'll be one - then again, Nic Cage and Tim Burton were signed for a Superman too weren't they?

[Titanium]

The Hulk came out not that long ago. Now they are remaking it because it was so bad and not what the fans wanted at all.

Just saying, I wouldn't mind seeing that happen to Superman.


Go back, tell the origin story, show his first year of being the man of steel and the origin of the hate between Superman and Luthor. Then throw in a fight scene with either Lex in a battle suit, or Lex using a red solar lamp to take away superman's powers and the two fighting mano-e-mano.

And just for the hell of it, a giant spider in the third act. I mean seriously, that does sound cool. Lexcorp robotic spider weapon thingy vs Superman? It'd at least be superman doing more than floating around spying on people.

[Fatguy]

Sigh....I liked SR, and am looking forward to a Singer helmed sequel. It had its problems, no doubt there (Super baby, terrible Kate Bosworth), but I dont demand perfection. Its good moments outnumbered the bad for me.

[Eliseu Gouveia]

The Hulk came out not that long ago. Now they are remaking it because it was so bad and not what the fans wanted at all.

Just saying, I wouldn't mind seeing that happen to Superman.


Go back, tell the origin story, show his first year of being the man of steel and the origin of the hate between Superman and Luthor. Then throw in a fight scene with either Lex in a battle suit, or Lex using a red solar lamp to take away superman's powers and the two fighting mano-e-mano.

And just for the hell of it, a giant spider in the third act. I mean seriously, that does sound cool. Lexcorp robotic spider weapon thingy vs Superman? It'd at least be superman doing more than floating around spying on people.


Sign me up for a hard reboot as well.
I know it´s a Oh!- So very manly man thing to do to never apologise or go back and show signs of weakness but if the film has had the reception it did, they should be humble and just admit that everything´s not rosey for the franchise.

And why does it HAS to be Lex Luthor yet again? Or General Zod, for that matter?
As much as I´d like to see Jude Law´s take on Zod, if it HAS to be Singer, I´d like him for once to come up with something of his own instead of plundering yet again from the Donner movues.
What , we´re gonna have to watch Lex again asking for Australia?

Supes has a HUGE rogues gallery.
If Tim Burton managed to make >Penguin< fascinating, can anyone honestly tell me that in this day and age there is not one single creative team that could dazzle us with a reimagined >Toyman<? Bizarro? Parasite? Metallo? Darkseid? Lady Maxima? Brainiac?

Lex fans worldwide forgive me but ....
I. Am. SO. Sick. Of. Lex.

[CBikle]

Maybe they can bring back Gus Gorman from Superman III ?

Dave Chapelle would be a fantastic Gus Gorman...

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B000059XUJ.01._SCLZZZZZZZ_.jpg

[Eliseu Gouveia]

The ski scenne was amusing but I don´t think ´d want to revisit it just yet.



Superman has a LOT of Giant Robot pounding to do before we start rehashing old stories.

[The Batman]

Superman also fought a giant robot in that movie. It shot lasers and missles at him and everything. He beat it with exploding acid. He also fought himself in that movie too. In a junkyard. He also fought an evil business tycoon. Sure it wasn't Lexcorp but it was close.

With all the fighting, and all the robots, and all the evil tycoons in Superman III it must've been the best Superman movie ever.

[Eliseu Gouveia]

Well, the SFX were kinda lame even for 80s standards (I remember this scene where Supes is fighting a computer and I almost rolled my eyes out of their sockets) and from what little I recall, the acting and story were dreadful.


The evil Supes fight was cool, though.

[Flash's Lightning]

I have only seen Superman, Superman II, and Superman Returns.

Was III and IV any good?

[cactusmaac]

I don't see a problem here. The $209 million budget of SR's factors in all the false starts the movie had, does it not? The various directors and scripts, even all the stuff that was shot and then not used in the movie.

Lowering the budget to $175 mil isn't bad at all when you figure contracts are already signed, a director's already placed, etc. All a producer needs to do now is slap Singer on the wrist and tell him not to waste time on a long, expensive space sequence that never gets used.


SEAN

The $208m figure didn't include the $32m spent before Singer was signed.

It also depends how much of that $175m is devoted to salaries for Singer, his writing team and Spacey. Studios are cracking down on expensive movies all over the place and I wouldn't be surprised if they go for a cheaper director for the sequel, one who'll deliver the action picture they want.

[Sean Whitmore]

I have only seen Superman, Superman II, and Superman Returns.

Was III and IV any good?

No.

Or, to be more specific: noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo.


SEAN

[Eliseu Gouveia]

Well, in all fairness, Superman 3 has Annette O&#180;toole as Lana Lang in it.
And Richard Prior doing ski in a skyscraper.
And evil Superman getting drunk.

Those are classics. :p

IIRC, IV has Mariel Hemingway talking and breathing in outer space... which of course made me want to vanish from the face of the earth the moment the people I dragged to the movie started turning their necks toward me.

[CBikle]

Well, in all fairness, Superman 3 has Annette O&#180;toole as Lana Lang in it.
And Richard Prior doing ski in a skyscraper.
And evil Superman getting drunk.

Those are classics. :p

IIRC, IV has Mariel Hemingway talking and breathing in outer space... which of course made me want to vanish from the face of the earth the moment the people I dragged to the movie started turning their necks toward me.

And it was the first appearance of...NUCLEAR MAN !

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/77/NuclearMan2.jpg
http://img153.imageshack.us/img153/358/superman42xo.png

[DaeJi]

HOW DARE YOU MENTION HE WHO SHALL NOT BE NAMED!!!!:evilangry :evilangry

[Eliseu Gouveia]

And I&#180;ve just got out of therapy....

Now I&#180;m gonna have to bury those memories All! Over! Again! :mad: :rolleyes: :p :D

[Black Atom]

Nuclear Man was so much stupider than Super-bastard.

Oh, wait, no he wasn't.

[PatrickG]

The part alone where Luthor goes free because Supes wasn´t around to testify was enough to get my blood boiling.

Why?

Lex did spend five years in jail. He just didn't get more than that and he had Gertrude on the outside pulling strings for him when he went for parole.

At the end of Superman Returns, there's probably not enough evidence to even put him on trial once he gets off the island. Seriously. He gets off the island. He lives in his mansion. He calls his lawyer.

Superman's word shouldn't be able to secure a conviction without evidence but his absence from a case like Luthor's should guarantee a parole, especially with poor old Gertrude vouching for Lex.

[CBikle]

Why?

Lex did spend five years in jail. He just didn't get more than that and he had Gertrude on the outside pulling strings for him when he went for parole.

At the end of Superman Returns, there's probably not enough evidence to even put him on trial once he gets off the island. Seriously. He gets off the island. He lives in his mansion. He calls his lawyer.

Superman's word shouldn't be able to secure a conviction without evidence but his absence from a case like Luthor's should guarantee a parole, especially with poor old Gertrude vouching for Lex.

He did kidnap Lois Lane and pretty much confess his plan to her. That should do it.

Also, in the 1st movie, didn't he kill that FBI agent (John Byner) ?; that should've been enough right there to get him put away.

[CBikle]

Also, don't forget that Lex Luthor created NUCLEAR MAN !

http://www.thephatphree.com/_photos/Nuclearman.jpg
That should also get him some jail time

[Eliseu Gouveia]

Even if you discard III and IV, Luthor was already considered the greatest criminal of our time in the first movie, meaning that he already had authorities chasing him before he decided to detonate two nuclear weapons in american soil.

Allying himself to Zod didn&#180;t help (unless you wanna selectively retcon Superman II).

[Citizen V]

Im hoping that a sequel is not done.I think a reboot would have to be done..

[CBikle]

Even if you discard III and IV, Luthor was already considered the greatest criminal of our time in the first movie, meaning that he already had authorities chasing him before he decided to detonate two nuclear weapons in american soil.

Allying himself to Zod didn´t help (unless you wanna selectively retcon Superman II).

Luthor wasn't the villain in III, that was Ross Webster (played by Robert Vaughn) and his sister who

S
P
O
I
L
E
R
*
*
*


...turns into a robot.

[Eliseu Gouveia]

You know, I had completely forgotten about that.

It´s almost as if that whole portion of my memories was systematicaly erased.

[666MasterOfPuppets]

Here's (http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/film/news/e3if727c623f03c782b8ad564866c828796) an article from the Hollywood Reporter that talks about the future of the studios' frachise film, including the sequel to Superman Returns, assuming one ever even gets made.

Here's the important bit.

The future of the studio's recent comic book adaptation, 2006's "Superman Returns," is somewhat more dubious. That film cost $209 million (even after various tax rebates) and marketing costs sent

expenses upward of $300 million, but director Bryan Singer's Man of Steel picture made only $201 million domestically. While insiders say the movie was profitable, the studio mandated major cost cuts before proceeding with a sequel.

"If we do a sequel to 'Superman,' we want it to be less expensive," Horn acknowledges. "I have to see a screenplay before I say yes to anything. But the studio would be willing to spend as much as $175 million if the screenplay and other factors warranted it."

Still, Singer has announced that he plans to direct a second "Superman" project.

Are we being premature in worrying about who and what will be in Singer's next Superman film? Is it going to be another 20 years before we see the Man of Steel on the silver screen again? Are the haters having a field day right now?

Yo can bet haters are having a goddamn party right now. It's annoying and sad that Superman Returns has gotten mostly bad critics and crap from people who simply don't understand what that movie was all about.

Anyway, Michael Dougherty is writing the script right now (don't know what happened to Dan Harris), and soon it will be presented to the WB execs, in order to get the final greenlight. Superman: The Man Of Steel will start filming next year, my friend.

SUPERMAN FOREVER!!!!!

[666MasterOfPuppets]

Nuclear Man was so much stupider than Super-bastard.

Oh, wait, no he wasn't.

Oh yes, he was.

Luthor: Let's put inside this box, next to Superman's hair sample, some fabric remnants! Let's attach it to a rocket, and when it gets to the sun, the radiation will turn everything inside the box into a fully developed, fully DRESSED Superman male clone, with the added bonus that it will be totally programmed to destroy Superman, and he'll have LONG NAILS!!!!

:rolleyes:

[Captain Smith]

Yo can bet haters are having a goddamn party right now. It's annoying and sad that Superman Returns has gotten mostly bad critics and crap from people who simply don't understand what that movie was all about.



What's not to understand? People didn't like it as much as they should have for an effort of this expense because:

1. It was slow
2. Except for the plane, the action was trivial
3. Supes was portrayed as a wimpy, love struck, stalker
4. A new continuity that made no sense and promised more of the same in a sequel by the same guys
5. A ridiculous comic Luthor with a stupid, stupid real estate plot

That's is, dude. If you cut out the plane sequence and tossing the island, you could have made the movie with Supes with NO special effects and just have him standing around talking. He could have just jumped into a window from a platform like George Reeves on the TV show.

[itsyaboy]

Yo can bet haters are having a goddamn party right now. It's annoying and sad that Superman Returns has gotten mostly bad critics and crap from people who simply don't understand what that movie was all about.



What's not to understand? People didn't like it as much as they should have for an effort of this expense because:

1. It was slow
2. Except for the plane, the action was trivial
3. Supes was portrayed as a wimpy, love struck, stalker
4. A new continuity that made no sense and promised more of the same in a sequel by the same guys
5. A ridiculous comic Luthor with a stupid, stupid real estate plot

That's is, dude. If you cut out the plane sequence and tossing the island, you could have made the movie with Supes with NO special effects and just have him standing around talking. He could have just jumped into a window from a platform like George Reeves on the TV show.

/signed

It's a damn shame. I was watching Batman Begins last nite and all I could think about was how much better it is than Superman Returns.

[The Batman]

Oh yes, he was.

Luthor: Let's put inside this box, next to Superman's hair sample, some fabric remnants! Let's attach it to a rocket, and when it gets to the sun, the radiation will turn everything inside the box into a fully developed, fully DRESSED Superman male clone, with the added bonus that it will be totally programmed to destroy Superman, and he'll have LONG NAILS!!!!

:rolleyes:

In terms of comic book science there's things that are alot stupider than Luthor developing a solar powered cloning machine that'll make him his own Superman from Superman's stolen genetic material. I think the problem with Nuclear Man was that he wasn't Bizarro. I mean, Nuclear Man's origin is about as good a movie origin for Bizarro as any.

[Black Atom]

Oh yes, he was.

Luthor: Let's put inside this box, next to Superman's hair sample, some fabric remnants! Let's attach it to a rocket, and when it gets to the sun, the radiation will turn everything inside the box into a fully developed, fully DRESSED Superman male clone, with the added bonus that it will be totally programmed to destroy Superman, and he'll have LONG NAILS!!!!

:rolleyes:

In the context of standard comicbook science? That's really not that dumb. I mean, that's the sort of stupidity I can laugh at.

Still, I hope they do make a Superman sequel eventually. But I don't think it'd be bad idea to divorce themselves from the Donner continuity. Start with a clean slate.

[IamtheRock3]

what odd is the criticizim grown with time

remeber when it first came out you had a lot of people who like it


now it seem the majaroty says WORST MOVIE EVER!!!

[IamtheRock3]

In the context of standard comicbook science? That's really not that dumb. I mean, that's the sort of stupidity I can laugh at.

Still, I hope they do make a Superman sequel eventually. But I don't think it'd be bad idea to divorce themselves from the Donner continuity. Start with a clean slate.

naaa if they using the same actors they kind of have to

just add more action and more villans, thing will be cool

[witchboy]

I think a new movie using the same cast should follow the same continuity , it would just confuse the general public otherwise . IMO Superman Returns was a fun movie . It could have been better ( my #1 complaint is with the lackluster Lois they cast , although Superbaby and Superstalker/Superhomewrecker were also poor choices ) but it was still a fun afternoon at themovies with my family . The sequel can still be awesome with a good script , although they do have some unfortunate lingering plot lines to work out . A great challenging villain and big action to give the whole thing a shot in the arm will go a long way to getting on the right track . Let Lois's relationship end between movie without any intereference from Supes , so the Supes/Lois relationship can move forward without him being a homewrecker .
A new series down the road years later with a new cast will surely have a new continuity .

[666MasterOfPuppets]

What's not to understand? People didn't like it as much as they should have for an effort of this expense because:

1. It was slow

Well, it's obvious you weren't gonna get "Speed".


2. Except for the plane, the action was trivial

Disagree. What about the bank robbery, Superman saving Metropolis, and lifting the Kryptonite island?


3. Supes was portrayed as a wimpy, love struck, stalker

Stalker? Are you kidding me? Do you really know what a stalker is?


4. A new continuity that made no sense and promised more of the same in a sequel by the same guys

The continuity issues, are something I agree with.


5. A ridiculous comic Luthor with a stupid, stupid real estate plot

Not more ridiculous than Gene Hackman's Luthor.

[666MasterOfPuppets]

In terms of comic book science there's things that are alot stupider than Luthor developing a solar powered cloning machine that'll make him his own Superman from Superman's stolen genetic material. I think the problem with Nuclear Man was that he wasn't Bizarro. I mean, Nuclear Man's origin is about as good a movie origin for Bizarro as any.

I know there are stupider things than Nuclear Man. But saying Nuclear Man's less stupid than Super-kid, well...


In the context of standard comicbook science? That's really not that dumb. I mean, that's the sort of stupidity I can laugh at.

Yeah, well, see above. Anyway, I think I know why you said what you said. There are serious continuity issues in there.


Still, I hope they do make a Superman sequel eventually. But I don't think it'd be bad idea to divorce themselves from the Donner continuity. Start with a clean slate.

That wouldn't be a bad idea. But I guess it won't happen. Plus, I'm a fan of the Donner movies myself, and seeing all that thrown away would be, to me, a waste.

[ACK!]

I didn't think Superman Returns was bad, but it did have some flaws. I never understood why Bryan Singer chose to tie his movies into the Christopher Reeve ones. After all these years, I figured a new director would want to start his own canon. I don't necessarily need a re-staging of Superman's origin, but I felt they could have just had Superman in a new story without having to recount or tie in to past movies.

Brandon Routh wasn't bad. He was better as Clark Kent than as Superman. He almost seemed to be channeling Christopher Reeve when he played the bumbling Clark. He was a little stiff as the man of steel.

I thought Kevin Spacey was good as a more edgy, less-comedic Luthor. Of course, he still surrounds himself with idiots, though none on the level of Otis.

The absolute weak link in the movie is Kate Bosworth. If the movie is supposed to have taken place five years after Superman II, then she's not old enough to be playing Lois Lane. She also didn't have the feistiness of any of the previous Loises. When Clark returns to the Planet, she's like "Hey Clark, how ya doin?" The old Lois would have eyed him cynically and said "Where've you been, Clark Kent?"

Personally, I don't need Superman to have an illegitimate son. Maybe they can send him off to Professor X's school in the next movie so they don't have to deal with him. And why not bring in a new villain to give the series a little more variety. I would rather see Singer carve out more of his own territory and get away from the Donner/Lester era.

Superman I & II are two of the greatest superhero movies ever, but Singer's series needs to stand on its own.

[Eliseu Gouveia]

I think it&#180;s unfair to label Superman fans "haters" just because we didn&#180;t like Singer&#180;s movie. Ths is not a religion, people are allowed to voice their disaproval.
I&#180;m not as big a fan of Big Blue as I was during Byrne&#180;s MOS but I still feel that rush when I hear the movie theme.

There are so many things wrong with this movie I usually don&#180;t even know where to begin.

For instances, Lex Luthor marrying an old lady just to inherit her $$$.

Coming from someone who&#180;s read comic Luthor and watched animated Luthor, that scheme is so unbelievably beneath him it shouldn&#180;t even register on radar.

If comic or animated Luthor wanted some old lady&#180;s $$$, he would have had Henchman#345 marry/kill her, not him himself.

[4thHorseman]

If comic or animated Luthor wanted some old lady´s $$$, he would have had Henchman#345 marry/kill her, not him himself.


Eh, I dunno about that. There's even more problems in that in and of itself. After coming out of jail, the last thing you want to do is more legal problems such as murder or theft. He did it the best way he could, and in the most legal way. Have an old woman get you, (he could have poisoned her or something here to speed up her death), and then of course get her inheritance.

[90'sCartoonMan]

Allying himself to Zod didn´t help (unless you wanna selectively retcon Superman II).

Superman Returns seems to be following pick and choose continuity from the first two movies anyway. Some events happened but others didn't.


I never understood why Bryan Singer chose to tie his movies into the Christopher Reeve ones. After all these years, I figured a new director would want to start his own canon. I don't necessarily need a re-staging of Superman's origin, but I felt they could have just had Superman in a new story without having to recount or tie in to past movies.

Hmm, good point. I think that since past attempts at creating a new Superman movie pretty much failed before they could get started, they decided to play it safe and look at what was successful before and then just...continue with it.

[666MasterOfPuppets]

I think it´s unfair to label Superman fans "haters" just because we didn´t like Singer´s movie. Ths is not a religion, people are allowed to voice their disaproval.
I´m not as big a fan of Big Blue as I was during Byrne´s MOS but I still feel that rush when I hear the movie theme.

There are so many things wrong with this movie I usually don´t even know where to begin.

For instances, Lex Luthor marrying an old lady just to inherit her $$$.

Coming from someone who´s read comic Luthor and watched animated Luthor, that scheme is so unbelievably beneath him it shouldn´t even register on radar.

If comic or animated Luthor wanted some old lady´s $$$, he would have had Henchman#345 marry/kill her, not him himself.

One thing is a Superman fan. Another is a Superman hater. When we talked about Superman haters, we were talking about people who simply hate Superman.

On top of that, there were people who dissed this movie the second after the teaser came out. Which is sad.

And Luthor, above everything else, is a cold man. It's perfectly fitting for his character what he did.

[ACK!]

When it was rumored that a new Superman movie based on "The Death Of Superman" titled Superman Reborn or Superman Lives was in the works, I thought it would be interesting to show Superman battling Doomsday to the death, have a credits sequence and then reveal that it's one year later after Superman's death and how Metropolis is still in mourning. The pre-credit sequence footage is shown to be archival news footage in a documentary.

The rest of the movie would deal with the re-emergence of Superman. I don't know if I'd follow the storyline with the four Supermen, as that might be too many characters to cram into a two-hour movie. Maybe pick one of them and make him mysterious...is he really Superman or an impostor taking advantage of an opportunity??

[Citizen V]

Yo can bet haters are having a goddamn party right now. It's annoying and sad that Superman Returns has gotten mostly bad critics and crap from people who simply don't understand what that movie was all about.

Anyway, Michael Dougherty is writing the script right now (don't know what happened to Dan Harris), and soon it will be presented to the WB execs, in order to get the final greenlight. Superman: The Man Of Steel will start filming next year, my friend.

SUPERMAN FOREVER!!!!!

But if that is the case,does this mean that this new Superman film will be made more..cheaply?The budget is lower,and there are some changes.Is WB preparing for another potential failure,just incase?Doing the best,but this time preparing for the worst?

[Eliseu Gouveia]

I really don&#180;t care much for the budget issues.

A smart director will know how to milk every cent and even with inflation, there have been great movies made with far less than 100mil budgets.
I&#180;m sure you can find a few directors who could film 3 exciting, enthraling Superman movies with those 200+ mil SR cost.

[Cayman]

I really don´t care much for the budget issues.

A smart director will know how to milk every cent and even with inflation, there have been great movies made with far less than 100mil budgets.
I´m sure you can find a few directors who could film 3 exciting, enthraling Superman movies with those 200+ mil SR cost.

Singer didn't seem to spend very smartly. I'm sure that ridiculous train set cost millions.

[Eliseu Gouveia]

Film smartly is definitely the way to go.

The 2003 Peter Pan had plenty of cool flight scennes for its time, plus truckloads of sets, wardrobe and SFX and yet it cost 100 mil.

[666MasterOfPuppets]

But if that is the case,does this mean that this new Superman film will be made more..cheaply?The budget is lower,and there are some changes.Is WB preparing for another potential failure,just incase?Doing the best,but this time preparing for the worst?

Sadly, yes. Alan Horn himself said he wanted the next movie to be cheaper than SR. You wanna read something sad, just for a change? It's sad that WB doesn't trust its most important franchise. It's SUPERMAN, for Rao's sake.

BTW, on a sidenote, I just saw Spider-Man 3. Is there ANYONE here who SERIOUSLY thinks this movie is better than Superman Returns?

[Eliseu Gouveia]

Yes.

I enjoyed maybe 80-90% of Spider-Man 3.
That´s better than the 5-10% I got from SR.

[Cayman]

BTW, on a sidenote, I just saw Spider-Man 3. Is there ANYONE here who SERIOUSLY thinks this movie is better than Superman Returns?

Considerably better.

[Sean Whitmore]

Better on a level that beggars description.


SEAN

[MaxofSteel]

Yes.

I enjoyed maybe 80-90% of Spider-Man 3.
That´s better than the 5-10% I got from SR.


Considerably better.


Better on a level that beggars description.


SEAN

Ouch. :p __

[cactusmaac]

Spidey 3 sucked balls compared to the previous ones, but it had enough moments to beat out SR. Only thing SR had going for it was the plane scene.

[Zero Hunter]

And it was the first appearance of...NUCLEAR MAN !

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/77/NuclearMan2.jpg
http://img153.imageshack.us/img153/358/superman42xo.png




I never knew Superman fought the Sentry. :)

Now I see where Marvel got the idea.

[jadrax]

I never knew Superman fought the Sentry. :)

Now I see where Marvel got the idea.

You know, you have a point there!

[666MasterOfPuppets]

Heh, the comments regarding Spidey 3 are... interesting. Given that this movie was a complete soap opera and that you have complained about this aspect of SR, I expected a different answer.

Oh well...

[Sean Whitmore]

Heh, the comments regarding Spidey 3 are... interesting. Given that this movie was a complete soap opera and that you have complained about this aspect of SR, I expected a different answer.

A complete soap opera with 1, 2, 3, 4...FIVE battles against 1, 2...THREE different super-powered opponents.

Spidey 3 can be knocked for a helluva lot of things, but comparing it action-wise to Superman ain't one of them.


SEAN

[666MasterOfPuppets]

Hmmmm... I see your point. There were more fisticuffs in SM3 than in SR, granted.

[4thHorseman]

A complete soap opera with 1, 2, 3, 4...FIVE battles against 1, 2...THREE different super-powered opponents.

Spidey 3 can be knocked for a helluva lot of things, but comparing it action-wise to Superman ain't one of them.


SEAN

Too bad there's more to movies than action. Superman may not have had as many action scenes, but the movie not only looked better, it was less laughable. Disco Peter was a complete joke, along with every villain (except Sandman) in the entire Spiderman movie franchise. And if I wanted to see boring rehashed action scenes, then I would enjoy Spiderman more than I did

[Scarlet Speedster]

I absolutely loved Superman Returns and it's one of the reasons that got me back into comics after a decade. Spider-Man 3 had plenty of action, but it had no heart or soul--it was a made-by-committee kind of film with all sorts of half-baked ideas. I liked how Superman felt isolated and awkward after having been gone from Earth for five years and how Singer connected it to the first two Superman films.

I have no doubt the sequel will be made and Singer has promised to go "Wrath of Khan" in terms of action, so maybe that will placate some of the naysayers.

[Pink Bat Max]

I see the sequel happening. Now, the question is are they going to actually have a superpowered fight in it or are they going to do more the same "Superman uses his powers to save stuff."

Yeah, I've been watching JLU recently.... that's still the most faithful adaptation of comic material I've ever seen. Yes, it's easier to go 'big concept' in cartoon animation, so I understand why they can have such massive, epic fights as they had in the series finale. But c'mon, when are we gonna see a live action cinematic Superman..... you know.... PUNCH something?

HMM. Maybe what they need to do is a Superman /animated/ movie, and really cut loose.

[Pink Bat Max]

I see the sequel happening. Now, the question is are they going to actually have a superpowered fight in it or are they going to do more the same "Superman uses his powers to save stuff."

Yeah, I've been watching JLU recently.... that's still the most faithful adaptation of comic material I've ever seen. Yes, it's easier to go 'big concept' in cartoon animation, so I understand why they can have such massive, epic fights as they had in the series finale. But c'mon, when are we gonna see a live action cinematic Superman..... you know.... PUNCH something?

HMM. Maybe what they need to do is a Superman /animated/ movie, and really cut loose. And forget /Doomsday/ like in the direct to DVD stuff.... Pit him against Darkseid and his minions.

[Sean Whitmore]

Too bad there's more to movies than action.

Too bad you didn't bother to read the post you were quoting.


Given that this movie was a complete soap opera and that you have complained about this aspect of SR, I expected a different answer.


Spidey 3 can be knocked for a helluva lot of things, but comparing it action-wise to Superman ain't one of them.

And in case you're wondering, the "helluva lot of things" don't belong here.


SEAN

[Brian "Vash" Ashby]

superman returns was the best superman movie


except maybe the one with Richard Pryor post exploding crack pipe. Or pre, i cant remember. I seem to recall that one was kind of fun to watch.

[CBikle]

superman returns was the best superman movie


except maybe the one with Richard Pryor post exploding crack pipe. Or pre, i cant remember. I seem to recall that one was kind of fun to watch.

It was post- crack pipe.

http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/thumb/5/53/180px-GusGorman.jpg

[Brian "Vash" Ashby]

thats the best joke


say you are going to do an impersonation of richard pryor, and then you just light a match and move it around screaming.

[666MasterOfPuppets]

Too bad there's more to movies than action. Superman may not have had as many action scenes, but the movie not only looked better, it was less laughable. Disco Peter was a complete joke, along with every villain (except Sandman) in the entire Spiderman movie franchise. And if I wanted to see boring rehashed action scenes, then I would enjoy Spiderman more than I did


I absolutely loved Superman Returns and it's one of the reasons that got me back into comics after a decade. Spider-Man 3 had plenty of action, but it had no heart or soul--it was a made-by-committee kind of film with all sorts of half-baked ideas. I liked how Superman felt isolated and awkward after having been gone from Earth for five years and how Singer connected it to the first two Superman films.

I have no doubt the sequel will be made and Singer has promised to go "Wrath of Khan" in terms of action, so maybe that will placate some of the naysayers.

Thank you guys. I mean, there were more action scenes in Spidey 3, but damn... SR's scenes looked so much better. I said nothing more about it in my previous post becuase words failed me (yeah, it happens from time to time).

[The Confessor]

what odd is the criticizim grown with time

remeber when it first came out you had a lot of people who like it


now it seem the majaroty says WORST MOVIE EVER!!!


Yeah, I've noticed that too. I never saw SR at the cinema, only when it came out on DVD. I enjoyed it then and I still do.

But the exact same thing happened with Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace, if you remember. For the first couple of months after release, everyone was saying "Yeeeaaaaaa...great movie!". Now all you ever hear people say is "crappy movie and I hated Jar Jar Binks!".

I have no problem with Jar Jar Binks and Episode II was much worse that TPM. :p

[itsyaboy]

Too bad there's more to movies than action. Superman may not have had as many action scenes, but the movie not only looked better, it was less laughable. Disco Peter was a complete joke, along with every villain (except Sandman) in the entire Spiderman movie franchise. And if I wanted to see boring rehashed action scenes, then I would enjoy Spiderman more than I did

Spider-Man 3, for what it was and supposed to be, was pretty good. I wasn't going in to the movie expecting it to be Oscar-caliber. Just for it to be fun and exciting. Which it was and which Superman wasn't for a good number of people. I thought Disco Peter was funny (he was actually a pretty good dancer).

There's no excuse for making a summer blockbuster movie be dull and uninteresting. People were expecting SR to be fun and exciting. Other than the plane scene it was pretty ho hum.

And you want to talk about rehash. SR rehashed a plot that was used in Superman I, rehashed the same character personalities (campy Luthor, stubborn Lois who always lands herself in trouble and needs rescuing, and a guy who tried his best to channel Reeves interepretation of the character(s)).

[Eliseu Gouveia]

Speaking of rehash, how many lines were lifted directly from the Donner movie?

The "hope you don´t give up on flying, statistically, it´s still best way to travel" comes to mind but IIRC, there were many-many others.

[Brian "Vash" Ashby]

Yeah, I've noticed that too. I never saw SR at the cinema, only when it came out on DVD. I enjoyed it then and I still do.

But the exact same thing happened with Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace, if you remember. For the first couple of months after release, everyone was saying "Yeeeaaaaaa...great movie!". Now all you ever hear people say is "crappy movie and I hated Jar Jar Binks!".

I have no problem with Jar Jar Binks and Episode II was much worse that TPM. :p

episode 2 was the worst of them all


TPM was the best of the new three. Liam brought his pimp tough on. ANd they used a sock for yoda, like god intended.

I never really see why people wouldnt like Superman returns. Solid work.

[Buried Alien]

Yeah, I've noticed that too. I never saw SR at the cinema, only when it came out on DVD. I enjoyed it then and I still do.

But the exact same thing happened with Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace, if you remember. For the first couple of months after release, everyone was saying "Yeeeaaaaaa...great movie!". Now all you ever hear people say is "crappy movie and I hated Jar Jar Binks!".

I have no problem with Jar Jar Binks and Episode II was much worse that TPM. :p

I'm getting off topic here, but FINALLY, someone who DOES NOT have a selective memory when it comes down to what really happened when THE PHANTOM MENACE was released in 1999! I remember too that during the first few weeks after EPISODE I was released, *everybody* was all gung-ho enthusiastic about STAR WARS being back in the cinemas with a new film after sixteen long years. The backlash didn't begin until months later, during that summer.

To hear most people talk about it now, however, you'd think that most people walked out of the theater immediately talking about what a lousy movie it supposedly was and how Lucas "raped their childhoods" (God, I hate that phrase). That came later, but for at least a few weeks, people were GAGA over the new STAR WARS.

Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

[Buried Alien]

And to keep things on-topic, I too liked SUPERMAN RETURNS and think it's an underrated movie, although I do agree it needed a few more "Wow! Lookitthat!" moments. The mood of the film was kind of glum, which is somewhat unexpected for a SUPERMAN movie.

Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

[xarathos]

Stop Singer before he kills again!

[Jared H.]

I really hope they revamp Luthor's character. Dump the Gene Hackman baggage and make him more like ASS's Lex. Maybe give him a brain tumor or something from being around all that radioactive kryptonite.

And bring in a villain on Supes' level, like Bizarro.

[Black Atom]

Heh, the comments regarding Spidey 3 are... interesting. Given that this movie was a complete soap opera and that you have complained about this aspect of SR, I expected a different answer.

Oh well...

-Sure, there's a love story at the heart of the Spider-Man movies, but it's one that can work and people can invest themselves in, UNLIKE
the romance in Superman Returns.
-Peter Parker is likeable and relatable. Many people feel that SR Superman is selfish and creepy. It doesn't help that they so utterly dismissed Clark Kent as a character as well.
-Humor. Spider-Man 3 is funny. The only humor in SR was stuff ripped lifted directly out of the Donner films.
-SM3 is fun and takes place in a fun world. SR is so preoccupied with taking itself seriously, that the few scenes that are supposed to be fun (like young Clark discovering his powers) seem drab and sterile. John Williams' fun and uplifting theme is a huge mismatch for the world that Singer has created, which seems more appropriate for a movie about the balls-to-the-walls world of Wall Street stock brokers.

SM3 has a lot going for it that SR simply doesn't.

[the Hornet]

episode 2 was the worst of them all


TPM was the best of the new three. Liam brought his pimp tough on. ANd they used a sock for yoda, like god intended.

I never really see why people wouldnt like Superman returns. Solid work.

No way. Ep 3 was the best, but TPM holds a special place in myheart because of the excitement and anticipation I had watching it at the time. At the best light saber duel ever.

Ep 2 although it went into some history, was boring.

[the Hornet]

-Sure, there's a love story at the heart of the Spider-Man movies, but it's one that can work and people can invest themselves in, UNLIKE
the romance in Superman Returns.
-Peter Parker is likeable and relatable. Many people feel that SR Superman is selfish and creepy. It doesn't help that they so utterly dismissed Clark Kent as a character as well.
-Humor. Spider-Man 3 is funny. The only humor in SR was stuff ripped lifted directly out of the Donner films.
-SM3 is fun and takes place in a fun world. SR is so preoccupied with taking itself seriously, that the few scenes that are supposed to be fun (like young Clark discovering his powers) seem drab and sterile. John Williams' fun and uplifting theme is a huge mismatch for the world that Singer has created, which seems more appropriate for a movie about the balls-to-the-walls world of Wall Street stock brokers.

SM3 has a lot going for it that SR simply doesn't.

Wow....I am easily pleased I think. Becaused I liked them all.

SR was great to me. I liked the fact that a lot of things seemed to be taken from Donner's work. I feel that was done on purpose. It was a tribute to both Donner and Chris. To me, this was a movie to reintroduce Superman to the new kids in the saem way Donner's first movie introduced him to us (or those who ddi not read the comics back then). The second movie onwards should progress well, in the way Spidey 2 did. The only thing I did not like was Clark's behaviour. I liked how well Routh seemed to imitate Reeve's Superman and CK but seriously I have always been in the "Clark is the real guy and Superman is the disguise" camp so I did not like how it was reverted in the movie.

Spidey 3 - not even close to be as great as Spidey 2 but it was still good fun. Tobey rocked and Sandman was cool. Not bad really.

[Brian "Vash" Ashby]

No way. Ep 3 was the best, but TPM holds a special place in myheart because of the excitement and anticipation I had watching it at the time. At the best light saber duel ever.

Ep 2 although it went into some history, was boring.

Ep 3 was garbage because it, like ep 2, required Natalie Portman and Hadyen whatever, to have some sort of chemistry and they did not.



Which does lead back to SR because although i feel its the best superman movie, dont really sense any chemistry between supes and lois. No wonder i like her better with Cyclops

[666MasterOfPuppets]

-Sure, there's a love story at the heart of the Spider-Man movies, but it's one that can work and people can invest themselves in, UNLIKE the romance in Superman Returns.

Don't see how. It was a goddamn soap opera, including the third guest, Gwen Stacy. I fail to see how the Peter/Mary Jane romance, as presented in SM3, is something that people can invest themselves in.


-Peter Parker is likeable and relatable. Many people feel that SR Superman is selfish and creepy. It doesn't help that they so utterly dismissed Clark Kent as a character as well.

Which is an overstatement, IMO. I mean, come on. Selfish and creepy? SUPERMAN? I think you don't see things for what they were, for what the movie tried to convey, but for what you wanted to see in the movie, but didn't.


-Humor. Spider-Man 3 is funny. The only humor in SR was stuff ripped lifted directly out of the Donner films.

Besides the pathetic attempt at making something funny with the now-called Disco Peter, I don't see where SM3 was funny.


-SM3 is fun and takes place in a fun world. SR is so preoccupied with taking itself seriously, that the few scenes that are supposed to be fun (like young Clark discovering his powers) seem drab and sterile. John Williams' fun and uplifting theme is a huge mismatch for the world that Singer has created, which seems more appropriate for a movie about the balls-to-the-walls world of Wall Street stock brokers.

SM3 has a lot going for it that SR simply doesn't.

OK now. Are we talking about the same movie here? The events presented in SM3 were far from funny. It was drama everywhere with, like I said, attempts at making something funny.

I'm not saying that SM3 was a bad movie, but IMO, it was easily the worst of the three. Raimi and Co. tried to put so many things in that movie, that it all got outta their hands.

[Eliseu Gouveia]

I have to agree that Spider-Man 3 was easily the worst of the trilogy.

The fact that it still manages to be far more entertaining than SR doesn&#180;t speak well of Singer.

[Sean Whitmore]

Let's start inching this one back on topic, folks. We have Superman Returns threads, and Superman vs Spider-Man should really be taken up on the movie forum.


SEAN

[Citizen V]

Personally,i think a sequel may be in doubt.If not,work would have already begun on it.

[Black Atom]

Personally,i think a sequel may be in doubt.If not,work would have already begun on it.

DC said a while back that their plan was to have a movie about each member of the "Trinity" every year. 2007 would've been Wonder Woman's year and '08 would start over with Batman 2. So, it's still possible we'll get a SR 2 by '09

[Ontir]

Personally,i think a sequel may be in doubt.If not,work would have already begun on it.

Work has already begun on it. Singer has been working on the story with Dougherty & Harris, as all three have said, several times, including that they're going to start shooting it next summer for its release in 2009. The head of Warners' had said, while "SR" was still in first-run, that there would be a sequel. Now he's hemming and hawing a bit, but I can't see them abandoning the franchise, and Singer is bound to up the action ante, as promised.

[666MasterOfPuppets]

The WB is waiting for the script, which is being written right now.

[Captain Smith]

Will it be the one with Nicholas Cage playing Superman?

[Black Atom]

Will it be the one with Nicholas Cage playing Superman?

Might as well be, as far as I'm concerned.

[666MasterOfPuppets]

Will it be the one with Nicholas Cage playing Superman?

Hell no. That script was horrible.

[winegeek]

-Sure, there's a love story at the heart of the Spider-Man movies, but it's one that can work and people can invest themselves in, UNLIKE
the romance in Superman Returns.

Was there romance in Superman Returns? ;)

I thought it was a tiresome mope fest. Lois was cold and unfeeling, Clark was hardly in the movie and Superman spent most of the movie feeling sorry for himself. The only person I felt for was Richard.

Superman doesn't need to be thrown in to a "Days of Our Lives" plot for the audience to relate to him. I wish the script writers had consulted just a few current comic book writers who understand Superman and how to make the audience care what happens to him.

Superman 2 the Donner Cut showed how to make Lois, Superman and Clark work. Lois wasn't nasty to Clark, she was suspicious. The reveal scene was hilarious. If the script writers wanted to rip off the humor, why didn't they do it with the relationship instead of lame jokes which fell flat?



SR is so preoccupied with taking itself seriously, that the few scenes that are supposed to be fun (like young Clark discovering his powers) seem drab and sterile. John Williams' fun and uplifting theme is a huge mismatch for the world that Singer has created, which seems more appropriate for a movie about the balls-to-the-walls world of Wall Street stock brokers.


I agree. There was no joy in the movie, no sense of anything grand. Just a bunch of whiney people standing around lamenting their stupid choices.

I hope the sequel finds a way to fix this. I'd love it if Superman Returns was ignored, but I know it won't be. I don't know how they can go forward, poor Richard needs to leave off screen so we're spared watching his heart get broken. That would be a drag.

Jason should visit Martha for the duration of the movie, Lois should tell Clark she's known all along, which would explain her snotty attitude. Then bring in an action plot which makes sense.

Finally Superman should punch people who attack him, instead of standing around like a pinata.

[Ontir]

There is romance in "SR." There is Richard's love for Lois, and the son he's raised since birth, as well as the starcrossed romance between Lois and Clark. It's pathos by the pound!