atp
New Member
Resident Troll
Posts: 6,823 
|
Post by atp on Mar 4, 2024 12:46:57 GMT -5
If we were so wrong about MoS and Cavill,please explain:
- Why hasn't there been MoS2 yet, even after 11 years?
- Why was Cavill replaced as Superman?
And also:
- Who exactly were the mysterious Reeve Only People?
Try to answer please
|
|
crown
New Member
Posts: 1,226
|
Post by crown on Mar 4, 2024 21:22:48 GMT -5
If we were so wrong about MoS and Cavill,please explain: - Why hasn't there been MoS2 yet, even after 11 years? - Why was Cavill replaced as Superman? And also: - Who exactly were the mysterious Reeve Only People? Try to answer please What am I gonna do with you ATP? I held up my end and delivered to you the Reeve Only Bully Leader. What do I get in return? This obsessive material of yours closes out of town. |
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,075
|
Post by Metallo on Mar 7, 2024 9:47:22 GMT -5
If we were so wrong about MoS and Cavill,please explain: - Why hasn't there been MoS2 yet, even after 11 years? - Why was Cavill replaced as Superman? And also: - Who exactly were the mysterious Reeve Only People? Try to answer please A lot of people drank the kool-aid when it came to MOS and didn’t want dissenting opinions killing their buzz. Very much head in the sand mentality. Every questionable element was excused whenever some people could see the problems coming. I remember one particular former member saying we should support MOS as much as possible even if it was bad just so we could get more movies. I said that was stupid and equivalent of supporting sh!t so WB could give us more sh!t. MOS was a failed experiment even though it had everything going for it, every advantage, and the only reason Cavill stuck around as long as he did was as because it was part of a shared universe. Even if MOS never got a sequel there was still a place for him. Otherwise he would have been a one and done like Brandon Routh. |
|
|
|
Post by Kamdan on Mar 9, 2024 6:05:59 GMT -5
The exact same thing happened when Superman Returns came out. Every criticism that’s common place today was whisked away with a “it will all be paid off in the next one.”
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,075
|
Post by Metallo on Mar 9, 2024 13:45:43 GMT -5
The exact same thing happened when Superman Returns came out. Every criticism that’s common place today was whisked away with a “it will all be paid off in the next one.” It was much worse with MOS though. Some people here did what you said but many didn’t. Even some of the people who gave MOS a pass endlessly criticized Superman Returns for the same issues like being too dreary looking, too boring, too violent for a Superman movie, too CGI heavy, no chemistry between the leads, and rehashing plot elements from previous Superman films. That's a double standard. One guy here even said Superman getting stabbed in the side by Luthor in SR was too violent for kids and had no place in a Superman film but completely ignored the violence in MOS which was ten times worse and much of it actually perpetrated by Superman himself. That's what leaves an even more sour taste with MOS. It's got many of the same flaws as SR but none of the positives. It's got more action but somehow it's still boring. There was never the same level of outrage that SR didn’t get a sequel compared to MOS not getting one. There was also never the same level of outrage over Routh being shown the door compared to Cavill even though Routh never got as many appearances in the role as Cavill did. |
|
|
|
Post by Kamdan on Mar 9, 2024 22:47:04 GMT -5
Another problem is that Singer kept saying he was gonna go all Wrath of Khan on the follow up to Returns. That’s what blindly led people to think that this was gonna be like the Star Trek films where they had a lackluster start with The Motion Picture and rebounded with the sequel.
The fallacy with the mentality is that a Wrath of Khan was possible because they got rid of the key individuals that made The Motion Picture the way it was. So, in a sense, we got that in the form of Man of Steel that thought the way to appeal to audiences was be treated as the next great DC based film series following up from Nolan’s Dark Knight Trilogy. Of course, we saw how little faith there was when it all snowballed with the addition of Batman that spelled harsh desperation that led to our ultimate despair.
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,075
|
Post by Metallo on Mar 10, 2024 0:21:18 GMT -5
Another problem is that Singer kept saying he was gonna go all Wrath of Khan on the follow up to Returns. That’s what blindly led people to think that this was gonna be like the Star Trek films where they had a lackluster start with The Motion Picture and rebounded with the sequel. The fallacy with the mentality is that a Wrath of Khan was possible because they got rid of the key individuals that made The Motion Picture the way it was. So, in a sense, we got that in the form of Man of Steel that thought the way to appeal to audiences was be treated as the next great DC based film series following up from Nolan’s Dark Knight Trilogy. Of course, we saw how little faith there was when it all snowballed with the addition of Batman that spelled harsh desperation that led to our ultimate despair. Not exactly. The difference there is at least Singer had shown in the past, before he even made Superman Returns, that he could come back and make a better written, more action packed sequel and better film the second time with X2. X-men was a far better film than Superman Returns but X-men did suffer some of the same complaints and issues Returns did. They were just more severe with Returns. It’s not really a one to one comparison with The Motion Picture/Wrath of Khan dynamic. Singer was simply using Wrath of Khan as an example of what he’d do and unlike Roddenberry and everyone behind Star Trek: TMP he probably understood what he needed to do to the next film and he could adjust. For all we know he could have come back and made it work. Roddenberry on the other hand had become so far removed creatively from what made the original Star Trek series work by then that he was part of the problem. He also didn’t have many of the same people with him that made the TV show work when Paramount finally did make TMP. By the 80s it was clear that the less involved Gene was with the day to day running of Star Trek the better it could be. Also Star Trek II at least kept what worked from TMP. MOS didn’t do that with SR (if anything it doubled down on what DIDN’T work). It was too extreme a shift in the opposite direction when it came to certain things. An overreaction. TWOK found a balance and got back to the core of what made the Trek franchise work in the first place. MOS was a dismissal of what made the franchise work in the first place. So again it’s not a one to one comparison. |
|
atp
New Member
Resident Troll
Posts: 6,823
|
Post by atp on Mar 10, 2024 7:16:45 GMT -5
One of the worst things MOS did was lead us on with deceptive trailers.
The first few trailers really gave the impression that we were going to get something deep and almost "poetic". Something in the same spirit as "Contact" with Jodie Foster.
The reality was a shallow, ugly, noisy, brutal piece of crap that was nothing more than a video game with some dialogue scenes.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kamdan on Mar 10, 2024 8:17:13 GMT -5
X2 succeed over the first because they had a much better storyline to base itself on, which was the highly praised standalone graphic novel God Loves, Man Kills. That combined with the tease of the Dark Phoenix storyline was perfect recipe to deliver a “Wrath of Khan.” No threads left untied for Returns were that engaging to warrant a follow up on that scale, especially when directly stealing a plot point from Khan of our main character having an illegitimate son only to have him killed off so Superman could be “an angry god.” That definitely was played out in the Snyderverse and it wasn’t very appealing at all. There was nowhere to go but sink slower with Singer which led the powers at be decide to reboot.
|
|
atp
New Member
Resident Troll
Posts: 6,823
|
Post by atp on Mar 10, 2024 9:08:41 GMT -5
My son was IN the bus.
He saw.
What Clark did.
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,075
|
Post by Metallo on Mar 10, 2024 12:15:16 GMT -5
X2 succeed over the first because they had a much better storyline to base itself on, which was the highly praised standalone graphic novel God Loves, Man Kills. That combined with the tease of the Dark Phoenix storyline was perfect recipe to deliver a “Wrath of Khan.” A storyline which was shepherded through development for the film BY SINGER. He was still the director and the writers had to follow his lead. He could have screwed that up or he could have pulled it off. He pulled it off. The writers weren’t working autonomously though. Singer, the producers, and the studio had to DECIDE and AGREE to go with that particular storyline. It wasn’t just thrust on all of them and they were forced to use it. Singer and WB could have done the same thing with SR. Even if God Loves Man Kills was a good story we’ve seen directors and studios screw up good source material before. The FoX-men era of films alone is littered with examples of that happening. It had to be adapted well and executed well and Singer and his writers did that. There were plenty of “threads” left untied by Superman Returns that could have been developed for a sequel. Not just the kid but the fact that there was a massive new planetary body made of alien materials now floating around in the solar system and the chaos that would cause on a locally cosmic scale as well as any attention that might attract from any number of outside forces. Pretty big scale. At the end of SR they made a point to update us on just what happened to that huge piece of rock made up of Kryptonite and Kryptonian Crystal and that wasn’t done on accident. I’m even pretty sure they say that it’s STILL GROWING after it’s settled into its own orbit around the sun. If WE can notice such real cosmic changes and events now from our real world in our own universe do you really think no one or no thing wouldn’t notice something like that happening in the fictional universe of Superman? If anything they’d pick up on it even more easily. And if Singer wanted to or the studio wanted to any number of good comic book storylines could have been attached to that to develop as a sequel. The “angry god” thing didn’t work because Snyder is a hack and his execution of the idea was poor not because it was a bad idea. It’s all about the execution and the people doing it. |
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,075
|
Post by Metallo on Mar 10, 2024 12:19:14 GMT -5
One of the worst things MOS did was lead us on with deceptive trailers. The first few trailers really gave the impression that we were going to get something deep and almost "poetic". Something in the same spirit as "Contact" with Jodie Foster. The reality was a shallow, ugly, noisy, brutal piece of crap that was nothing more than a video game with some dialogue scenes. Yeah. That first teaser was very deceptive. They wanted everyone to think it was Terence Malick meets Christopher Nolan. Thoughtful, deep, and intellectual. It ended up being a dude bro frat boy punch up. I think you’re right in that a lot of people probably felt turned off and bailed. Hence why WB knew they had to include Batman in the next film to get people excited again. |
|
|
|
Post by Kamdan on Mar 10, 2024 20:08:09 GMT -5
Another plus for Singer’s development of the first X-Men film was that he got into a situation like Nicolas Meyer did where he could cherry pick all of the good elements of the previous drafts of X-Men to deliver a decent film of that era that was very much intended to be a prelude to what was to come in the following films. Singer and his writers built Superman Returns from the ground up, aside from the obvious swipes from Donner’s original and hardly succeeded with what he had. The young writers who also worked on X2 were out of their depth writing something on this scale, as were the two leads.
It’s also disheartening to hear about how Singer got his way all of the time by bringing up what was then ancient history with the Superman Lives and say “you were going to make this.” Now the joke’s on him because he made his Superman a reality that isn’t well lauded and its only successes can be linked back to Donner’s tenure. It baffled me then and especially now that he praised Donner's sense of verisimilitude, yet when it was his turn, he had not a lick of it. Why did the Daily Planet have to look like as though Tim Burton designed it? Why center your plot around Kryptonian crystals being able to grow ugly landmasses so Luthor can do that schtick again? Somebody really needed to be questioning him about these things.
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,075
|
Post by Metallo on Mar 10, 2024 22:05:29 GMT -5
Another plus for Singer’s development of the first X-Men film was that he got into a situation like Nicolas Meyer did where he could cherry pick all of the good elements of the previous drafts of X-Men to deliver a decent film of that era that was very much intended to be a prelude to what was to come in the following films. Singer and his writers built Superman Returns from the ground up, aside from the obvious swipes from Donner’s original and hardly succeeded with what he had. The young writers who also worked on X2 were out of their depth writing something on this scale, as were the two leads. It’s also disheartening to hear about how Singer got his way all of the time by bringing up what was then ancient history with the Superman Lives and say “you were going to make this.” Now the joke’s on him because he made his Superman a reality that isn’t well lauded and its only successes can be linked back to Donner’s tenure. It baffled me then and especially now that he praised Donner's sense of verisimilitude, yet when it was his turn, he had not a lick of it. Why did the Daily Planet have to look like as though Tim Burton designed it? Why center your plot around Kryptonian crystals being able to grow ugly landmasses so Luthor can do that schtick again? Somebody really needed to be questioning him about these things. What you’re leaving out is that a lot of that stuff he wanted to use from previous drafts wasn’t used or had to be cut out because of demands from Fox and Tom Rothman not only because Rothman looked down his nose at the material but mostly for budgetary reasons. So in the end Singer’s “freedom” to cherry-pick was evened out by the restrictions put on the production by the studio. One could argue that forced him to be more clever and creative and gave us a better film (like Meyer with Star Trek II) but the more last minute story and set piece changes were just more obstacles to delivering a good film. Singer and his writers crafted a more original story for Superman Returns but the bones of it wasn’t a bad one simply one he misjudged as far as what he wanted vs what he expected the audience to want. After that learning experience there was a chance he wouldn’t have done that again but again the problem wasn’t whether it was original or based on more directly on specific source material but the execution at the writing stage. As far as the end results of Superman Returns and the reception to it that was simply Singer’s hubris catching up to him. It’s not the first or last time that’s happened to any director especially directors on these kinds of films. The same thing happened to Snyder and Goyer when they arrogantly referred to the failures of previous Superman films (primarily Superman Returns), how they’d “fix” things, and what they wouldn’t do on Man of Steel. Then it happened again years later to Joss Whedon when he arrogantly referred to the failures of previous Superman films (primarily Man of Steel and BVS), how he’d “fix” things, and what he wouldn’t do on Justice League. It’s not a flaw exclusive to Bryan Singer. It’s easy to become arrogant and overconfident with success under your belt and people (mostly suck ups and yes men) praising you as the next golden boy. Just as directors have had the creative flaw of lazily rehashing previous films stories or elements of stories for sequels and follow ups for decades even the good ones. |
|
crown
New Member
Posts: 1,226
|
Post by crown on Mar 11, 2024 3:25:36 GMT -5
Rumor is that the young writers only got the job because they were....... SLEEPING with Bryan Singer! Sorry I ruined your innocence. |
|
|
|
Post by Kamdan on Mar 13, 2024 6:48:23 GMT -5
Nothing ruined here. Just reassured. I remember seeing that Look Up in the Sky documentary when they showed up in it to bash Superman Lives and thought, “THESE are the two schmucks are the writers? You can tell how they got this job.” They also heavily rewrote X2 and are probably only responsible for dumb things like NSYNC on Cyclops’ radio and a cat licking Wolverine’s claws.
|
|
crown
New Member
Posts: 1,226
|
Post by crown on Mar 13, 2024 7:56:23 GMT -5
Nothing ruined here. Just reassured. I remember seeing that Look Up in the Sky documentary when they showed up in it to bash Superman Lives and thought, “THESE are the two schmucks are the writers? You can tell how they got this job.” They also heavily rewrote X2 and are probably only responsible for dumb things like NSYNC on Cyclops’ radio and a cat licking Wolverine’s claws. Also guy who played Iceman in X-Men.... you know how he got cast in the movie right? |
|
|
|
Post by Kamdan on Mar 13, 2024 13:10:48 GMT -5
Was Singer’s type and he had a twin.
|
|
crown
New Member
Posts: 1,226
|
Post by crown on Mar 15, 2024 16:02:26 GMT -5
Was Singer’s type and he had a twin. Yeah Sean Ashmore and his brother obviously slept with Singer to get their "big break" in Hollywood, they lived with him at his house too. Begs the question, did Singer pressure Brandon Routh to do anything sexual to get cast as Superman? Routh seems like such a moral upstanding guy I don't believe he would have agreed to Singers perversions. |
|
|
|
Post by Kamdan on Mar 15, 2024 16:37:13 GMT -5
Gotta admit it was on my mind when I met Routh at a convention but he was such a nice guy and perfectly willing to sign my photoshopped picture of him in a better Superman suit that I decided that was something we don’t need to know unless he wants to say it himself.
|
|
crown
New Member
Posts: 1,226
|
Post by crown on Mar 15, 2024 18:32:30 GMT -5
Gotta admit it was on my mind when I met Routh at a convention but he was such a nice guy and perfectly willing to sign my photoshopped picture of him in a better Superman suit that I decided that was something we don’t need to know unless he wants to say it himself. Well Routh took it really hard when there was no sequel to SR... he was literally reduced to crying on the floor. Hopefully, he didn't sell his soul to Singer... I get a feeling he probably didn't since he looked just like Reeve so obviously Singer was gonna cast him no matter what. |
|
|
|
Post by Kamdan on Mar 16, 2024 6:21:23 GMT -5
Should have paid attention to what was being said in Superman IV instead of laughing at the hokey special effects:
“If you teach the Earth (yourself) to put its faith in only one man (Singer), even yourself (career), you’re teaching them to be betrayed.”
Something I contemplated him inscribing on the autograph was “Why didn’t I look like this?” And this was a very early example of making him look pitch perfect as Reeve without that unnecessary mass of hair in a costume that was more fitting for Evil Superman.
Again, all of these criticisms given right when that first picture appeared on the internet. I’m sure he was told over and over that Singer knows what he’s doing and you’ll be a star like Hugh Jackman. Now we’re almost 20 years later and Returns is just viewed as skippable footnote in the Superman franchise.
It’s a shame that they constantly tease us with Routh led Superman series but it’s an unobtainable object.
|
|
crown
New Member
Posts: 1,226
|
Post by crown on Mar 16, 2024 21:27:08 GMT -5
Should have paid attention to what was being said in Superman IV instead of laughing at the hokey special effects: “If you teach the Earth (yourself) to put its faith in only one man (Singer), even yourself (career), you’re teaching them to be betrayed.” Something I contemplated him inscribing on the autograph was “Why didn’t I look like this?” And this was a very early example of making him look pitch perfect as Reeve without that unnecessary mass of hair in a costume that was more fitting for Evil Superman. Again, all of these criticisms given right when that first picture appeared on the internet. I’m sure he was told over and over that Singer knows what he’s doing and you’ll be a star like Hugh Jackman. Now we’re almost 20 years later and Returns is just viewed as skippable footnote in the Superman franchise. It’s a shame that they constantly tease us with Routh led Superman series but it’s an unobtainable object. So many things about SR sucked. Even the title “Returns” felt derivative of Batman. That first pic of Routh with the blue and brown wetsuit and the mullet was cringe. And the film was just too gaay. Gaay director, gaay writers, gaay Lex Luther, even Kal Penn was gaay! It’s no wonder a Superman film made by a committee of gaay men cast pre-pubescent Kate Bosworth as Lois Lane… they were not attracted to real women! |
|
