Luke Skywalker 1,792 Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 unfortunately it isnt.The damned Williams' themes.And it does not retell the sotry from the begging like Batman. or the new HULK ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryant Burnette 654 Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 As I said, I think it's better to not think of Returns as a sequel of any kind, but as a different take on the Superman myth.Doing that is problematic, since none of the filmmakers did so. They stated their intent to make a Superman movie that picks up threads from Superman and Superman II, and for better or worse, that's what we're stuck with. Though I myself like Superman Returns, I'm hoping that The Man of Steel will ignore the vast majority of that movie and just start afresh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red 75 Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 And it does not retell the sotry from the begging like Batman. or the new HULK ...Not to be nitpicky, but the new Hulk is not retelling the origin. It's basically what Batman Forever was to Batman Returns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke Skywalker 1,792 Posted March 18, 2008 Share Posted March 18, 2008 And it does not retell the sotry from the begging like Batman. or the new HULK ...Not to be nitpicky, but the new Hulk is not retelling the origin. It's basically what Batman Forever was to Batman Returns.i think i read they are making it as if the other never happened, and they hulk creation is told in the 1st minutes of the movie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry B 50 Posted March 18, 2008 Share Posted March 18, 2008 As I said, I think it's better to not think of Returns as a sequel of any kind, but as a different take on the Superman myth.Despite the fact that the film features Marlon Brando as Jor-El, Glenn Ford as Jonathan Kent (in a photo), and was even going to feature footage from Superman: The Movie at one time. Singer just couldn't make up his mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryant Burnette 654 Posted March 18, 2008 Share Posted March 18, 2008 As I said, I think it's better to not think of Returns as a sequel of any kind, but as a different take on the Superman myth.Despite the fact that the film features Marlon Brando as Jor-El, Glenn Ford as Jonathan Kent (in a photo), and was even going to feature footage from Superman: The Movie at one time. Singer just couldn't make up his mind.Yeah, it's a marvel of botched conception, although for me, the execution is good enough to make the movie worthwhile. It wasn't what I wanted to see from a Superman movie, but it's not too bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elmo Lewis 6 Posted March 18, 2008 Share Posted March 18, 2008 Doing that is problematic, since none of the filmmakers did so. They stated their intent to make a Superman movie that picks up threads from Superman and Superman II, and for better or worse, that's what we're stuck with. Though I myself like Superman Returns, I'm hoping that The Man of Steel will ignore the vast majority of that movie and just start afresh.I know it's a major licence from Singer's original intentions, but you think the film doesn't work that way?As I said, I think it's better to not think of Returns as a sequel of any kind, but as a different take on the Superman myth.Despite the fact that the film features Marlon Brando as Jor-El, Glenn Ford as Jonathan Kent (in a photo)How is that any different than using the Superman March from the original movie, too? In fact, how is that any different from the fact that they used said Superman March in Smallville, which bears no diegetic relation to the original movie? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unlucky Bastard 7,782 Posted March 18, 2008 Share Posted March 18, 2008 My solution is just ignore the 2006 film. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BurgaFlippinMan 7 Posted March 18, 2008 Author Share Posted March 18, 2008 the fact that they used said Superman March in Smallville, which bears no diegetic relation to the original movie?It was used? Wow... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hitch 57 Posted March 18, 2008 Share Posted March 18, 2008 Do you have any idea what you're saying??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerrygollay 0 Posted March 19, 2008 Share Posted March 19, 2008 Yes it was.Not to mention boots that looked like something a member of KISS would wear.Ha, ha, ha , yeah , that is true !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke Skywalker 1,792 Posted March 22, 2008 Share Posted March 22, 2008 returns considers donner's cut as the canon, i think.Actually it can't. Jor-El is fully "killed off" and there's one or two other continuity glitches IIRC. The original Lester cut is still official canon.Especially since the Fortress of Solitude exists in Superman IV.I just remembered this.Doesnt Superman 'Turn back the world' again in the Donner cut? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unlucky Bastard 7,782 Posted March 22, 2008 Share Posted March 22, 2008 Yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke Skywalker 1,792 Posted March 22, 2008 Share Posted March 22, 2008 So, its more feasible Singer using the donner version than the Lester one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryant Burnette 654 Posted March 23, 2008 Share Posted March 23, 2008 returns considers donner's cut as the canon, i think.Actually it can't. Jor-El is fully "killed off" and there's one or two other continuity glitches IIRC. The original Lester cut is still official canon.Especially since the Fortress of Solitude exists in Superman IV.I just remembered this.Doesnt Superman 'Turn back the world' again in the Donner cut?The reason the Donner cut ends that way is that that was always how Superman II was supposed to end. However, when the production of both films stopped work on Superman II in favor of finishing work on Superman, it was decided that -- since, somehow, nobody had gotten around to figuring out quite how to end the first movie -- the around-the-world ending would be used for Superman. Then, they'd figure out how to end Superman II later, once its production resumed. That's how we ended up with the ultra-lame Clark-kisses-Lois-into-amnesia bit. Which, to be fair, is not one iota lamer than the idea that reversing the Earth's orbit would also reverse time -- that's one of the all-time retardedest things in movies. (But it's done with such panache that I just don't mind it.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unlucky Bastard 7,782 Posted March 23, 2008 Share Posted March 23, 2008 I sometimes wonder what Dick and Mank would have come up with for the ending had they been allowed to finish II in 1980. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ollie 1,059 Posted March 23, 2008 Share Posted March 23, 2008 After listening to Donner and Mank about them wishing they could have contined to work on the films I wonder what would have happened.................Imagine a Donner Superman III & IV and possibly Williams continuing to score them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke Skywalker 1,792 Posted March 23, 2008 Share Posted March 23, 2008 The people who hired lester... i hope they feel guilty by the least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unlucky Bastard 7,782 Posted March 23, 2008 Share Posted March 23, 2008 The Salkinds love their Lester movies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke Skywalker 1,792 Posted March 23, 2008 Share Posted March 23, 2008 the hell with them.Nuff said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quintus 5,399 Posted March 31, 2008 Share Posted March 31, 2008 Not good news. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morlock 11 Posted March 31, 2008 Share Posted March 31, 2008 Sorry, we couldn't find that page.Please use the navigation on the left to continue. Bad news indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elmo Lewis 6 Posted March 31, 2008 Share Posted March 31, 2008 Jerry Siegel's heirs got the Superman copyrights now.The good news for Warners? The copyright claim only covers elements of the character that appeared in Action Comics #1. The bad news? That includes the characters Clark Kent and Lois Lane. Oh, and the costume. (...) We bet the executive who suggested they should change Clark Kent's name to 'Barry', Lois to 'Sally' and that Superman himself should wear a clown costume instead of a cape, is now looking pretty smug.Further clicky. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Breathmask 555 Posted March 31, 2008 Share Posted March 31, 2008 Add another "." at the end of the URL. For some reason, the board software can't post a URL that ends with "..." (who makes a URL that ends with "..." anyway?!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morlock 11 Posted March 31, 2008 Share Posted March 31, 2008 Are people that dissapointed that there may not be another Singer Superman? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unlucky Bastard 7,782 Posted March 31, 2008 Share Posted March 31, 2008 No big deal. Just make something else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quintus 5,399 Posted March 31, 2008 Share Posted March 31, 2008 Are people that dissapointed that there may not be another Singer Superman?Well the fact that this thread is into it's fourth page sort answers your question Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QMM 4 Posted March 31, 2008 Share Posted March 31, 2008 Not good news.About the movie maybe.It's great news for the creators. They sold the rights in 1930 for $130 and the families deserve their cut of the money. Also great news that they can now license Superman to entities other than DC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quintus 5,399 Posted March 31, 2008 Share Posted March 31, 2008 That is a good thing of course, but I don't really care about the families of the creators, in the same way that I don't really care about the Tolkien estate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ollie 1,059 Posted March 31, 2008 Share Posted March 31, 2008 Are people that dissapointed that there may not be another Singer Superman?No I'm excited, he needs to stay away from superhero films. Let someone make them who also knows how to add a bit of excitement to the movies.If I want soap operas I'll tivo them and watch them when I get home from work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pieter Boelen 740 Posted March 31, 2008 Share Posted March 31, 2008 I think we've had just about enough superhero movies for a while anyway. Let's start with some ADVENTURE ones again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red 75 Posted April 1, 2008 Share Posted April 1, 2008 Are people that dissapointed that there may not be another Singer Superman?Not particularly. I'd be fine either way, plus there's the chance that Singer would learn from and correct his mistakes with a sequel. Good for Seigel's family. They deserve their money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now