ye5man
New Member
1%
Posts: 7,928
|
Post by ye5man on Jun 28, 2013 12:28:32 GMT -5
Yeah, the money it made  |
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,078
|
Post by Metallo on Jun 28, 2013 12:33:57 GMT -5
True. But if it was just a question of money they could have gotten someone else whose films made money. There was no guarantee he could do a film like STM based on the type of material. His general skill was pretty clear to see. There have been a lot of cases where good directors couldn't grasp how to handle certain kinds of material.
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,078
|
Post by Metallo on Jun 28, 2013 12:49:57 GMT -5
I whole heartedly agree If the film was as brilliant as Avengers, it would have had brilliant word of mouth. We'd all love it and it would have made a fucking fortune and nobody would be comparing it negatively to STM. A few Reeve maniacs would hate it by default but normal folk like us would be hugely relieved. Because its not that film, people are looking at excuses. And when people nitpick we get blamed for wearing nostalgia glasses, which is really pathetic. is "Superman" a captive of "Superman: the movie" ?. Its a relevant question. But had MoS done its duty we would not be asking it. Yup. All this. Perhaps that is how to find a good director for a new Superman movie. By looking wider than people who have directed superhero movies. WB seems too lazy or not creative enough to do that. They lack the ability to make that kind of artistic leap. But they should be doing what you say. They've been playing it safe since they went with Singer and Goyer because of their success with Xmen and Blade. Even Campbell directed Zorro before he directed Green Lantern. They need more outside the box thinking like Nolan. he wasn't the retard obvious choice. Look for directors who have the skill to handle these films. Branagh was the guy for Thor because of his theater background. Singer was the guy for Xmen because he knew how to use ensembles in serious stories like Usual Suspects. Whedon was the guy for Avengers because of his genre work and because he also know how to work with large casts of characters on stuff like Firefly. Johnston was the pick for Capt America because he'd done period films before and he had the experience in fx heavy films. WB needs to start looking for the right people who have had success instead of people who did the same stuff over and over. The obvious choices. The guns for hire. |
|
atp
New Member
Resident Troll
Posts: 6,823 
|
Post by atp on Jun 28, 2013 12:58:33 GMT -5
What do you think of Mel Gibson?
He has spent enough time working with Donner to hopefully have a lot rub off on him. Not to mention winning an Oscar for best director.
His work on Braveheart shows he knows how to tell a story and how to handle drama and action. Braveheart was incredibly well paced. Despite long huge battle scenes, the movie never drags.
It is a shame Gibson has gone off the rails. My gut says he would have been a good director for a Superman movie.
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,078
|
Post by Metallo on Jun 28, 2013 13:06:36 GMT -5
I like that Gibson has been the type of guy that defied expectations as a director. But since his reputation is in shambles a big studio for WB would never touch him for a DC film that's meant to have wide mainstream appeal. Too bad. I can think of a couple of DC films I'd love to see him direct. I'd they had the right take I bet he could do something interesting with Wonder Woman. Get him some gender sensitivity counseling first. If WB has any sense they will let Del Toro make his Dark DC movie. It might not put asses in seats but it would be amazing. He's too obvious for an Etrigan movie but hat would also be amazing. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 28, 2013 13:16:16 GMT -5
Goddamn, ATP...  What a suggestion! Gibson! Yes- a thousand times, yes! Sent from my SPH-D710 using proboards |
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jun 28, 2013 13:28:13 GMT -5
If the "Making of" STM book is accurate, then the Salkinds almost had Speilberg--- but because "Jaws" hadn't come out yet- they didn't want HIM. By the time "Jaws" came out, they ran after him, but he already left the building, so to speak. Then- Donner had the "Omen" be a big boxoffice hit- and the Salkinds went right after him. It's a pity there's no way to see 'parallel what if' movies, had Speilberg, or even Guy Hamilton, or even Richard Lester had been the director instead.... let alone what might have happened if STM was a box office disappointment--- and/or how that would have had ripple effects down the line after that-  |
|
|
|
Post by ChrisM on Jun 28, 2013 13:28:59 GMT -5
Yeah, the money it made Goes back to what I said - STM had some luck and good fortune. It's not like the Salkinds did a worldwide talent search for the right director. In a different reality, it would have been directed by Guy Hamilton starring Nick Nolte with music by Goldsmith... and no Manky to save their ass. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 28, 2013 13:48:53 GMT -5
As amusing as the rage is with people who simply aren't happy that MOS's flaws aren't enough to turn some of us off, I'm also amused by the complete exaggeration of those flaws to drill home their point that they don't care for it.
Jor's thread had a valid point, I don't buy that if they did it a certain way everyone would have been on board, there are people who are just too stuck in their ways to accept change and that is life.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 28, 2013 13:59:56 GMT -5
There will never ever be a new Superman movie that everyone here loves. Ever.
Sent from my SPH-D710 using proboards
|
|
ye5man
New Member
1%
Posts: 7,928
|
Post by ye5man on Jun 28, 2013 15:20:06 GMT -5
The way some people have been going on, STM is wearing thin! All I wanted from MOS (after SR) was 2D visuals/excitement and fighting. I got that in spades so I am not complaining. I do need another viewing though. Best thing about MoS is everyone has taken to Cav. That in itself is great. Well, apart from a certain Reeve obsessed fool whom I recently heard was talking about Chris Reeve appearing in his dreams |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 28, 2013 17:07:22 GMT -5
The way some people have been going on, STM is wearing thin! All I wanted from MOS (after SR) was 2D visuals/excitement and fighting. I got that in spades so I am not complaining. I do need another viewing though. Best thing about MoS is everyone has taken to Cav. That in itself is great. Well, apart from a certain Reeve obsessed fool whom I recently heard was talking about Chris Reeve appearing in his dreams who was that? |
|
ye5man
New Member
1%
Posts: 7,928
|
Post by ye5man on Jun 28, 2013 17:23:24 GMT -5
Come on Kris, who else??
|
|
|
|
Post by Jor-L5150 on Jun 28, 2013 18:42:22 GMT -5
What would/did folks who grew up on george reeves really think of a superman who had barely off camera sex with lois? What did the die-hards of the 70s think of the cosmetic look of superman the movie? If we were in their shoes would we look at our ICON the way fans and critics are looking at "man of steel" ? You can't tell me that it is not a SIGNIFIGANT factor. STM is a HEAVILY flawed film- but its amazing to watch and has a perfect cast. MOS is a flawed film - but its amazing to watch and has a perfect cast. STM has a lotta "heart" - no one disputes, but that "heart" is the frosting over plot holes and camp. If we levelled the scrutiny at STM that we do for modern CBMs I think we'd shred it. Again, the character AND the genre are competing against their own success. Well first off you don't know what the fuck camp is if you're throwing around that tired assed MOS cheerleader complaint of STM. People who do that focus on the surface and don't even think about it. STM is a flawed film but its a lot less flawed than MOS. STMS flaws are mostly down to CHOICES and artistic ideas.. MOS flaws are down to EXECUTION. See the difference? A lot of people's complaints of STM SEEM to be over elements they don't like. But it's story is told very well. Snyder had trouble doing that. The flaw in your a argument is you're stuck on cosmetics but you ignore the problems of execution which seem to be the beef most critics have with MOS. And even then all things said despite all its flaws STM was pulled off despite much more against it and while older fans may not have all cared for certain choices most of the complaints don't dwell on execution. NO. i am pretty GOD. DAMN. CERTAIN. that is NOT what i'm doing. i VERY clearly said- at the outset- that i am NOT having a go at people for not "loving/liking" MOS. in fact- i clearly say the OPPOSITE. i DO NOT CARE (in any real passionate way) if someone does NOT like- or simply has NO interest in MOS. i said that abundantly clearly. (though i am dismayed at the rip-roaring hate this recent version has managed to get) and when i refer to "camp" in STM it is not in a hateful mean-spirited way- I WORSHIP that movie! but it DOES have camp. luthor is played with very little menace and otis- seriously, tell me otis is not camp. and i also freely admitted that MOS has flaws. also- i love the cosmetics of BOTH films. i LOVE the cosmetics, the "look" of STM and MOS. i am abso-fucking-lutely NOT "hung up" on the "cosmetics" of STM. AND i am even-more-abso-fucking-lutely certain i am not badgering a film(stm) to prop up another(MOS) . basically everything you just said has ZERO basis in what i said. |
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,078
|
Post by Metallo on Jun 28, 2013 19:13:29 GMT -5
Zero basis? God damn certain? ...when you whined about Paul Dini and Mark Waid after they had their way? By your logic every film with silly comedy or where a character acts foolish to be made fun of is camp. STM is very very light on camp if there is any in there at all. You don't know what you're talking about. like those fools that say Schumacher's batman films are campy. No they aren't. They're just stupid childish comedy. Flash Gordon is camp. Barbarella is camp. People throw camp around when they can't think of any other way to describe something even when it doesn't fit. A lot of Andy Warhol movies are camp and the humor in STM isn't the same thing. heck even something like Beyond the Valley of The Dolls is closer to true camp. Things can be comedic without being camp. Some people don't see the distinction. Otis is silly and stupid. So he camp? Jesus that's like saying Tommy Boy is camp. Lex being played with little menace means he's camp? Like I said you don't know what the heck you are saying on this one. Any ol Comedy doesn't always equal camp. |
|
|
|
Post by Jor-L5150 on Jun 28, 2013 19:42:54 GMT -5
i have other reasons for my beef wih mark waid. i made NO comment on paul dini as i admire him very much and as i have REPEATEDLY said i dont care if someone has a negative view of MOS.
hey guys- metallo just walked into a thread!
|
|
MerM
New Member
Posts: 6,665
|
Post by MerM on Jun 29, 2013 15:26:50 GMT -5
and when i refer to "camp" in STM it is not in a hateful mean-spirited way- I WORSHIP that movie! but it DOES have camp. luthor is played with very little menace and otis- seriously, tell me otis is not camp. Otis is not camp. Otis is broadly-played comic relief, and there's a heck of a lot of difference between that and camp. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 29, 2013 15:38:07 GMT -5
Well, I sure as heck think Otis is campy.
Sent from my SPH-D710 using proboards
|
|
|
|
Post by ChrisM on Jun 29, 2013 16:33:42 GMT -5
and when i refer to "camp" in STM it is not in a hateful mean-spirited way- I WORSHIP that movie! but it DOES have camp. luthor is played with very little menace and otis- seriously, tell me otis is not camp. Otis is not camp. Otis is broadly-played comic relief, and there's a heck of a lot of difference between that and camp. I think you're getting lost in the semantics. Otis is not a character you take seriously. Call it comic relief or camp or whatever, but that's what it is. |
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,078
|
Post by Metallo on Jun 30, 2013 11:25:32 GMT -5
Calling Otis camp is like calling Happy Hogan campy in Iron Man 3. Its a silly comic relief character. Like I said may as well call all comedy characters camp. Most of Lester's comedy would be considers SLAPSTICK rather than camp. That's exactly what the opening of SIII is. Penguins goons in Batman the movie are camp sidekicks.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 30, 2013 11:48:25 GMT -5
Hogan's behavior is in tone with the rest of the movie. There is nothing close to Otis's tone in STM. This goofball that never does anything right ever when pretty much everything else in the movie is played straight or realistically? Nah, that's camp all the way
Sent from my SPH-D710 using proboards
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,078
|
Post by Metallo on Jun 30, 2013 12:00:37 GMT -5
That doesn't mean it's camp though. Camp is also a tone a movie has throughout. You can't just stop and start it. Either it's campy or its not. Otis is slapstick comic relief. Not camp. John Waters camp films are always camp. They don't suddenly shift into something else. And Otis sure isn't something out of Waters or Semple or Devines type of comedy. Iron mans films don't have the same tone throughout. Sometimes they are serious sometimes dark and sometimes they are humorous. Just like...you guessed it. STM.
Otis is played for laughs and the films acknowledges it. That's not camp. It's not played ironically straight.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 30, 2013 13:59:30 GMT -5
Eh, it's all opinion. I'm not wrong anymore than you are.
Sent from my SPH-D710 using proboards
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,078
|
Post by Metallo on Jun 30, 2013 15:16:51 GMT -5
And camps camp. If STM points out how stupid and funny Otis is then how is that camp? Lex openly points out Otis's foolishness. It's the absurd played for laughs directly. Not the absurd played straight. People throw the term around way too loosely without appreciating the humor. To them absurd automatically equals camp
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 30, 2013 15:27:47 GMT -5
Wouldn't bother wasting my time kev
|
|
