Superman Returns

[crazy_asian_man]

I know plenty of other people that hate SR as well and consider it to be a steaming pile of crap (subjectively of course).

Well, I don't know those people, so I can't judge whether or not their judgement has any merit whatsoever, whereas my judgement is fantastic.

[EvilSupes]

I haven't seen SR in over 3 years (I think) but it's easily nests next to STM for me as a good Supes movie. Sure it has it's problems but don't all movies? Look at SII - great superman movie but has parts that let it down but it's still good. The difference with STM for me is it only really had the Can you read my mind bit that I wasn't keen on.

Anyway, the blu-ray set with the new krypton sequence will certainly bring a fresh experience all round. Can't wait.

[crazy_asian_man]

Sure it has it's problems but don't all movies? Look at SII - great superman movie but has parts that let it down but it's still good. The difference with STM for me is it only really had the Can you read my mind bit that I wasn't keen on.

Agreed, even STM, which everyone reveres here, has its issues.

To me, STM's Luthor bits are so over the top, over time, I've gotten used to them, but often I fastforward through them whenever I view STM. I think Baird cut them down as much as you could without losing the story points, but at times Donner goes too far in trying to lighten up a film. (*Lethal Weapon 4 anyone?)

[atp]

Apr 27, 2011 11:22:54 GMT -5 crazy_asian_man said:

but at times Donner goes too far in trying to lighten up a film. (*Lethal Weapon 4 anyone?)

I saw LW4 recently, and you're right. It's basically a Chris Rock comedy that happens to have Mel Gibson in a cameo as Riggs.

[Jor-L5150]

Apr 27, 2011 17:14:47 GMT -5 atp said:

Apr 27, 2011 11:22:54 GMT -5 crazy_asian_man said:

but at times Donner goes too far in trying to lighten up a film. (*Lethal Weapon 4 anyone?)

I saw LW4 recently, and you're right. It's basically a Chris Rock comedy that happens to have Mel Gibson in a cameo as Riggs.

LW4 is slightly more "on the level" than "national lampoon: loaded weapon" parody.

[crazy_asian_man]

LW4 is slightly more "on the level" than "national lampoon: loaded weapon" parody.

LW4 was still fun- but imo only because at that stage of the series, it was pretty unlikely ANY sequel or time with the characters were ever going to happen again- ever. It has good parts in it, and is entertaining just to see those characters again, but it definitely didn't need the addition of Chris Rock's character, recycled comedy schtick (far less believable at that point), nor the laughing gas sequence (were fart jokes much further behind that?).

If LW was too dark, and LW3 a little on the light side, I thought LW2 was perfect in terms of balancing the dark and lighter elements. LW4 is definitely still watchable, but in a 'what the heck, they're throwing everything in but the kitchen sink in at this point just to entertain us' way.

(Sad because they did have multiple scripts and options in mind prior to the window opening for them all to make the film)

Not sure how I'd feel about an 'LW5' with older Riggs and Murtaugh. Given how Gibson seems an extremely rich but bitter celeb at this point, I doubt his 'young crazy guy with an edge' appeal would work anymore for a happy-go-lucky LW--- but if Donner were to make a darker, more serious LW with Gibson and Glover, it could be interesting- but hard to envision, given how the series got more and more comedic over time.

Anyhow- what were we talking about again?
Oh yeah--- Superman Returns.

[botz1]

Funny on how Thors $392.4 million worldwide
has everyone buzzing and superman returns 391 mill was a failure.

WB made money, those greedy business mogul bastards wanted more....

[Valentine Smith]

Well, Thor made that money in something like 5 weeks of worldwide release, as opposed to SR...

I don't think the amount of money SR made was the issue. It was the amount of money that was sunk into Superman movies BEFORE Superman Returns which were never filmed. Just like WB claims SR had a budget of roughly 200 million, but it looks like a movie that was filmed for under 100.

[Jimbo]

Same thing happened with Disney's movie Tangled. It suffered years of development heck, revolving door of the director, art style and producers, until it was finally made in 2010...with the final total of $260 million. Maybe 100 million of that actually made its way onto the screen. Thankfully, Disney has deep pockets and can make money off merchandising for years to come. With SR, I get the feeling WB never had any faith in SR after years of disappointment and saw the movie solely as a way to cut their losses.

[Valentine Smith]

Someday, I'm going to write a paper on exactly that, Jimbo.

My suspicion is this: Singer was either told to tell a low-key Superman story that could be brought in substantially under-budget, or the word was put out for directors to pitch a low-key Superman film that could be made for little money and Singer's pitch "won".

WB shafted everyone.

[eccentricbeing]

Val...forget writing a paper. Write a book on it. Investigate everything, so when you find the real culprit in this debacle, you can look at him dead in the eye.

[ShogunLogan]

May 22, 2011 18:56:50 GMT -5 botz1 said:

Funny on how Thors $392.4 million worldwide
has everyone buzzing and superman returns 391 mill was a failure.

Thor has been out 2 1/2 weeks as opposed to 18 weeks.
Thor cost $150 million as opposed to $270 million.
Thor's ROI is 2.61 (and climbing) as opposed to 1.45.

And, let's face it...Thor doesn't have the name recognition that Superman has yet it is faring extremely well.

Look at the ROI thread...every movie under 2.00 either got a reboot or ended the franchise (with the exception of heckboy):

Blade: Trinity -- 1.99
Batman and Robin -- 1.90
heckboy 2 -- 1.88
Hulk -- 1.79
Incredible Hulk -- 1.75
Punisher -- 1.64
heckboy -- 1.50
Superman Returns -- 1.45
Watchmen -- 1.42
Elektra -- 1.30
Losers -- 1.16
Howard the Duck -- 1.03
Catwoman -- 0.82
Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World -- 0.80
Punisher War Zone -- 0.29
Jonah Hex -- 0.23

[ger-el]

Good points, SogunLogan, but I would still wait and see what the final numbers are. The fact is that most of these large movies make most of their money in the first 2 weeks. So, Thor is getting to the point where the numbers will see big drops and the final gross will be more set in stone.

The other problem is the budget for SR. That number seems to be more reflective of what WB counted towards the budget, which was all of the failed attempts before SR. SR's true budget would have been a much lower number. WB just lumped it all in there because of past failings on their part.

The list you included is great, and a great point about how those movies didn't get sequels or were rebooted. Most of them do seem to be sequels to series movies that had run their course (ie, Blade, Batman) or just one time jobs (Watchmen). Elektra could even be seen as a sequel to Daredevil, which itself was a horrible movie.

[crazy_asian_man]

The other problem is the budget for SR. That number seems to be more reflective of what WB counted towards the budget, which was all of the failed attempts before SR. SR's true budget would have been a much lower number. WB just lumped it all in there because of past failings on their part.

That would make sense. Also, if WB was trying to look good for all the waste, perhaps that also explained their over-inflated expecations for the boxoffice. (It HAS to make a billion dollars to be a success? Really. Again, it'll be interesting to see how MOS will be evaluated boxoffice wise....)

[EvilSupes]

MoS will be a massive budget no doubt, look at the cast... Box office expectations will be high.

[Valentine Smith]

I don't think there's any danger of previous budgets being counted against MoS.

[stargazer01]

Just saw this on youtube. Wish it had actually played like that.




Interesting comment, I wonder if it's true:

Excellent! This is what Singer proposed to do and is mentioned in the complete shooting script. He wanted it to open like the first film with the theatre curtains and then dissolve into the footage of Brando and York in  black and white with Kal-el's blankets being the only items in color. I don't know if this was filmed or not

[Rod]

the explosion looks like a close up of an eye as in blade runner.
i love the sound effect!

[ye5man]

Definitely not a "vague sequel" then

[botz1]

ok we're many hours into the release of the blu ray edition with the RTK footage...why aint it on you tube yet!!!!!!!! hahaha

[Deleted]

God, the sound on Superman Returns is so fucking incredible. Krypton exploding is one of the most amazing things I've ever heard on my home theater system. My neighbors HAVE to hate me.

[EvilSupes]

Jun 7, 2011 17:53:35 GMT -5 @ucfkevin said:

God, the sound on Superman Returns is so fucking incredible. Krypton exploding is one of the most amazing things I've ever heard on my home theater system. My neighbors HAVE to hate me.

It's true. Forget picture quality and colour from this movie, the sound is absolutely orgasmic! It sounded good when I watched at the cinema, and it sounded good in standard dolby 5.1, so I cannot imagine what it will sound like in HD audio with my new receiver. It's gonna be great.

DTS-HD audio all the way baby.

[Jimbo]

DTS-HD, Dolby TrueHD, LPCM 5.1....it's all the same.

[Deleted]

False.

I can hear the difference.

[Legsy]

Don't Dance is correct Jeembo. I can hear it meself.