ye5man
New Member
1%
Posts: 7,928
|
Post by ye5man on Mar 14, 2013 5:19:55 GMT -5
Sorry, but this is NOT Lois Lane. I don't see it.  Neither do I dude, this is Rebekah Brooks! ;D ;D ;D |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 14, 2013 6:36:22 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by EnriqueH on Mar 14, 2013 8:00:56 GMT -5
I thought the picture looked fuzzy.
Anyway, you get the point. Hey, maybe she can play Vera when sheets of a certain age?
|
|
|
|
Post by SupermanUF on Mar 14, 2013 10:06:43 GMT -5
No, so quit the passive aggressive shit. There is nothing passive aggressive about it. Let's be clear: I know this is a "boys' club" and all, and everyone's entitled to their opinion, but your misogynistic bullshit is getting tiresome. Even in your last few posts, you couldn't even help yourself--you call her trailer trash, an ugly bitch--get a grip, man. |
|
ye5man
New Member
1%
Posts: 7,928
|
Post by ye5man on Mar 14, 2013 14:43:08 GMT -5
Yeah, but to be fair, he was looking at a pic of Rebekah Brooks!
|
|
|
|
Post by Jimbo on Mar 14, 2013 15:01:57 GMT -5
The URL for that picture even says "Rebekah Brooks." Are we in need of another drunk thread? ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by eccentricbeing on Mar 14, 2013 15:14:38 GMT -5
I know of a good AA group in Miami.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 14, 2013 16:14:58 GMT -5
The URL for that picture even says "Rebekah Brooks." Are we in need of another drunk thread? ;D Looks like Enrique had one too many Cosmopolitans |
|
ye5man
New Member
1%
Posts: 7,928
|
Post by ye5man on Mar 14, 2013 17:29:18 GMT -5
Too much playing with yourself makes you go blind, Enrique Which explains why you think this is ugly  |
|
|
|
Post by Jor-L5150 on Mar 14, 2013 17:36:14 GMT -5
"He's a man, but he's a Man of Steel," added writer David Goyer. "It's very much the theme of the movie, so it's embedded in the title, which we settled on at the very beginning. He's human but he's not human." It sounds as if the fact that he's not human will play a much larger role in the movie than any of us may have expected. "We try to flesh out Krypton and its different political factions, it's fauna, it's science. It's not a cameo," he said of Russell Crowe's Jor-El. "I think people think he's playing the Marlon Brando role, which isn't necessarily the case." So, Krypton will have a large role in Man of Steel, but what about the larger DC Universe? "I can't really say," is all Zack Snyder will reveal, before adding: "My hope is that we establish him and that he's a viable, awesome character that everyone is interested in seeing continue. He's the biggest superhero in the world. Or should it be. He's Superman, for gods sake!"
"Having gone to boarding school, I didn't have a comic-book store nearby," the British actor confessed when asked whether or not he grew up a fan of the iconic DC superhero by Total Film Magazine. "But as soon as I was cast in the movie, that's when I got my full, real introduction to Superman." After doing plenty of reading and watching a pile of box sets, Cavill finally felt as if he had a good grip on the character. "I managed to piece together this character, maintaining that baseline and having all differences and nuances that our script adds. This is our own thing, Stand-alone. It's about Superman, but we're not copying from any one comic book in particular. And that's a good thing, because its an origin-story."
"He's not a villain," Michael Shannon said of General Zod. "He's not a villain any more than any other General fighting to protect his people. He doesn't like to just hurt people and steal diamonds; he's focused on being successful at his job." Unlike Cavill, Shannon didn't look to the past for inspiration, saying instead that he wants to take this version of the character in a different direction altogether. "I think the way Terrence Stamp approached it - and this isn't any kind if criticism of his performance - there was something kind of detached about it. Pure, hatred, rage, whatever... I think this [characterisation] is more ambiguous." As for his suit, the Boardwalk Empire star emphasises that motion capture technology was necessary as, "the real thing would probably crush me."
Talking of costumes, Superman also underwent a pretty radical transformation for Man of Steel. "We have absolute respect for what was then. But now is now. Even Superman in the new comics doesn't have the briefs - he has the red belt, but not the briefs. It's time for a change." Much more can from both of these actors can be found in the latest issue of Total Film Magazine.
|
|
|
|
Post by Valentine Smith on Mar 14, 2013 18:14:36 GMT -5
Love all of that!
|
|
botz1
New Member
Posts: 422
|
Post by botz1 on Mar 14, 2013 18:18:59 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 14, 2013 18:40:39 GMT -5
It depends really. Usually when people try to tell you Superman sucks they'll say 'aw but he's too powerful'.
In saying that I hope they don't tone him down too much, if they are indeed going to tone him down.
|
|
downwithrouth
New Member
Geekdom really needs to shut up
Posts: 167
|
Post by downwithrouth on Mar 14, 2013 22:00:44 GMT -5
Look, I don't like Amy Adams as Lois Lane. She looks like Central Florida trailer trash. If you or anyone else here don't like my opinion, be a man and talk to me DIRECTLY. None of this pussy ass, "Oh Enrique this and that." passive, aggressive bullshit. The fuck do you care what I think of Amy Adams anyway and why are you taking it personally? Have I said something about you? No, so quit the passive aggressive shit. Amy Adams looks ordinary to me. The worst-looking Lois Lane we've had thus far is Margot Kidder, and she doesn't get half the grief Amy Adams is taking over her looks. What makes Adams, who looks pretty much like the glamor girl-style Lois of the comics and cartoons (hair color being the only variable), such a horrendous pick for the part when we've had a much homelier Lois in the Reeve films? Honestly, it feels like Superman fans just need something or someone to hate for no reason. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 14, 2013 22:04:21 GMT -5
that's a fair point. When did Margot Kidder become a looker?
Never thought she was a stand out or anything.
|
|
downwithrouth
New Member
Geekdom really needs to shut up
Posts: 167
|
Post by downwithrouth on Mar 14, 2013 22:07:11 GMT -5
In comparison to what? The Fleischer Superman, who could fly and see thru walls but still got his ass kicked on a regular basis? The Dini-Timm Superman, who was virtually indestructible but could feel extreme pain and be knocked off his feet by strong impacts? I don't recall Superman being diminished as a character in either of those versions by having a more restrained power set. Superman doesn't need to be a god to be impressive. He just needs to be super and compelling. I'm fine with dialing his powers back to Fleischer or Dini-Timm levels if the storytelling is good. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 15, 2013 4:51:37 GMT -5
The biggest concern of mine is based on one question: will this film have heart?
What made the original work so well was the heart of the movie. It's earnest, in the writing, in the handling of the material, in the acting. Superman isn't a cynical character, even though he can be protrayed as having heart in spite of living in cynical times.
Of course, culturally, the late 1970s were the perfect time for a movie like "Superman." Just look at "Star Wars." People were cynical for a decade, between Vietnam, Watergate, and the slew of anit-hero movies in which the protaganist and antagonist could swap places. Look at the heroes of the time. Popeye Doyle. Charles Bronsan in "Death Wish." People were ready for that change, and it showed. Those two movies were just the first to do it. People were ready for heroes again, and they were ready to leave the cynicism behind.
Let's explore some other concepts of heart in different, but similar films. "Batman" worked for 1989 because culturally we were losing that optimism. Then, our hero films became superficial. Look at the sequels, then at anti-hero crap like "Spawn." Those movies failed because they didn't have heart.
Then again, hero movies are working now even though I'd say as a culture we're still rather cynical. Marvel is making a killing on its characters because they have heart. Tony Stark and Thor have to face difficult trials to fully realize their hearts and the good they can do for others rather than for themselves. Steve Rodgers has heart and wears it on his sleeve, even if others mock or ignore him for it, even in different time periods. In the solo movie, he must prove himself to Tommy Lee Jones again and again. He does it in modern times in "The Avengers" and audiences are not rolling their eyes at him.
Characters can even have heart in cynical films or films in which the character is not always displaying his heart outwardly. Look at Nolan's Batman universe. Although these movies can be downright bleak and depressing at times, Bruce Wayne is a character with heart, though he is violent, dresses in black, stalks the night, and thrives on fear. And yet he inspires others because they see his heart in his actions. Even when he takes the fall for Harvey Dent's crimes and is vilified, his heart is evident because he makes that sacrifice for the greater good, even if it does lead to unintended consequences. Even characters with no knowledge of his personally can see the heart displayed by Wayne.
These movies and characters work because the characters have heart and the intent of the filmmaker is to be earnest, to bring viewers into the world and immerse them. The creators don't keep you at the border and have you critique or criticize those worlds. You're not meant to view these movies from the outside.
Why did "Superman Returns" not really find favor with the general public? Because the character is in many ways just going through the motions. Superman is doing super feats because he feels compelled to do them. His selfish pursuit of putting his world back in order to his desires after selfishly upending it undermines the reason why we loved him to begin with. Also, the movie too many times failed to take us inside. It tried to be too cute with us, trying to reference other incarnations of the character. It's okay to have one throwaway joke, but don't keep doing it over and over. Here's an example:
"Superman" -- Clark looks up the modern half-phone booth up and down, a subtle joke to the phone booth gag used for decades. One quick joke, but we're not out of the action.
"Superman Returns" -- The one-liner when Lex is asked if he's been to the Fortress before. The wigs on the boat. The Addis Ababa gag. The re-creation of the Action No. 1 cover. A reference to Gotham. "Truth, Justice ... all that stuff." "It's a bird, it's a plane ..." then "You wanted to see me?" "Great Caesar's Ghost!" (Now, I won't harp on the final recitation of Brando's speech about sons and fathers because it fits the story.)
These things took us outside of the picture too many times instead of letting us become part of that world, and for what? Just so the creators could puff out their chests and say, "See! We loved the first movie just as much as you! That means ours is good, too!"
So, will this new movie have heart? If not, it will fail.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 15, 2013 6:58:53 GMT -5
wow Lois holding a photo of Clark is interesting   |
|
|
|
Post by Valentine Smith on Mar 15, 2013 7:26:19 GMT -5
The only thing I don't like about this costume is the half-assed belt and its placement. Otherwise, this might be my favorite Superman suit ever...
If this movie makes me feel as good as Captain America, Avengers, or Dark Knight Rises did, then it will be a success in my eyes.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 15, 2013 7:28:05 GMT -5
That's literally my only gripe with it. It's like they were caught in two minds so said 'fuck it we'll have kinda half a belt!"
|
|
|
|
Post by Valentine Smith on Mar 15, 2013 7:50:54 GMT -5
Guarantee it: at the end of this flick, she knows Clark is Superman, and will "play dumb" to protect him in future films.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 15, 2013 7:52:17 GMT -5
Guarantee it: at the end of this flick, she knows Clark is Superman, and will "play dumb" to protect him in future films. You might be right. Looks like she's in the Arctic there, and she has a photo of him so maybe she knows pretty much from the get go? |
|
|
|
Post by Valentine Smith on Mar 15, 2013 7:54:28 GMT -5
I love the idea that she's chasing the "Superman" story before he's even Superman, and instead it's like he's a UFO or something. Is he an angel? Who is this guy that seems to be around whenever people are rescued from certain death at the last second?
It's a really cool angle rather than the "Lois is in love with Superman because he saves her..."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 15, 2013 8:12:56 GMT -5
I love the idea that she's chasing the "Superman" story before he's even Superman, and instead it's like he's a UFO or something. Is he an angel? Who is this guy that seems to be around whenever people are rescued from certain death at the last second? It's a really cool angle rather than the "Lois is in love with Superman because he saves her..." Absolutely, I'm keeping my fingers crossed this is the angle they'll go with. Adam's did say their two characters are 'at odds' at first |
|
|
|
Post by EnriqueH on Mar 15, 2013 9:05:20 GMT -5
that's a fair point. When did Margot Kidder become a looker? Never thought she was a stand out or anything. I may have made my point too strongly, but Kidder was the exception, not the rule. She looked good in STM but she took TERRIBLE care of herself. |
|
