|
Post by lois on Feb 11, 2011 23:06:07 GMT -5
If Superman Returns was a one shot, one off kind of deal, just the one movie, sure, I'd consider it to be somewhat of a success. But that's about it. I respect your opinion Kevin and I hope you mine, and whilst I don't agree with what you've said, it was fun/enjoyable debating with you. And if may say so, it shows that you too are a passionate Superman fan. I sincerely hope you enjoy the new Superman movie. Also, if everyone liked the same thing, the world would be pretty damned boring.
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Feb 12, 2011 3:37:56 GMT -5
Interesting points- though in Ang Lee's Hulk case.... my own problem with it wasn't that it was too angsty or took itself too seriously- my problem was with the fact that, from the way the movie was done, I didn't really care what happened to the Bruce Banner character one way or the other- and I should have! Consequently, the drama was not of interest. The action was even less so.
(Suprising as his kung fu epic "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon" was pretty amazing in both departments)
Contrast that to the Ed Norton Hulk- and I'm in the same camp with you there- LOVED that film- Its success to me is that I DID care about the character and much of that was because the filmmakers/Norton seemed to 'know' what made the character so appealing & carry it through- on a character level and on an action level.
I thought SR delivered on the character level. The action, though.... well.....
|
|
ye5man
New Member
1%
Posts: 7,928
|
Post by ye5man on Feb 12, 2011 9:48:15 GMT -5
You call him wonderful because you blindly assume he has the same opinion as you? Sorry, but that's the most retarded thing I've read in ages.
Remember Reeve wrote a lot of Superman IV...
Oh, and a £200M budget is offensive! A typical George Reeves (B/w) episode holds my interest a heck of a lot more than SR. Why? Very tight plotting, suspense, genuine chemistry between the actors.
You can sugar coat with cgi all you want but if you don't respond to the characters then its all in vain.
|
|
|
Post by Scissorpuppy on Feb 12, 2011 11:11:20 GMT -5
To me the interesting thing is that both Hulk movies made around the same amount of money. HULK ($137 million Budget with $245,360,480 Box Office) and The Incredible Hulk ($150 million Budget with $263,427,551 Box Office). So while their is no doubt, more people claim to enjoy TIH, it seems to have around the same audience as the first. I think the mistake the studios make is thinking EVERY comic book character has to make 400 million dollars or whatever.
To me The Dark Knight was a blessing and a curse. It proved that certain comic characters can be done seriously and make MEGA money, but I think the studios (WB especially) saw how much it made and decided to regroup and emulate that success, rebooting Superman probably came out of that. If TDK came out and made 300 million and Singer had finished Valkerie on time and on budget, you probably would have "The Man of Steel" blu ray on your shelf at home right now and wondering about part 3.
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Feb 12, 2011 11:21:57 GMT -5
I agree that it's pretty strange about the Hulk situation. In trying to read into those numbers, you could assume: (1) it's a big compliment that the reboot made almost as much as the first, or (2) it's probably as much money as Hulk would have made, period. In a slightly different situation, Spiderman 3 and X3 both made more money than 2- but both were generally disliked more than the 2nd ones in those series. (With Venom forced in by the studio for 3, wonder if that's why the studio concluded they knew better than Raimi? *sigh*) The new director for Matthew Vaughn mentioned in an interview that he thought that the opportunity to make a big budget superhero film was running out, I believe it was partiallly because of studio expectations (would make sense), partly because of (lack of) quality control. To echo your thought: Wonder what'll happen if the new Superman 'only' makes 300 million. Hm.
|
|
|
Post by Krypton Refugee on Feb 12, 2011 14:01:02 GMT -5
If Superman Returns was a one shot, one off kind of deal, just the one movie, sure, I'd consider it to be somewhat of a success. But that's about it. Ironically, that's pretty much exactly what it became. I view it as the end of the Donnerverse and I've made peace with that fact. I believe most people will see it as that "one Superman movie that wasn't all that good" as years go by. I think Kev's right in saying most people, the non diehard Superman fan, just didn't care one way or another if there was a sequel or not. It didn't have the buzz that Batman Begins had, heck, that even the most recent Star Trek had. Part of that may be due to the end not setting up a sequel like Batman Begins did. I tell ya, I was so pumped leaving the theatre after the way the last scene of Begins played out. Superman just kinda ended. I LOVED the end and what it symbolized and all that, but to most people who have no idea about Jor-El's speech in the original, it was just another boring scene in an overlong, boring movie.
|
|
|
Post by lois on Feb 12, 2011 21:03:57 GMT -5
You call him wonderful because you blindly assume he has the same opinion as you? Sorry, but that's the most retarded thing I've read in ages. Remember Reeve wrote a lot of Superman IV... Oh, and a £200M budget is offensive! A typical George Reeves (B/w) episode holds my interest a heck of a lot more than SR. Why? Very tight plotting, suspense, genuine chemistry between the actors. You can sugar coat with cgi all you want but if you don't respond to the characters then its all in vain. I respectfully disagree. I never blindly assumed that he had the same opinion as me. I apologize to everyone here if I came across that way and I didn't mean to come across as arrogant and say everyone is wrong and that I was right. I never wanted to give that impression. Terribly sorry about that. *oops* I respect everyone's opinion here and I hope all of you mine as well. Yes, I'm aware he wrote a lot about Superman IV, I agree with you on that. Superman IV could and should have been better. The best films in IMHO with Chris Reeve are Superman the Movie and Superman II. IMHO I felt SR made money and I hear you and understand what you're saying about the budget about SR, I respectfully disagree with you on that, but, I do understand where you're coming from and your thoughts on that topic and respect your opinion about it and I hope you mine as well. George Reeves, is one of my favorite actors too as Superman. I too noticed the chemistry between him and his fellow actors. I also enjoyed SR. I loved the movie and thought it was fantastic. I sincerely hope that you enjoy the new Superman movie.
|
|
|
Post by lois on Feb 12, 2011 21:08:43 GMT -5
THANK YOU everyone here for making this a fun,very enjoyable and SUPER board to be on. It's been loads of fun discussing/debating/arguing/chewing the fat/cuttin' loose/ with all of you about what we think of Superman Returns and all the other great thread topics here too. I admit I do get carried away at times *blush* *gotta watch that* ;D It would be really nice if all of us could meet in person and get together at a restaurant/pub and talk about Superman Returns and I would love to be amongst my fellow group of wonderful Superman fans and that includes ALL of you here. Can you imagine the commotion we would cause?!? LOL ;D HUGS to all of you! And I mean that sincerely and from the heart. Lois
|
|
SGB
New Member
Posts: 15,265
|
Post by SGB on Feb 12, 2011 23:33:16 GMT -5
Chris Reeve approved the choice of Routh for the Superman role. Um, how could Reeve have approved of Brandon when he died before Brandon was cast?
|
|
|
Post by lois on Feb 13, 2011 0:09:13 GMT -5
Chris Reeve approved the choice of Routh for the Superman role. Um, how could Reeve have approved of Brandon when he died before Brandon was cast? *oops* my mistake ;D I meant to say he liked the idea of Brandon of being cast as Superman, sorry about that. And, he might have approved of Brandon after actually seeing him in the role if he could have done so. *see ... I'm learning...* ;D
|
|
Conor
New Member
Posts: 1,569
|
Post by Conor on Feb 13, 2011 4:16:40 GMT -5
Dana Reeve said she approved him and said Chris would have too.
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Feb 13, 2011 5:42:01 GMT -5
I believe that this Superman film is the one that has the most controversy....but I don't share your belief that most people see it as 'the one Superman movie that wasn't all that good'. I think Superman 3 and 4 have that distinction.
|
|
|
Post by Krypton Refugee on Feb 13, 2011 11:02:51 GMT -5
I believe that this Superman film is the one that has the most controversy....but I don't share your belief that most people see it as 'the one Superman movie that wasn't all that good'. I think Superman 3 and 4 have that distinction. Yes, but most young people today have no recollection whatsoever of Superman 3 and 4 unless they happened to grow up with them. heck, most of them probably don't remember Superman Returns either at this point.
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Feb 13, 2011 11:15:33 GMT -5
Good point. Most young at this stage are so used to big budget superhero films during the summer- period- that it's taken for granted and even if they like them, are probably pretty disposable to their memory, for the next thing.
STM to me came at 'the right time' so to speak- but then again- it sort of came 'at the right time' in the theares, too, to make it as large as "Lord of the Rings" was at its time. (though of course it's a gigantic pity that DOnner wasn't able to do a whole trilogy right off the bat, like that series.)
During the summer SR came out, superhero films were/are still a big event....but not THAT big of an event as when Superman the Movie or SII came out. Also, there's the question of how popular comic books and Superman as a character specifically is to the young moviegoing audience nowadays.
At the time, I was teaching a summer program with 100+ 'tweener' kids- of all different shapes/sizes/etc. and asked them in each of the the classes I taught what movies they enjoyed & NONE of them were interested in seeing ANY Superman movie that summer. (Now, this is before it even came out)
Why? Apparently- Superman was 'too perfect' as a character and the kids 'couldn't relate to him'. Instead, they were excited over the next "Harry Potter" and "Pirates of the Carribean" instead.
So..... of course it doesn't mean every kid in the world felt that way, but it definitely was a giant suprise to me that so many did, that summer.
|
|
|
Post by lois on Feb 15, 2011 18:13:02 GMT -5
Dana Reeve said she approved him and said Chris would have too. That's very nice of you to say and I 100% agree. She and Chris are sadly missed.
|
|
|
Post by Jor-L5150 on Feb 16, 2011 21:54:22 GMT -5
speaking of shit movies that get sequels...
there's ad nauseum tv spots for "big mommas house" number whatever....
(throws up in throat)
|
|
|
Post by lois on Feb 20, 2011 16:32:35 GMT -5
speaking of shit movies that get sequels... there's ad nauseum tv spots for "big mommas house" number whatever.... (throws up in throat) *sigh* ;D me thinks you got kryptonite shoved up your pants
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Mar 11, 2011 0:36:50 GMT -5
I sort of agree- I LOVED the introspection....but didn't expect anyone else to, so actually I was suprised that it made as much as it did. (I STILL think $391 million is a heckuva lot worldwide, for a franchise that was dead for so long) However, it kills me that what the fans claim to ALL want (more action)- from what we've been able to glean on what was in store- (which is still not that much, but still) the sequel seemed VERY set to WANT to deliver on more action! EVERYONE I think could have won out. Those who hated SR and those who loved SR.... and those who didn't want to go back to the very beginning ALL OVER AGAIN! The Donnerverse COULD have continued forward (somewhat) under Singer/Routh. Oh well. But..... with Geoff Johns stating in his comicon interview that he was heavily influenced in writing the Superman 'Secret Origins' by the Donner films--- and David Goyer stating that HIS script is heavily influenced by Geoff Johns' Superman.... Wouldn't it be ironic if there ends up being more Donner influence after all is said and done because of this?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 11, 2011 11:09:18 GMT -5
Val and I will be watching this for the first time together on Monday along with other related nerdy items.
|
|
ye5man
New Member
1%
Posts: 7,928
|
Post by ye5man on Mar 11, 2011 12:59:27 GMT -5
Very true
"Why the World doesn't need Superman" was obviously bollocks as everyone (quite rightly) was thrilled he returned.
"Why the World doesn't need Superman": Stupid fucking topic for the first Supes films in 2 decades. Fail.
Anyway, enough of the angsty shit, let's see Superman on top form on the big screen: in complete control.
|
|
|
Post by SupermanUF on Mar 11, 2011 13:19:21 GMT -5
Yup... that was my biggest qualm with Superman Returns.
Especially that fucking AWFUL line... "You wrote that the world doesn't need a savior, but every day I hear people crying for one."
That kills me.
Superman doesn't think of himself as a savior. He'd just give a half-cocked smile and say "I'm just here to help," then roll up his sleeves and get to work. That's the Superman the world needs right now.
|
|
|
Post by Valentine Smith on Mar 11, 2011 13:29:18 GMT -5
I love SR, and that line always made me cringe, too.
|
|
ye5man
New Member
1%
Posts: 7,928
|
Post by ye5man on Mar 11, 2011 13:58:03 GMT -5
Remember it was written by a couple of kids who pushed the Christ analogy to the forefront thinking it would be "deep". Too far if you ask me, lost its impact.
Reeve took the "thinking" Superman far enough in IV (the scene of Kent taking the glasses off in the Planet)
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Mar 11, 2011 14:44:37 GMT -5
Interesting- this probably highlights why SR split fans... What fans think is the worst, I actually thought that this was the best line in the film, that encapsulated why I thought THIS version of Superman worked so well for me. The weakness of this take, though, is that they didn't really commit all the way with it, like TDK did with making the Joker menacing. He hears the suffering all over the world, then out of all the cries for help around the world, he chooses to stop a bank robber and fly a prostitute to a hospital. Hmmnn......
|
|
|
Post by stargazer01 on Mar 11, 2011 15:21:37 GMT -5
Interesting- this probably highlights why SR split fans... What fans think is the worst, I actually thought that this was the best line in the film, that encapsulated why I thought THIS version of Superman worked so well for me. The weakness of this take, though, is that they didn't really commit all the way with it, like TDK did with making the Joker menacing. He hears the suffering all over the world, then out of all the cries for help around the world, he chooses to stop a bank robber and fly a prostitute to a hospital. Hmmnn...... But they Did commit.... Didn't he end up sacrificing his life at the end and nearly died? He probably died. But the love for his son brought him back to life. To me that line is the best one in all the Superman movies. It showed his huge compassion for the world, and why it's not easy being Superman. He wanted Lois to try to understand that, and it seems she did, because right after that she changed her bitter attitude towards him. God I love this movie. Really doubt that the Snyder roboot will top it in terms of the drama and epicness.
|
|