crown
New Member
Posts: 1,136
|
Post by crown on Jul 20, 2016 20:55:13 GMT -5
Can you guys (and please start participating people!!!) imagine how ungodly awesome Superman IV would have been if the Mark Pillow Nuclear man was only Lex's FIRST attempt at making a monster!!!?! ?? What if the after Superman just barely defeats the Mark Pillow Nuclear Man after nearly DYING.. Lex unleash an exponentially MORE POWEFUL MONSTER??? This time, the monster could grow in size (original ability concept for Nuclearman) and DIDN'T need to stay in direct sunlight??? The 2nd Nuclearman could have been basically a Doomsday killing machine!! Think about how awesome a concept this would have been for Superman 4!
|
|
|
Post by inebriated87 on Jul 20, 2016 22:10:28 GMT -5
Played by Dolph Lundgren ?
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 16,854
|
Post by Metallo on Jul 20, 2016 22:27:18 GMT -5
Well there were two attempts at Nuclear Man in he original cut.
But Superman fighting a giant stupid genetically engineered Kryptonian monster created by Lex? I'm not sure why but...something tells me that would suck @ss even if they'd had a budget of saaaay...250 million dollars. Just a gut feeling.
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jul 20, 2016 23:37:31 GMT -5
Well there were two attempts at Nuclear Man in he original cut. But Superman fighting a giant stupid genetically engineered Kryptonian monster created by Lex? I'm not sure why but...something tells me that would suck @ss even if they'd had a budget of saaaay...250 million dollars. Just a gut feeling. What's so amazing is that the powers that be don't get why the 'death of Superman' story was so powerful- it had a giant build up across almost every major DC comic with all the major heroes being defeated along the way - simple story, but without the buildup, it would have been a 'wtf?' story or situation .... much like how BvS's version of it pretty much played out.
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 16,854
|
Post by Metallo on Jul 21, 2016 10:40:04 GMT -5
The Snyder films and even SR feel like WB recycling some ideas from previous incarnations to save money or speed up the process. Doomsday even looked like one of the Tim Burton designs from Superman Lives. They've been chomping at the bit to do the death of superman somewhere. BvS just seemed to cram about three movies into one and waste a great story. I don't mind changes but it's a wasted opportunity that hurt the movie they did make renter than help it.
|
|
crown
New Member
Posts: 1,136
|
Post by crown on Jul 21, 2016 20:16:12 GMT -5
Well there were two attempts at Nuclear Man in he original cut. But Superman fighting a giant stupid genetically engineered Kryptonian monster created by Lex? I'm not sure why but...something tells me that would suck @ss even if they'd had a budget of saaaay...250 million dollars. Just a gut feeling. That's the point; in the original cut the 1st monster was a joke character and the second monster was the real threat. In MY IDEA.. the 1st monster is a real threat and the 2nd monster is an ULTRA THREAT that Superman basically has no chance of beating. Would it have been better then if Superman had DIED at the end of 4 and didn't come back to life? Woulda been a better send off of Reeve as the character than what we got.
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 16,854
|
Post by Metallo on Jul 22, 2016 16:35:25 GMT -5
Well there were two attempts at Nuclear Man in he original cut. But Superman fighting a giant stupid genetically engineered Kryptonian monster created by Lex? I'm not sure why but...something tells me that would suck @ss even if they'd had a budget of saaaay...250 million dollars. Just a gut feeling. That's the point; in the original cut the 1st monster was a joke character and the second monster was the real threat. In MY IDEA.. the 1st monster is a real threat and the 2nd monster is an ULTRA THREAT that Superman basically has no chance of beating. Would it have been better then if Superman had DIED at the end of 4 and didn't come back to life? Woulda been a better send off of Reeve as the character than what we got. Tonally that doesn't work for the Reeve series. You can't just kill him and end it. Certainly not like that. Snyder did it in a series where it does fit better and it still sucked. If a movie has one real monster threat have one real moster threat. Doing the same thing but bigger is repetitive. If a film has a secondary threat it has to be different and a different obstacle to overcome. That's why Dark Knight works while basically having two final struggles for Batman to overcome. Two face is something very different from The Joker and presents a different kind of challenge. IV would have been a good send off of it had actually been good and that's a problem with execution not the concept. Superman goes through a good character arc but it's lost in a bad movie.
|
|
crown
New Member
Posts: 1,136
|
Post by crown on Jul 22, 2016 22:26:16 GMT -5
The 2nd monster wouldn't be more of the same though... it would simply be an escalated threat.
It would be like Superman in the comics finally defeating doomsday, and then having to literally fight an army of doomsdays.
To use your Dark Knight example, Joker started out as a "two bit whack job in a cheap suit and make-up.. a nobody" then by the end of the film he basically controls Gotham... it was the same threat only escalated.
Regarding Superman dying in Superman 4... it could have worked if there was a message of hope at the end of the funeral.... think about at the end of Dark Knight Rises to use an example when Batman/Bruce Wayne are essentially dead..
Superman 4 could have ended with little Jeremy getting a crystal sent to his classroom which leads him to the fortress of solitude..... Jeremy inserts the crystal and a ghostly apparition would appear before him.... Kal-El.
CUT TO BLACK.
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 16,854
|
Post by Metallo on Jul 23, 2016 8:26:36 GMT -5
LMAO. Wait wait...first you say it's a second stronger doomsday like monster and then it's an army of Doomsdays? Which one is it?
That's not an escalation of "a" threat it's a second threat. An escalation would be something like the helicopter rescues double jeapordy or even Doomsday in BvS where he keeps getting stronger and evolving everytime they attack him.
You're applying more recent modern conventions to a series where they don't fit. They never did anything like that for the Reeve series because of the times and because it would be a different kind of movie. The kind of stuff you're talking about was done for MOS and BvS. Ask yourself if those movies are like the Reeve movies.
The Dark Knight trilogy is not the same as the Reeve series. It played out differently and was executed differently. Yes Nolan clearly draws some inspiration for structure and tone and intent from STM (especially on Batman Begins) but he also put his own spin on it. The Reeve series covered and kept the status quo. The dark knight trilogy used and then seemed to move on from or abandon certain conventions of the character. Nolan was never as beholden to staying with anything from the comics long term. The Manor burned down and wasn't even in the Dark Knight. Bruce Wayne was Batman for about a year to a year and a half total between retiring for eight years then faking his death for good. There is no D.ick Grayson or Robin. Nolans intent was to do something unconventional with the characters.
The Reeve Superman series stuck with the status quo. To be the kinds of movies you're talking about Lois would have stayed dead in STM, and the fortress would have stayed destroyed in superman II. The Reeve Movies kept the comics status quo in tact and followed conventions. That's why I said they're different kinds of movies because they are. Superman Returns is the closest thing to taking a similar concept and taking it off in a different direction instead of staying traditional with it.
Superman IV needed focus not a fake out. I remember the first Highlander movie wanted to do something like what you're proposing only not as far and even they dropped it because they realized it was too convoluted and needlessly drew out the ending.
|
|
crown
New Member
Posts: 1,136
|
Post by crown on Jul 23, 2016 17:28:50 GMT -5
LMAO. Wait wait...first you say it's a second stronger doomsday like monster and then it's an army of Doomsdays? Which one is it? That's not an escalation of "a" threat it's a second threat. An escalation would be something like the helicopter rescues double jeapordy or even Doomsday in BvS where he keeps getting stronger and evolving everytime they attack him. You're applying more recent modern conventions to a series where they don't fit. They never did anything like that for the Reeve series because of the times and because it would be a different kind of movie. The kind of stuff you're talking about was done for MOS and BvS. Ask yourself if those movies are like the Reeve movies. The Dark Knight trilogy is not the same as the Reeve series. It played out differently and was executed differently. Yes Nolan clearly draws some inspiration for structure and tone and intent from STM (especially on Batman Begins) but he also put his own spin on it. The Reeve series covered and kept the status quo. The dark knight trilogy used and then seemed to move on from or abandon certain conventions of the character. Nolan was never as beholden to staying with anything from the comics long term. The Manor burned down and wasn't even in the Dark Knight. Bruce Wayne was Batman for about a year to a year and a half total between retiring for eight years then faking his death for good. There is no D.ick Grayson or Robin. Nolans intent was to do something unconventional with the characters. The Reeve Superman series stuck with the status quo. To be the kinds of movies you're talking about Lois would have stayed dead in STM, and the fortress would have stayed destroyed in superman II. The Reeve Movies kept the comics status quo in tact and followed conventions. That's why I said they're different kinds of movies because they are. Superman Returns is the closest thing to taking a similar concept and taking it off in a different direction instead of staying traditional with it. Superman IV needed focus not a fake out. I remember the first Highlander movie wanted to do something like what you're proposing only not as far and even they dropped it because they realized it was too convoluted and needlessly drew out the ending. First of all you KNOW my Superman IV ending idea would have been awesome! The idealistic young man Jeremy becoming the next Superman is way more believable than that useless rent-a-cop "Robin" John Blake becoming Batman. Second of all why is my idea a second threat and not an escalated threat? How come it's perfectly acceptable to have the 1st Nuclearman a joke and the 2nd Nuclearman a threat and not have BOTH monsters a threat with the 2nd monster threat level rise exponentially??? What if after "barely graduated high-school physics" Superman threw Nuclear Man into the power plant, the sun monster came back out literally one MILLION times stronger? Or what if the Nuclear Power plant essentially resulted in Nuclear Man multiplying one MILLION times so now Superman had to take down an army of Mark Pillows? Whether it's a single monster or many.. I'm talking about a rising threat level.. that would make the the end of the film truly hopeless for Superman which would result in his death. I DO THINK that Superman IV.. the true conclusion of the series... would have had a lot more latitude toward breaking the status quo BECAUSE IT'S AN ENDING!!!!!] Batman Begins and Dark Knight didn't do anything too daring... it was all status quo stuff... Begins starting the myth and TDK starting the endless Batman Joker battle "you and I are destined to do this forever" It wasn't until the Rises.. the TRUE END of the series that they established that Batman was only really Batman for a year and his body is already wrecked and he's probably gonna die or at least retire for good. Likewise, SIV as the ending of the Reeve films could have gone outside convention and delivered a powerful ending with the death of our hero. but his spirit remaining in the fortress as the new Jor-El figure to inspire and teach Jeremy.. the next Superman.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 23, 2016 17:39:48 GMT -5
I think you're one of the few people that would enjoy the film you're describing.
|
|