|
|
Post by Matt in the Hat on Oct 22, 2009 15:44:25 GMT -5
I once had Taco Bell for lunch and dinner. Had a pretty epic dump in the bathroom that night.
|
|
|
|
Post by ReeveIsSuperman on Oct 23, 2009 3:40:52 GMT -5
I once had Taco Bell for lunch and dinner. Had a pretty epic dump in the bathroom that night. That was as entertaining as SR ... |
|
|
|
Post by MAVERICK on Oct 23, 2009 4:07:20 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by stargazer01 on Oct 23, 2009 11:05:38 GMT -5
|
|
Legsy
New Member
Alright, alright, alright...
Posts: 15,339
|
Post by Legsy on Oct 23, 2009 11:18:57 GMT -5
That's disturbing on so many levels. |
|
|
|
Post by MAVERICK on Oct 23, 2009 11:57:03 GMT -5
Well, much like ReeveIsSuperman, he only knows that one trick.
But I know what about it is disturbing you. You filthy, filthy little girl.
|
|
Legsy
New Member
Alright, alright, alright...
Posts: 15,339
|
Post by Legsy on Oct 23, 2009 13:12:40 GMT -5
;D
|
|
EvilSupes
New Member
LOOK! Superman's drunk!
Posts: 3,037
|
Post by EvilSupes on Oct 23, 2009 15:10:59 GMT -5
Wow this thread really has gone, very off topic! But then, are there any that are not?! ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by EnriqueH on Oct 24, 2009 6:06:05 GMT -5
Al, you mention Parker Posey.
I thought she and Lex had zero chemistry. They looked more like brother/sister or gay friends than lovers. What the heck was their relationshipWith Lex and Ms. Teschmacher, the chemistry was there.
|
|
EvilSupes
New Member
LOOK! Superman's drunk!
Posts: 3,037
|
Post by EvilSupes on Oct 24, 2009 7:11:08 GMT -5
I can understand why the tone of the movie was darker - they were trying to make it fit with today without being overly slapstick and colourful like the 1978. Since as well recent movies have been 'dark' it was only inevitably SR was going to follow that trend.. But for me I didn't feel SR was 'too dark' it felt in between. I suppose in comparison to STM it would appear very dark, but given if it tried to do something like STM today would it work or would a lot of viewers laugh their way out the cinema? Certainly from our perspective it would be ok, but I would imagine a lot of people wouldn't 'get it' and after all it's all about making money... So while it appears a 'dark' tone is too much for some people, honestly would a more bright and cheerful tone of the 1978 movie be any better today?  |
|
|
|
Post by eccentricbeing on Oct 24, 2009 11:18:05 GMT -5
It's not that SR had to replicate the tone of STM. It's the fact that the tone in SR didn't work very well at all.
|
|
|
|
Post by stargazer01 on Oct 24, 2009 11:45:08 GMT -5
It's not that SR had to replicate the tone of STM. It's the fact that the tone in SR didn't work very well at all. I disagree. It worked well enough that it made almost $400 mil WW (more than Batman Begins, actually), sold well on dvd and got pretty good reviews. It seems to me the movie found an audience that did some repeated viewings at the theaters. I definitely think it did solid all around. And it went up against the jagernaut that was the Pirates sequel, something Batman Begins didn't have to go up against in its run. Unfortunately WB are idiots and didn't give it the chance of a sequel to see more of this epic storyline. Superman Returns was only the set up. Only the beginning. Brainiac vs Superman in this universe would have been So epic, imo. Handled by Singer, that is. |
|
|
|
Post by eccentricbeing on Oct 24, 2009 12:16:40 GMT -5
It's not that SR had to replicate the tone of STM. It's the fact that the tone in SR didn't work very well at all. I disagree. It worked well enough that it made almost $400 mil WW (more than Batman Begins, actually), sold well on dvd and got pretty good reviews. It seems to me the movie found an audience that did some repeated viewings at the theaters. I definitely think it did solid all around. And it went up against the jagernaut that was the Pirates sequel, something Batman Begins didn't have to go up against in its run. Uh, ok. |
|
|
|
Post by stargazer01 on Oct 24, 2009 13:19:59 GMT -5
|
|
ye5man
New Member
1%
Posts: 7,928
|
Post by ye5man on Oct 24, 2009 13:35:34 GMT -5
It worked well enough that it made almost $400 mil WW (more than Batman Begins, actually), sold well on dvd So you're saying that the more money a film makes the better it is artistically? Nonsense and you know it. |
|
EvilSupes
New Member
LOOK! Superman's drunk!
Posts: 3,037
|
Post by EvilSupes on Oct 24, 2009 13:37:56 GMT -5
I think what she means is, the money it made worldwide deserved a sequel more than Batman Begins.
|
|
|
|
Post by stargazer01 on Oct 24, 2009 14:06:28 GMT -5
It worked well enough that it made almost $400 mil WW (more than Batman Begins, actually), sold well on dvd So you're saying that the more money a film makes the better it is artistically? Nonsense and you know it. That's not exactly what I said. This is what I said: I disagree. It worked well enough that it made almost $400 mil WW (more than Batman Begins, actually), sold well on dvd and got pretty good reviews. It seems to me the movie found an audience that did some repeated viewings at the theaters. I definitely think it did solid all around. And it went up against the jagernaut that was the Pirates sequel, something Batman Begins didn't have to go up against in its run.This was the consensus by rottentomatoes, Consensus: Singer's reverent and visually decadent adaptation gives the Man of Steel welcome emotional complexity. The result: a satisfying stick-to-your-ribs adaptation. www.rottentomatoes.com/m/superman_returns/In contrast, this is the consensus on Transformers 2, Consensus: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen is a noisy, underplotted, and overlong special effects extravaganza that lacks a human touch. www.rottentomatoes.com/m/transformers_revenge_of_the_fallen/I agree, Box Office and a movie's quality are not interconnected. Many great films tanked at the BO, but now are considered classics. For instance, "The Shawshank Redemption", "Blade Runner", "It's a Wonderful Life". |
|
ye5man
New Member
1%
Posts: 7,928
|
Post by ye5man on Oct 24, 2009 16:52:33 GMT -5
I think what she means is, the money it made worldwide deserved a sequel more than Batman Begins. If that's true then I take back what I said. We all know SR made enough to justify a sequel and something has happened behind the scenes that is preventing WB from greenlighting a sequel. It can't be $ that is stopping this. That Jason kid must be about 11 now? |
|
|
|
Post by Matt in the Hat on Oct 25, 2009 12:13:24 GMT -5
Al Pacino should be Dan Turpin in a sequel.
You know this to be true...
|
|
|
|
Post by MAVERICK on Oct 25, 2009 13:20:40 GMT -5
GREAT idea Matt!
Have Darkseid kill him in the 3rd installment!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2009 13:59:04 GMT -5
Ten years ago, Franz would've been a perfect Turpin.
|
|
ye5man
New Member
1%
Posts: 7,928
|
Post by ye5man on Oct 25, 2009 14:14:52 GMT -5
I always thought Lane Smith would have made a perfect Turpin
|
|
|
|
Post by Matt in the Hat on Oct 25, 2009 22:30:10 GMT -5
Ten years ago, Franz would've been a perfect Turpin. Of NYPD Blue fame? yeah i can see that kinda. |
|
ShogunLogan
New Member
If you shoot me, you're liable to lose a lot of those humanitarian awards.
Posts: 10,095
|
Post by ShogunLogan on Nov 10, 2009 8:05:07 GMT -5
I think what she means is, the money it made worldwide deserved a sequel more than Batman Begins. Yeah, but many forget what is truly important among business...return on investment. Batman Begins earned 2.49 times it's cost. Superman Returns earned 1.45 times it's cost. That's significant. I did a long chart of all the ROI among superhero movies a while back...I will have to track it down. |
|
EvilSupes
New Member
LOOK! Superman's drunk!
Posts: 3,037
|
Post by EvilSupes on Nov 10, 2009 9:27:52 GMT -5
I see what you mean. Still, it deserved a sequel. Look at heckboy 1, it didn't make as much as either of those movies yet it got a sequel, but that was with Universal Pictures. Maybe Warner Bros are more fussy about this kinda thing more. More the reason why I'd like to see Warner Bros lose the license to making Superman movies.
|
|
