Discussion of movies and ReelThoughts topics

It is currently Fri Feb 27, 2015 1:58 pm

Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 141 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 8  Next
Confirmed: Zack Snyder is directing Superman. 
Author Message
Post Re: Confirmed: Zack Snyder is directing Superman.
Vexer wrote:
If you ask me, it's pretty ridiculous to be judging a film solely based on it's costume, have you guys considered the possibility that this isn't the final version of it? Maybe the costume is going to be tweaked with some CGI in post-production?

Who's judging the film based solely on the costume? We're judging the costume.

Thu Sep 01, 2011 12:26 pm
Post Re: Confirmed: Zack Snyder is directing Superman.
The international trailer.

It's the same as the domestic trailer, albeit with a different voiceover monologue recited by Jor-El, rather than Jon Kent.

Sat Jul 21, 2012 3:24 pm
Post Re: Confirmed: Zack Snyder is directing Superman.
Ken wrote:
The international trailer.

It's the same as the domestic trailer, albeit with a different voiceover monologue recited by Jor-El, rather than Jon Kent.

This trailer played before the midnight screening of TDKR that I saw. The audience was hushed while it played, and I'm thinking it wasn't because they were awed by the trailer.

Sat Jul 21, 2012 4:21 pm
Post Re: Confirmed: Zack Snyder is directing Superman.
Ragnarok73 wrote:
Ken wrote:
The international trailer.

It's the same as the domestic trailer, albeit with a different voiceover monologue recited by Jor-El, rather than Jon Kent.

This trailer played before the midnight screening of TDKR that I saw. The audience was hushed while it played, and I'm thinking it wasn't because they were awed by the trailer.

The audience at my theater seemed pretty impressed by it(as was I) The Hobbit trailer on the other hand barely elicited any sort of reaction from people at all. Know I get you guys were talking about refering to the film's "look", it had a very "uncanny valley" feel to it.

Sat Jul 21, 2012 4:35 pm
Post Re: Confirmed: Zack Snyder is directing Superman.
Amusingly enough, the musical cue used in the Superman trailer is from the Fellowship of the Ring.

Sat Jul 21, 2012 4:40 pm
Post Re: Confirmed: Zack Snyder is directing Superman.
Ken wrote:
Amusingly enough, the musical cue used in the Superman trailer is from the Fellowship of the Ring.

It wouldn't be the first time that musical scores were rehashed. I guess Howard Shore wouldn't mind this as long as he got paid.

Sat Jul 21, 2012 5:50 pm
Post Re: Confirmed: Zack Snyder is directing Superman.
From the thoroughly good comic series All Star Superman:


Sat Jul 21, 2012 6:37 pm
Second Unit Director
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2010 8:35 am
Posts: 371
Post Re: Confirmed: Zack Snyder is directing Superman.
Looks like Superman as directed by Terrence Malick. Though it'll probably only be a gimmick used in the early parts of the film (Zack Snyder does love his gimmicks). But I'd love to see a Superman movie made as if it were the Tree Of Life, with nothing but gorgeous imagery and pretentious, self-indulgent wank for two and a half hours. Maybe the whole space imagery/beginning of the universe stuff could be substituted with the destruction of Krypton.

Last edited by Awkward Beard Man on Sat Jul 21, 2012 10:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Sat Jul 21, 2012 10:24 pm
Post Re: Confirmed: Zack Snyder is directing Superman.
The funny thing is, I also thought of Malick when looking at some of these shots. I kind of doubt they'll take it in that direction, but Snyder could choose worse directors to emulate visually.


I was wondering what a version of the Man of Steel trailer with no voiceover would be like. So I made one.

Sat Jul 21, 2012 10:28 pm
Post Re: Confirmed: Zack Snyder is directing Superman.
I'm actually finding myself getting pretty excited for this movie, in spite of the wait and the lack of information. As anybody who's been here for any decent length of time is already sick of hearing about, Superman is my favorite fictional character. There's something inherently cool about seeing him get the V.I.P. big-screen treatment again.

As an outlet for that, and maybe to share some of that enthusiasm with people who aren't as familiar with the character, I figure I'll put together some random bits of trivia that could get some discussion going.

[Reveal] Spoiler: Identity
Everybody knows that the character has two identities. There's Superman, the public persona for his superheroic activities, and there's Clark Kent, the persona that allows him to live and work among humans as one of them. Over the years, there has been some debate (and several interpretations) as to which identity is the real one and which one is the diguise.

It is becoming more accepted these days that there is actually a distinctive third identity: that of the lost boy whose parents found him in a cornfield, who grew up baling hay, and who went on to develop a sober sense of responsibility both toward his adoptive planet and to the legacy of his lost ancestors.

This third personality--of the kid born on Krypton and raised in Smallville--is the real identity. Both Superman and Clark Kent of Metropolis are masks. The tragedy of that is that there are very few people and places to which he can truly be himself.

[Reveal] Spoiler: Creation
Superman was developed in the mid-1930s by writer Jerome Siegel and artist Joe Shuster, two aspiring science fiction authors from Cleveland, Ohio. Their first version of the character was a bald villain with incredible mental powers, which they shopped around without any success. Very little of their materials from this period survived, Shuster having thrown them into a fire in a moment of frustration.

They developed a second version of the character whose powers were physical and who used them for good. They based his appearance on that of a circus strongman and based his abilities on those of John Carter. The difference was that John Carter was an Earthling sent to another planet, whereas their character would be an alien who lost his home planet in a terrible cataclysm.

This version of the character was turned down by a number of companies before being accepted by National Comics (now DC Comics). One noteworthy company that turned Superman down was Eisner & Iger, the company owned at the time by legendary comic artist Will Eisner. By Eisner's own admission, he soon regretted the decision, but it was based more on his company's limited resources than any failure to see the character's appeal.

Siegel and Shuster had tremendous luck with Superman for a while. They saw their character in comics, movies, and radio, they became relatively rich, and they had their own studio where a number of professional artists worked on Superman comics. Throughout this time, they tried a number of legal strategies to get back the rights to Superman, which they'd sold to National Comics in order to put bread on the table. DC, unwilling to budge, instead offered them a cash settlement, which they accepted in exchange for reaffirming DC's ownership of Superman. By the end of the 1940s, Siegel and Shuster had done quite well for themselves, despite having no arrangement with DC for residual payments.

Somehow, by a decade or so later, Siegel and Shuster were both broke. Siegel struggled to find work in the industry before eventually quitting and becoming a postal carrier. Shuster drew comics for as long as he could before his worsening blindness stopped him. What happened to their small fortune is still a mystery.

When the first Superman movie was made in the 1970s, a group of concerned comic artists publicly embarrassed DC into renegotiating contracts with Siegel and Shuster. The two creators earned both a modest pension for themselves and a trip to the movie premiere. They got to meet the cast, the crew, and President Carter.

Ownership of Superman is still under contention today, with DC and the families of the two men regularly in and out of court. While DC will likely continue to own the character, rights to Superman's debut appearance (in the famous first issue of Action Comics) are set to revert back to the creators soon. DC will lose the legal right to reuse any distinctive plot points that originate from that story, which includes the depiction of Superman's origins.

[Reveal] Spoiler: some notes on powers
Superman originally started out just like his name sounds. Any ability that a regular man would have, he has a super version of that. His senses were much more acute. He could run faster and leap higher and farther than any ordinary man. His skin was much tougher than that of any ordinary man. This was the original concept that informed the first few years of the comics, but it was soon violated.

The trouble was in the cartoons of the 1940s. The animators couldn't figure out how to portray Superman's fantastic leaps in a way that looked weighty and realistic. They did their best whenever they could. Whenever they couldn't, they drew him launching himself like a torpedo in fantastic, controlled mid-air movements. This was how it was decided that Superman flies. It was so popular that the feature was quickly added into the comics.

Over the years, writers experimented with adding lots of different superpowers. The ones that were popular were reused again and again. The ones that weren't as popular were simply forgotten about. Explanations for these abilities were devised in hindsight and retroactively added into the story. As such, just how powerful Superman is supposed to be, especially in relation to the ever-increasing ranks of other Superman-esque characters ("superheroes"), was in a constant state of flux.

Superman was arguably at his most modest level in that first issue of Action Comics, in which he leaped in increments of several city blocks to get from point A to point B. I would wager that it was in the mid-1960s, when Superman flew through the heart of the sun anytime he needed to clean his costume, that he was probably portrayed at his most powerful. Just how powerful he should be is something that many writers have wrestled with over the years. Oftentimes, his powers are reduced simply so that whomever is writing him at the moment doesn't have to try so hard to create a challenge to the character.

At the end of the day, the important thing isn't the powers themselves, but how he chooses to use them. Ultimately, Superman's mission is to inspire others to use their own gifts for the betterment of the world, just as he uses his.

[Reveal] Spoiler: Why Superman?
I'll leave the answer to that question to a much better writer than me.

"I saw Superman not as a superhero or even a science fiction character, but as a story of Everyman. We’re all Superman in our own adventures. We have our own Fortresses of Solitude we retreat to, with our own special collections of valued stuff, our own super–pets, our own “Bottle Cities” that we feel guilty for neglecting. We have our own peers and rivals and bizarre emotional or moral tangles to deal with.

I felt I’d really grasped the concept when I saw him as Everyman, or rather as the dreamself of Everyman. That “S” is the radiant emblem of divinity we reveal when we rip off our stuffy shirts, our social masks, our neuroses, our constructed selves, and become who we truly are.

Batman is obviously much cooler, but that’s because he’s a very energetic and adolescent fantasy character: a handsome billionaire playboy in black leather with a butler at this beck and call, better cars and gadgetry than James Bond, a horde of fetish femme fatales baying around his heels and no boss. That guy’s Superman day and night.

Superman grew up baling hay on a farm. He goes to work, for a boss, in an office. He pines after a hard–working gal. Only when he tears off his shirt does that heroic, ideal inner self come to life. That’s actually a much more adult fantasy than the one Batman’s peddling but it also makes Superman a little harder to sell. He’s much more of a working class superhero, which is why we ended [All-Star Superman] with the image of a laboring Superman.

He’s Everyman operating on a sci–fi Paul Bunyan scale. His worries and emotional problems are the same as ours... except that when he falls out with his girlfriend, the world trembles.


In today’s world, in today’s media climate designed to foster the fear our leaders like us to feel because it makes us easier to push around. In a world where limp, wimpy men are forced to talk tough and act ‘badass’ even though we all know they’re shitting it inside. In a world where the measure of our moral strength has come to lie in the extremity of the images we’re able to look at and stomach. In a world, I’m reliably told, that’s going to the dogs, the real mischief, the real punk rock rebellion, is a snarling, ‘fuck you’ positivity and optimism. Violent optimism in the face of all evidence to the contrary is the Alpha form of outrage these days. It really freaks people out."

- Grant Morrison

Mon Jul 23, 2012 5:28 pm
Post Re: Confirmed: Zack Snyder is directing Superman.
Some more stuff:

[Reveal] Spoiler: random trivia
Clark Kent's middle name is either Jerome or Joseph, depending on the portrayal. No points for guessing who he's named after.

In some recent portrayals, Superman is a vegetarian, owing to the fact that his extended range of visual powers enables him to see the exact moment that the life ebbs from a dying creature.

In other portrayals, his favorite food is beef bourginion. This is almost surely an inside joke among Superman fans that got so far out of hand that it was canonized. There is an old issue in which Clark, down in the dumps, is visited at his apartment by Lois Lane, who cooks him beef bourginion for dinner. Cut to the next morning, when Clark walks into the office of the Daily Planet full of good cheer. Surface implication: Lois cheered him up by cooking him dinner. Not-so-subtle implication: Lois cheered him up in a different way.

It is somewhat popularly known that Superman's powers derive from yellow sunlight, but there have been varying approaches to how this works. Initially, it was like hitting a switch. If Superman is in a star system with a yellow star, his powers are on. If he's in a star system with a red star, his powers turn off. A later idea that tends to stick is that his unique alien cell structure readily absorbs starlight. It stores yellow radiation like a solar battery, and that stored radiation is the source of his power. Red radiation is useless to him, so when his cells suck it up, the powers fade.

One last factoid that is relevant to this forum: his favorite movie is To Kill A Mockingbird.

[Reveal] Spoiler: some noteworthy titles
Sure, the stories were simpler—the morals less complex, the characters rougher around the edges. But the comics of this era were far more bountiful than those of today. Here, for your consideration, are a recounting of Superman’s origin, a brief sidebar offering a plausible explanation for his (then relatively modest) abilities, and a breezy story introducing many long-term staples—all in a dozen pages or so. Can the ponderous, incremental superhero stories of today really be considered an improvement?
(Action Comics #1 is available for online reading here.)

Reading these stories collected, back to back, is (probably) infinitely preferable to reading them in their original presentation as weekly fragments. The artwork is excellent, and we get to see plenty of Superman in his early days of righteous, if somewhat shapeless, social anger.

They lack scope, but there are more than enough heroics to make up for it. All the basic elements of the myth are here, drawn vividly in the definitive style of Joe Shuster. These first appearances in fluid motion are as sensational as a flying superhero ought to be.

It’s Clark Kent as a reporter first, donning the tights only when the stakes are at their highest. Perhaps this choice was a necessity of effects-spare ‘50s television, but it worked better here than it ever has in the comics.

The makers of this picture view the titular character as mythic and human in all the ways that count. In spite of the misplaced time travel sequence, Superman: the Movie makes an excellent case for their position. Everyone in this production delivers, especially Superman himself.

The Watchmen writer/artist duo manages to wed crowd-pleasing action, fan-pleasing Easter eggs, and intelligentsia-pleasing meditations on greener grass. Never mistake it for the inferior television counterpart, which lacks the necessary context.

Dark portent appropriately gives way to sunny optimism in the last Superman story of the Silver Age. It’s heartfelt in its desire to hit all the bases, and while that means a slightly silly everything-and-the-kitchen-sink approach, it’s infinitely preferable to the reboot that followed.

(Superman Annual #15 and both parts of Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow? are available in the trade paperback volume The DC Comics Stories of Alan Moore.)

This amalgam of many editions of the character is too heavy on the post-1986 “earthling” Superman for my taste, but it’s smoother than any blend has a right to be. For the creators, Batman: the Animated Series is still the standard to beat. The third season of this show, smart and thematically rich, rises to the challenge, and the rest of it is pretty good too.

I’ve often thought of Alex Ross as an artist in search of a format. His paintings sure do make the characters look suitably larger than life, but comic book storytelling is almost exclusively the domain of the pencil artist for a reason. Photorealistic watercolor is too dense and self-conscious to really move a narrative—unless it’s a sparse, open narrative such as the one Paul Dini contributes to this project. His perceptive and elegant world hunger parable is a fine canvas for Ross’s arresting style.

The format is an interesting choice: 45 minute stories divided into two parts each, featuring an ensemble cast. Timm and Co., perhaps for the first time, seem unsure of their footing at times, unwisely nerfing Superman and committing a variety of other errors. Nevertheless, there are some good stories to be had, and Michael Rosenbaum is a hoot as The Flash.

There is an audience out there with a lot of background in Silver Age superhero comics, and there is an audience out there that appreciates obnoxiously clever meta-fiction. The audience for this book lies within the intersection. No, the title character isn’t Superman, but he might as well be.

It’s Superman, with all the compassion but none of the wisdom to keeps it in check. While the metaphors are obvious and not especially daring, this oddball Stalinist reimagining is a nice way of looking at the classic superhero themes of power and responsibility (eat your heart out, Spidey) from an unusual angle.

This Superman writer’s contradictory feelings about the character mirror his contradictory feelings about a hereditary family disease, as told in this (kind of) true story. It’s peppered with short vignettes that cast a critical eye on various elements of the Superman myth, which are interesting if Watchmen wasn’t enough of a deconstructionist’s feast for you.

Timm and Co. successfully resuscitate their Justice League project with shorter episodes and a wider variety of characters. They capture an age of superheroes, but aren’t naïve enough to either ignore the many ramifications or stoop to bland superhero cavalcade beat-em-ups. The first season is undoubtedly smarter and much more interesting, but the Flash/Luthor mind swap in the second season is too funny to miss.

There is a fictional character named Clark Kent, secretly a superhero. There is a real person (or a less fictional character?) named Clark Kent, also secretly a superhero, who lives his double life generally unhappy about being named after the fictional character. I promise the story is more touching and less obnoxiously clever than it sounds.

The imagination, human optimism, and breakneck storytelling of classic Superman are wedded with modern authorial and artistic sophistication. In my experience, this is not only a definitive and marvelous take on the character, but the superhero genre’s strongest claim to real artistic merit.

Editor Michael Thau gamely attempts to cobble together a jigsaw puzzle with several missing pieces, and the final picture is discernible enough if you squint hard. This chop-job Superman II, thematically, is a much better companion—indeed, a much better second half—to the 1978 original. It ups the romance and reduces the sound and fury, leaving the final lesson (including that time travel sequence, which works best here where it belongs) all the more bittersweet.

Oft-maligned, much-misunderstood, semi-reboot. Director Bryan Singer deserves criticism for not delivering the classical rendition that the title promises. He also deserves praise for daring to hurt the invulnerable man.

Mon Jul 23, 2012 5:30 pm
Post Re: Confirmed: Zack Snyder is directing Superman.
A couple of thoughts:

1) In
[Reveal] Spoiler:
superman returns, what do you think of superman having a son, and that (feeble) son having powers. I know he slept with Lois is Superman 2, but he was human when he did.

2) The reverse time sequence in superman. It is bittersweet in Superman 2 (donner cut) because he sacrifices what he shared with Lois. But the fact that it is used as a device in the first one (I suppose to show how powerful he really is)?..what's the point of anything bad happening if superman can go back in time to fix it like it never happened?

There is a funny commercial with Seinfeld (superman is also his favorite character) and superman voiced by Patrick Warburton called "hindsight is 20/20" where Seinfeld tells him he just can't go back in time when he feels like it.

3) if superman's only weakness is kryptonite, why doesn't he just wear a lead lined suit?...problem solved. I guess it would also keep the yellow sun's rays from getting to him, but he could just take it off and "recharge his batteries" every so often.

4) doesn't doomsday beat superman to death?

Tue Jul 24, 2012 8:31 am
Post Re: Confirmed: Zack Snyder is directing Superman.
[Reveal] Spoiler: 1.
He was still Kryptonian. Red sunlight neutralizes his powers, but it doesn't change his biology. It's kind of like if a car runs out of gas. It doesn't run, but it's still a car. And it would still have a baby car if it were to mate.

[Reveal] Spoiler: 2.
The only reason they tacked the time travel sequence onto the first one is that it looked like the second movie wasn't going to get made. They couldn't do their planned cliffhanger ending, so they needed something strong to end the movie, and that was it. It was essentially 100% down to executive meddling.

As for whether or not he could time travel anytime he wanted, I'm sure he could. But that gets us into his greatest limitation of all: his sense of responsibility. With Superman, it's rarely about whether or not he can do something, but about whether he should do something.

There's a good story from the '70s called Must There Be A Superman? in which the Guardians of the Universe imply to Superman that his activities are hindering human progress, rather than nurturing it. The creative team did a great job of showing just how much this idea eats at Superman throughout the issue.

[Reveal] Spoiler: 3.
Superman's prescribed weaknesses are kryptonite, magic, and red sunlight. While those are interesting in a mythological sense, ultimately the best stories tend to be the ones that find other challenges for the character, or at least ones that use them creatively and not as an easy way out of a writer's corner.

There is also the issue that kryptonite is SUPPOSED to be incredibly rare. I know that's often hard to believe, given that lazier writers have the stuff popping up about once a week, but in theory, Superman has a very small chance of running into it. There is one piece he knows is accounted for, because he entrusted it to Batman to use in the event of a "Superman goes rogue" scenario.

[Reveal] Spoiler: 4.
The Doomsday story arc was pretty lame from front to back. They ended up cheating their way out of it for both characters, having them in trauma-induced states of hibernation that looked indistinguishable from death. I know, right?

The "death of Superman" story idea has actually been used a few times, but that was the one that got the big promotion and media attention. It was essentially the first big comic book event, like a blockbuster movie.

Tue Jul 24, 2012 10:42 am
Post Re: Confirmed: Zack Snyder is directing Superman.
Speaking of time traveling multiple times...

Tue Jul 24, 2012 12:18 pm
Post Re: Confirmed: Zack Snyder is directing Superman.
I have always liked Superman, with the Richard Donner original still being one of my favorite films adopted from a comic as well. My knowledge and understanding of the character, however, is limited to the old b&w superman TV series, old cartoons, and theatrical films. I never got absorbed into the comic. Do you think Allstar Superman is the best read regarding the character? With the illustrations you posted, it looks like that comic might be a heavy influence on Man of Steel. I don't have time to revisit everything, but I would like a quality read of a contained series, much like the whole Watchmen. Is Allstar Superman a self contained, graphic novel that I can get in novel form?

Tue Jul 24, 2012 1:13 pm
Post Re: Confirmed: Zack Snyder is directing Superman.
As far as I know, All-Star Superman is currently available in two collected volumes (six issues each). It is a self-contained 12 issue arc, and it was deliberately designed not to depend on the continuity of any other titles, so any reader who has at least a passing knowledge of the Superman basics should feel comfortable. It's more designed to represent a timeless, commonly understood Superman and include all the basic story tropes that have sprung from the character since the 1930s.

The only single volume collection I know of is the Absolute Edition, which I'd personally love to have, but it costs quite a few bones.

Tue Jul 24, 2012 4:27 pm
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 6:26 pm
Posts: 2157
Post Re: Confirmed: Zack Snyder is directing Superman.
I was going to take my standard approach to movies I'm anticipating by avoiding the trailers, but in this case I lasted for all of five minutes.

Here is the full trailer for Man of Steel.

The floor is now open to discussion, extrapolation, wild speculation, etc.

The temptation is to like what you should like--not what you do like... another temptation is to come up with an interesting reason for liking it that may not actually be the reason you like it.

Tue Dec 11, 2012 2:13 pm

Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 7:44 pm
Posts: 1550
Post Re: Confirmed: Zack Snyder is directing Superman.
Michael Shannon being in it is what most excites me about the film. not crazy about Hans Zimmer doing the score.

Tue Dec 11, 2012 4:09 pm
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:02 pm
Posts: 4202
Location: Zion, IL
Post Re: Confirmed: Zack Snyder is directing Superman.
That music in the trailer gave me chills, as for the film, it looks like a massive improvement over the mediocre Superman Returns.

Tue Dec 11, 2012 4:59 pm

Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 7:44 pm
Posts: 2169
Post Re: Confirmed: Zack Snyder is directing Superman.
Trailer looks good. Probably the most exciting movie of next summer. Certainly better than Star Trek into Darkness.

Tue Dec 11, 2012 6:23 pm
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 141 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 8  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by Vjacheslav Trushkin for Free Forum/DivisionCore.
Translated by Xaphos © 2007, 2008, 2009 phpBB.fr