Jump to content

Oh dear God...


Beowulf
 Share

Recommended Posts

please let it be a lie! A vicious, impossible lie!

Worst. News for Superman. Ever.

"A few days back an anonymous source sent an e-mail to me, AICN and Coming Soon saying they have big news in regards to "Superman" casting and would offer it to the first one who called. A few hours later when no-one had taken the bait, they sent along word that Beyonce Knowles has been cast as Lois Lane and Johnny Depp as Lex Luthor - personally I think its bull (if not whoever is making casting choices over there needs a reality check) but hey, its already out over the Net so may as well get the facts straight by indicating how it emerged.

(Update @ 11:55pm - Harry's got a second, regular and reliable contact who confirmed the scoop so sadly there's likely some truth to it after all."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 88
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Johnny Depp as Luthor? I think he could make it work, even though he'd never be as good as Hackman's inspired performance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Johnny Depp as Luthor? I think he could make it work, even though he'd never be as good as Hackman's inspired performance.

They should give Laurence Fishburne that part. He'd make a great Luthor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's not eccentric. And aside from the physical similarities, I don't think he'd fit the part.

Why does Lex Luthor need to be eccentric? We're past 1987 now Morlock, Lex Luthor is now a bald guy with lots of money and bad intentions. The Hackman clown is very probably out of the new movie.

I'm all for a new Superman movie -- my views on it are apparently quite popular since that thread last summer. The story, the myth, needs to be revised. But it needs to be done properly, too. No Ashton Kutcher, no Brendan Fraser. In my opinion, we need part of the Smallville cast back - that way we'll have the "popular" Superman from the 00's, and the backstory will be well developed. It seems to me quite futile to retell the same story some people have spent years developing and people have grown to love (as audience meters show). Bring Tom Welling and Michael Rosenbaum back and drop the rest of the dummies. Have a good script with about four lines of dialogue for every explosion (as the low-budget Lois and Clark would do for obvious reasons). It's really not a crazy idea as it sounds.

Personally, I would like to see a good Lois Lane, far from Margot Kidder and closer to Teri Hatcher. I would choose somebody like Natalie Portman or Jennifer Connelly, or even Liz Hurley but I fear both options are too attached to their respective sci-fi roles. Rumors are now on Kate Holmes which is frankly interesting but probably too young. Of course, the movie will inevitably be made for a teenaged audience, so there go most of the possibilities the remake offers. Oh well.

That and the score (hopefully they'll keep the Williams theme, but it's not the end of the world if they don't) are the two things I look the most forward to.

-Ross, who kneels every night and prays that the Brendan Fraser rumors are false.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's not eccentric. And aside from the physical similarities, I don't think he'd fit the part.

Come on, that guy is a former Shakespearean actor, so of course he could play Luthor. It's all about versatility, and Fishburne has plenty. Plus I don't think someone such as Luthor should be played by someone who looks weak. A strong actor with great acting abilities is key, and he should be chosen on those terms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know this might be kinda weird, but would anybody be up for Ian McKellen playing Jor-El? At least one of the Kryptonian elders. Tom Wilkinson would be a possibility too, in my book.

It seemed like I had someone in mind a few weeks ago for playing Superman, but I can't remember who. Maybe it was Brendan Fraser. Just as long as the directing and script are pretty strict with him. Maybe not strict, but they bring out his better qualities. The only objection I'd have, if I were casting, is that he's Canadian. Nothing against Canadians, but I just think an American should play the consummate American superhero.

Colin Farrell would be a possibility, but he's Irish and not a generally good role model. I figure a Superman actor should be a class act offscreen as well as on. Kinda like Jim Caviezel. I guess he would make a decent Superman...he's a little too soft-spoken and doesn't have much of a strong voice (even though Dean Cain was the same way).

I've been looking through IMDb at new movies coming out this year, looking for actors who might be a good Superman, and I came across John Malkovich. Dude...what an awesome Lex Luthor he'd be. (Joe Pantoliano could be Otis!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm. If they made another Superman Movie, I think it should try to be more like the old cartoon, and have a cast of unknowns. The direction would have to be very good - great visual compositions rather than alot of dollying around and flashiness. And the special effects would just be for flying, powers, boulders and evil laboratories and things, not for stupid green mists ala xmen, xfiles, nemesis, matrix, etc.

Superman 1 already took place in modern times. Why not make this one take place in the 40's and dispense with making fun of the time period ala hudsucker proxy, dick tracy, batman, etc.

They should just make a good movie with a good hero, good villain, good thriller/suspense/disaster/sci-fi/love story. And as for the Beyonce idea, we all know Lois is white. They can leave those types of liberties to stage plays of Superman ala "Hamlet in Bondage Gear" and such.

As for music, because I wouldn't need Williams to retread old territory he wouldn't want to, I'd say Christopher Gordon would be the best. But he would need 4 months to score and orchestrate himself, and use the same orchestra/hall as in Moby Dick. The director should also tell him to do some "Mickey-Mousing" when appropriate in the action music.

The Director of Photography would have to be someone who brings out color, but not with garish lighting. A natural airy feel, with enough grain to make the film look like a nice painting. Classic photography-a cross between the old studio system lighting and the new natural light type of look.

Most importantly, the director should avoid slyly commenting on the '40s from a modern perspective. It should not be wet with irony.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[Hmmm...would that not not overdo the latent but present similarities between the Son of Krypton and the Son of Man?

You mean Son of God, I presume?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[Hmmm...would that not not overdo the latent but present similarities between the Son of Krypton and the Son of Man?

You mean Son of God, I presume?

Okay, enough of that.

Neil

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd say, put the time setting for the new Superman movie in the far future, something like 2450 or why not even further away. We've already seen super heroes in a 40s background. Why put Superman there? What's the challenge? Where lies the danger? An automatic rifle a la mob style? A steam locomotive filled with dynamite?

The future is where the new challenges are. People go to work in flying cars in cities on top of other cities. The higher parts of the city are reserved for the rich and "civilized". The multinationals reside there. The lower parts is where you find the scum of the Earth. The real dirt.

The polar ice caps have melted. Superman was forced to build his new Fortress of Solitude on Pluto, the only planet mankind has not exploited yet.

New advanced level crimes are being committed by super crooks and criminals with super robots for their lifeguards. The future is an ideal place for inventing new villains with new tricks, but also for foreshowing future social life with its joys and problems. Do the people of the future still need someone like Superman or have they become supermen themselves?

----------------

Alex Cremers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only objection I'd have, if I were casting, is that he's Canadian. Nothing against Canadians, but I just think an American should play the consummate American superhero.  

Colin Farrell would be a possibility, but he's Irish and not a generally good role model.

Umm, wtf? :roll:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only objection I'd have, if I were casting, is that he's Canadian. Nothing against Canadians, but I just think an American should play the consummate American superhero.  

Colin Farrell would be a possibility, but he's Irish and not a generally good role model.

Superman is not american, he's an alien! For crissakes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Indeed, they are actors. If they are good (and I like both Fraser and Farrell, though I can't really see either as Superman) they're nationality or who they are in their private lives doesn't mean a thing. All this is forgotten if the performance is good.

Neil

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, is there anything at all different about Canadians and Americans other than who they pay their taxes to? :devil:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only objection I'd have, if I were casting, is that he's Canadian. Nothing against Canadians, but I just think an American should play the consummate American superhero.  

are we pulling a 'warner bros/harry potter' thing now?

And hector - i think what the American superhero quote was about was like a pop culture icon. . .not his actual nationality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd say, put the time setting for the new Superman movie in the far future, something like 2450 or why not even further away. We've already seen super heroes in a 40s background. Why put Superman there? What's the challenge? Where lies the danger? An automatic rifle a la mob style? A steam locomotive filled with dynamite?  

The future is where the new challenges are. People go to work in flying cars in cities on top of other cities. The higher parts of the city are reserved for the rich and "civilized". The multinationals reside there. The lower parts is where you find the scum of the Earth. The real dirt.

The polar ice caps have melted. Superman was forced to build his new Fortress of Solitude on Pluto, the only planet mankind has not exploited yet.  

New advanced level crimes are being committed by super crooks and criminals with super robots for their lifeguards. The future is an ideal place for inventing new villains with new tricks, but also for foreshowing future social life with its joys and problems. Do the people of the future still need someone like Superman or have they become supermen themselves?

Huh? What's wrong with a modern day, 2004 Superman? In my opinion, it is the only reason to make a new film.

-Ross, who bah's variations on the Superman story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Huh? What's wrong with a modern day, 2004 Superman? In my opinion, it is the only reason to make a new film.  

-Ross, who bah's variations on the Superman story.

Well, I could've been a good boy and only posted something like, "Yeah, Superman rules, when is the new movie coming out?", but it's just not my style.

----------------

Alex Cremers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Huh? What's wrong with a modern day, 2004 Superman? In my opinion, it is the only reason to make a new film.  

-Ross, who bah's variations on the Superman story.

Well, I could've been a good boy and only posted something like, "Yeah, Superman rules, when is the new movie coming out?", but it's just not my style.

Don't get me wrong, Alex. I'm not that closed-minded. I have to admit that most variations are interesting, but from points of view too far away from the original story. Politically, socioligically.... Superman provides very interesting twists and situations. But is that really what Superman is about?

I'm just somebody who's sick of shit like Mr. Mxyzptlk or Bizarro Superman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But is that really what Superman is about?

Superman is about this guy who cannot be hurt by anything except bits of green rock.

Pretty boring, actually.

That was until this alien came along with long pointy projections for elbows and killed Supes with a few punches in the belly.

----------------

Alex Cremers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And hector - i think what the American superhero quote was about was like a pop culture icon. . .not his actual nationality.

Yes, I understand that, I mean it was created by two guys from Kansas, is it? What's more american than two boys in the so called midwest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When Imperius Rex came, Doomsday had been exiled on the moon and the American government went up to get him to send to Imperius to kill him.

They sent Doomsday

Imperius killed Doomsday

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seen "Bowling for Columbine?"

Other than they don't pull out guns whenever they see a stranger. :)

And hector - i think what the American superhero quote was about was like a pop culture icon. . .not his actual nationality.

Yes but it has utterly nothing to do with actors, actors can play any nationality or icon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, originally I wasn't going to get into this but...

The only objection I'd have, if I were casting, is that he's Canadian. Nothing against Canadians, but I just think an American should play the consummate American superhero.  

You do, of course, realize that Joe Shuster was CANADIAN!!!

Also, is there anything at all different about Canadians and Americans other than who they pay their taxes to?

Bite Me!!! LOL

The story, the myth, needs to be revised.  

Ross, who bah's variations on the Superman story.  

These two statements are contradictory, Ross... Make up your mind. You are entitled to your own opinion of the 1978 Superman film.

Look people... Superman is dead. The character was killed off by Doomsday and as far as most fans of the storyline are concerned this whole "resurrection" after the fact is the worst load of money-grubbing, felonious codswallop ever thrust on the reader. He's dead!!! Nothing that has happened since has any bearing WHATSOEVER on the storyline. And as far as updating him Kal-El's rocket crashed into the field in Kansas in the 40's. Superman is the child of the baby-boomer era. There is nothing I hate more than when film makers decide they like a story enough to adapt it to the screen and then change everything that is inherent to the character. Storylines like this?

Frodo Baggins arrived home to his fiftieth story penthouse on Shire Ave, in the Bronx to find his old friend Gandalf awaiting him. Gandalf appeared to be upset?

?Frodo, is it safe?? he queried.

?Dude? It?s, like, totally hidden, man.? Frodo sipped on his double half cafe latte from Starbucks, as Gandalf told him of the ring and how an evil business conglomerate named Sauron Inc., were seeking the ring to make certain that all of their business dealings would be profitable and they would be able to rule Wall Street. Sauron Inc., was headed by a former friend of Gandalf?s. Saruman had decided that rather than lose his business in a hostile takeover, he would ally with Sauron, Inc. As the story unfolded, Frodo noticed a rustling sound coming from his balcony. Gandalf exploded from his chair to find Samwise Gamgee, listening intently at the glass doors. Sam was Frodo?s significant other and would have to accompany him on his quest? They grabbed some Frito?s and a six-pack of Barq?s from the kitchen and set forth on their skateboards.

?Meet me in two days at a club called ?The Prancing Pony?, it?s on the corner of 121st and Hudson.?

Loses something in the translation, doesn?t it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Frodo Baggins arrived home to his fiftieth story penthouse on Shire Ave, in the Bronx to find his old friend Gandalf awaiting him. Gandalf appeared to be upset?

?Frodo, is it safe?? he queried.

?Dude? It?s, like, totally hidden, man.? Frodo sipped on his double half cafe latte from Starbucks, as Gandalf told him of the ring and how an evil business conglomerate named Sauron Inc., were seeking the ring to make certain that all of their business dealings would be profitable and they would be able to rule Wall Street. Sauron Inc., was headed by a former friend of Gandalf?s. Saruman had decided that rather than lose his business in a hostile takeover, he would ally with Sauron, Inc. As the story unfolded, Frodo noticed a rustling sound coming from his balcony. Gandalf exploded from his chair to find Samwise Gamgee, listening intently at the glass doors. Sam was Frodo?s significant other and would have to accompany him on his quest? They grabbed some Frito?s and a six-pack of Barq?s from the kitchen and set forth on their skateboards.

?Meet me in two days at a club called ?The Prancing Pony?, it?s on the corner of 121st and Hudson.?  

Loses something in the translation, doesn?t it?

The topic title for this thead suddenly became relevant.

Oh dear God...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The story, the myth, needs to be revised.  

Ross, who bah's variations on the Superman story.  

These two statements are contradictory, Ross... Make up your mind. You are entitled to your own opinion of the 1978 Superman film.

I feel a new film is due. But as an update of the original story, not a whole new story in the future or the past or with a Kryptonian Lex Luthor. Clear now?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel a new film is due. But as an update of the original story, not a whole new story in the future or the past or with a Kryptonian Lex Luthor. Clear now?

Again? Do you really want a little spaceship crashing and the Kent folks parenting little Supes all over again? Give me something new. Something beyond a mere "next generation" version.

----------------

Alex Cremers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again?

Basically yes. A Superman-in-Metropolist-flirts-with-Lois-and-battles-Lex-Luthor movie that doesn't try to break as much ground as it can. Not too appealing, is it? I know, but keep reading.

Do you really want a little spaceship crashing and the Kent folks parenting little Supes all over again?

Well, that part in particular no. That's why I would prefer it if they made the movie based on Smallville's ground. Now I'm not blinded by geekiness. I know that the scripts and plots in that show are quite often below average (below acceptable I'd tend to say). I know that the direction is too boring to ever notice it -- albeit some exceptions. But all they'd need is Clark and Lex (and a shower scene for Kristin Kreuk) and place them in Metropolis with a whole new, preferrably more talented crew of movie, not tv, professionals.

Give me something new. Something beyond a mere "next generation" version.

I understand. Well, a Smallville movie would have interesting stuff to get by. For instance, Clark is convinced that he was sent to Earth to conquer it and enslave manking. Lex Luthor is originally a good guy turned bad (that is the most interesting thing about the show), who is also friends with Clark Kent. Those aspects have been very slowly and deeply developed in the show, and it seems to me a waste to stop them once the series ends its run with Clark heading to Metropolis. It also seems quite futile to repeat the same old story of the little ship, so why bother, when there are so many already used to the Smallville version?

-Ross, merely dreaming out loud.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.