|
|
| Page 1 of 11 |
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢
Posts: 73196
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel 🇮🇱
|
 Posted: Wed, 10th Feb 2010 10:57 Post subject: Man of Steel [R - 2013] |
|
 |
| Quote: | EXCLUSIVE: Warner Bros is trying to ready its DC Comics stalwart Superman to soar again on the Big Screen, and the studio has turned to Chris Nolan to mentor development of the movie. Our insiders say that the brains behind rebooted Batman has been asked to play a "godfather" role and ensure The Man Of Steel gets off the ground after a 3 1/2-year hiatus. Nolan's leadership of the project can set it in the right direction with the critics and the fans, not to mention at the box office. Besides, Nolan is considered something of a god at Warner Bros and has a strong relationship with the studio after the success of Batman Begins and The Dark Knight. Though he wasn’t obligated to do so, he gave the studio first crack at his spec script Inception, and Warner Bros was able to buy it before other studios even got a sniff. While Nolan completes that Leonardo DiCaprio-starrer for a July 16th release, he's also hatched an idea for Warner Bros' third Batman installment. Now his brother and frequent collaborator Jonathan "Jonah" Nolan, and David Goyer who co-wrote Batman Begins and penned the story for The Dark Knight, are off scripting it. (See 'FlashForward' Showrunner Exits For Features).
Legendary Pictures will partner with Warner Bros on the next installment of Superman. Legendary also co-produced/co-financed Superman Returns in 2006. Legendary was partnered with Warner Bros as a co-producer/co-financier on the recent Batman films including Batman Begins and The Dark Knight and will be involved in Nolan’s 3rd Batman film.
Let us emphasize that Superman 3.0 is in the early stages of development. And we doubt Nolan would direct. This wouldn't be a sequel to Superman Returns but a completely fresh franchise. As one of our insiders reassures: “It would definitely not be a followup to Superman Returns." Nolan coming on board follows a hiatus period for Superman after that 2006 reboot as the studio tried to figure out whether or not to make a sequel to that version starring Brandon Routh directed by Bryan Singer. As recently as this summer, Warner Bros was still contemplating how to proceed. That's when we were told that "Bryan or Brandon are not completely out of it yet. But Warner Bros doesn't have a handle yet on it, either. [Producer] Jon Peters is trying to make something happen since he stands to benefit financially. But they [the studio] need to hear a great story that makes sense." Another insider explained to us, "We know what we don't want to do. But we don't know what we want to do. We learned a lot from the last movie, and we want to get it right this time."
Fans have long been yearning for Superman to finally get the big screen Nolan-ized treatment this classic superhero deserves. Warner Bros clearly has learned from all five Superman movies. Superman: The Movie and Superman II starring Christopher Reeve and produced by Ilya and Alexander Salkind, were critical, fan, and financial successes. Their 1983 Superman III was mediocre. Then came a real dud in 1987, Superman IV: The Quest For Peace which continued wth Reeves but unfortunately was made by Golan-Globus's Cannon Films in association with Warner Bros. The inbetween period between that pic and 2006's Superman Returns was plagued by long delays and budget troubles and script misses. In 1997, original Batman director Tim Burton tried to make a Superman movie starring Nicolas Cage. Around 2004, J.J. Abrams wrote a film that was the first leg of a trilogy. Abrams wanted to direct, but had only directed episodes of his TV series (and wouldn't make his feature directing debut until 2006's Mission:Impossible III. McG and Brett Ratner separately were attached to that film. Ratner got closest, but Warner Bros was wary of a budget that swelled to $250 million, and which seemed risky after established star Josh Hartnett turned down the 3-picture deal that could have brought him $100 million in salary. After that, Warner Bros bosses didn't embrace Ratner's s choice of soap opera actor Matt Bomer to star.
Other prominent filmmakers were reportedly in the loop, but Warner Bros never pulled the trigger on the picture until Bryan Singer's involvement. Singer's Superman Returns was respectably reviewed for the genre. But it turned in only $52 million opening weekend, and $391 million worldwide gross. Problem was it cost too much (the budget was reportedly $270 million), and the promotion was lousy (Joel Silver was brought in at the last minute to inject macho into the marketing campaign). Worse, it left diehard fans only "meh" about a sequel starring Routh. Singer fared better, but it seems doubtful he'll be asked for an encore now. After all, Singer is now developing the spinoff X-Men: First Class for 20th Century Fox whose bosses were furious when he took on The Man Of Steel reboot instead of helming X-Men 3. But Singer and the studio subsequently made peace and he's back in the Fox fold and on board.
The restructuring of Warner Bros' business with DC Comics became Warner Bros Pictures Group president Jeff Robinov's first priority since having his contract reupped by Time Warner last summer. Problems have plagued the DC Comics-Warner Bros relationship for more than a decade. But the biggest failure has been to leave the most valuable DC Comics characters in movie development limbo by chaotically starting and stopping development on the high profile live action pics. Most recently, Warner Bros and DC Comics are finally getting their act together as evidenced by the progress on Green Lantern.
Superman 3.0 would test Warner Bros veteran executive Diane Nelson, the head of DC Entertainment Inc, that new company founded to fully realize and integrate the power and value of the DC Comics brand and characters across all media and platforms into Warner Bros Entertainment's content and distribution businesses. Nelson especially was charged with suping up Superman again because it's way too valuable to leave dormant like this. Besides, the clock is ticking.
Attorney Marc Toberoff, who keeps suing Warner Bros on behalf of creative rightsholders, warns that, in 2013, the Jerome Siegel heirs along with the estate of co-creator Joe Shuster will own the entire original copyright to Superman -- "and neither DC Comics nor Warner Bros will be able to exploit any new Superman works without a license from the Siegels and Shusters". He's also pointed out that, if Warner Bros does not start production on a new Superman sequel or reboot by 2011, the Siegels could sue to recover their damages on the grounds that the deal should have contained a clause in which the rights returned to the owners after a given time if no film was in development. The heirs of Siegel have already been awarded half the copyright for Superman. And in 2013 the heirs of co-creator Joe Shuster get the remaining half. After that, neither DC Comics nor Warner Bros will be able to use Superman without a financial agreement with the heirs. There are also stipulations on what parts of the origins story can be used in future Superman movies and which require re-negotiations with the creators' heirs or estates.
At first, Warner Bros felt no pressure to rush out another Superman pic. As Warner Bros chairman Alan Horn told a court hearing about rights to Superman, he hoped to make another Superman movie but no film was in development, no script had been written, and the earliest he foresaw another Superman film released would be 2012. He told the judge: "We had hopes to keep the character alive and to once again reinvent Superman. Our hope is to develop a Superman property and to try again. What hurt us is that the reviews and so on for the Superman movie did not get the kind of critical acclaim that Batman got, and we have other issues with Superman that concern us."
So Warner Bros is now bringing in Batman's saviour. What Nolan would do with the Superman character and story is intriguing to say the least. And he has the experience necessary of prepping and pepping a played-out franchise. The 2005 Batman Begins grossed $373 million worldwide on a reported $150 million budget. And of course 2008’s The Dark Knight crossed the $1 billion worldwide gross mark on a reported $185 million budget (and Heath Ledger posthumously won an Oscar for Best Supporting Actor).
Batman was rebooted according to Frank Miller's film noirish take on Batman. But there's a big difference between Superman's cinematic incarnations and comic book version. Warner Brothers and DC Comics for a long time weren’t sure which version they liked better. The cinematic version has been squeaky clean, occasionally campy, and has more-or-less unlimited power except when confronted with Kryptonite. The comic book version has some limits on his powers, can be darker, and fights aliens a lot more. Shortly after Dark Knight hit it big, fans assumed that Superman would be taken to the “dark” side as well. That's because Warner Bros mogul Jeff Robinov stressed post-Dark Knight that "we have to look at how to make these movies edgier". One of our insiders interpreted this to say: "He meant more sophisticated."
A more comic-accurate Superman seems like the way to go. No need to worry: Chris Nolan knows what he's doing. |
Source
Don't know what to think of this. I think the Superman character is quite awful one (as oppose to the character of Batman, which is very relatable). Nolan's realistic approach, if this is where they are pushing with this move, seems very out of place for a character like Superman, which really needs over the top enemies to shine, otherwise we get silly crap like Superman Returns.
And they are not sure whether to make a sequel or reboot. Really, I say, just reboot the damn thing. Routh was just awful for the part, not to mention the rest of the cast (except Kevin Spacey, but he's good despite the awful role). And the superkid? Please. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chiv
Posts: 27530
Location: Behind You...
|
| Posted: Wed, 10th Feb 2010 12:20 Post subject: |
|
|
i just hate this whole facination with 'realism' in fucking superhero films. what part of superman works in a strictly reality based universe?
i mean fuck, even batman is a poor choice to work the realism angle... hes a grown man that dresses up as a bat for fucks sake, and employs the use of magical technical devices.
not saying that the first batman reboot film wasnt a good film - it was, hes a good director, but 'realism' in 'comic book' characters is a shitty way to go... i mean fuck, i think even NOLAN acknowledges that, because his second batman film was most decidedly a step away from realism.
for these films to be GREAT, they need to revel in what they are... FANTASTIC and OUT THERE stories. go nuts, make it as over the top and exaggerated as possible, but thats not to say you shouldnt approach it with an eye QUALITY (where most of these kinds of films fail) - the two things are not mutually exclusive as some seem to think.
embrace the fantasy, i reckon. to hell with all this 'realism' bullshit.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢
Posts: 73196
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel 🇮🇱
|
| Posted: Wed, 10th Feb 2010 12:38 Post subject: |
|
|
I think "realistic" is a poor choice of description (I used it wrongly as well). I think more appropriate is "grounded in reality". Otherwise, you end up with bullshit like the Burton and Schumacher crap.
Every comic book film from the last years that is good has been grounded in reality. The Nolan Batman films, Iron Man, the first two X Men films, V for Vendetta, etc. None of them were particularly realistic, but were quite grounded in reality.
But this is only part of the formula. The other major part is having a good story. With the Superman character being such dumb idea (an invincible man faces enemies, wow!  ), the only thing that would work is make it an effects movie (kind of like Transformers, but at least have good actors, not Shia La Bluff and Skank Hox) with huge enemy/enemies doing all kind of havoc - and this is pretty hard to do, because no good actor will want to take part in such a bad script.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vaifan1986
Posts: 4638
Location: Birthplace of the necktie.
|
| Posted: Wed, 10th Feb 2010 13:12 Post subject: |
|
|
They need to introduce a strong villain, capable of killing superman without the need for kryptonite.
Micek:
i7 4790K @ 4.6GHz- Gigabyte Z97X-Gaming 3 - 980 WF3 \o/ - 16GB Corsair - WD 4TB - Mountain of SSDs - Dell UltraSharp U2414H 24''
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chiv
Posts: 27530
Location: Behind You...
|
| Posted: Wed, 10th Feb 2010 13:53 Post subject: |
|
|
while i do prefer more grittier/serious and more 'reality based' films, all im saying is that i dont believe that for these superhero films to be great and do well, that its really a requirement or an issue... as you said, and as i tried to say, whats really important is the director and the team behind it.
so basically i dont think it matters or is indicative in any way of quality, which direction a film takes (reality based or pure fantasy), its the strength of the production that matters.
MY hope for a superman movie, is that they make a story that MATTERS this time round. for singers superman, when it was finally over i got this feeling of.. wow.. that story was really unworthy of a 2 hour film... i want an end-of-the-world type scenario, with a villian that is worth stopping... i want the film to MATTER!! singers superman had none of that, it was just dull and irrelevant.
interesting side-note, terminator franchise has been sold  just throwin it out there...
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 10th Feb 2010 14:46 Post subject: |
|
|
personally i feel superman is one of the weakest character in all of fiction
any character that is indestructible except with shit that doesn't exist on earth, gets the stamp of godawful writing from me
only way i can think of that a superman story could be made even the slightest bit interesting, would be to focus on that
you have a man that is a god among men - how would you NOT be scared shitless by someone like that?
there should be a strong conflict with superman and humanity - essentially the people that raised him from infancy disowning him - and THEN we might have a story i might be interested in seeing
watchmen explored this a bit further, but in a different way
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chiv
Posts: 27530
Location: Behind You...
|
| Posted: Wed, 10th Feb 2010 15:31 Post subject: |
|
|
OR perhaps superman looks around and sees that for all his power he is changing FUCK ALL... due to human nature we're all still every bit as evil and nasty and hurtful towards each other... it makes him all depressed and he grows his hair long and starts wearing eyeliner and listening to shitty music while he cuts himself.
alternatively zod could always come back. he was fun.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
zipfero
Posts: 8938
Location: White Shaft
|
| Posted: Wed, 10th Feb 2010 15:54 Post subject: |
|
|
Superman sucks dongs, Doomsday is a pretty good villain and was in Kevin Smith's script killing Superman
8 out of 10 dentists prefer zipfero to competing brands(fraich3 and Mutantius)!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢
Posts: 73196
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel 🇮🇱
|
| Posted: Wed, 10th Feb 2010 18:47 Post subject: |
|
|
They will never kill him, and even if they do, they will find a silly way to bring him back like they do to all comic book characters. This is ridiculous, BTW, no matter how outrageously unreal a character is. Want to kill your main character for shock an awe? Fine, but stand behind it for more than 2-3 issues. You can always introduce another character that has the same powers, not like it isn't like that already. 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
zipfero
Posts: 8938
Location: White Shaft
|
| Posted: Wed, 10th Feb 2010 18:52 Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢
Posts: 73196
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel 🇮🇱
|
| Posted: Sun, 10th Oct 2010 19:33 Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chiv
Posts: 27530
Location: Behind You...
|
| Posted: Sun, 10th Oct 2010 19:39 Post subject: |
|
|
not like he can fuck it up worse than singer did.
atleast this time round it might have some fucking action in it, and be slightly interesting.
im being overly harsh, singers superman did some stuff pretty good, its just i wish they hadnt gone with THAT story, it was so utterly dull and pointless... i appreciate the need to relaunch a franchise with a kinda reintroduction story, but fuck.. thats NO excuse for making it that dull.. its supposed to RE-HOOK people into the series, not bore them so much they dont really give a fuck about a follow up movie..
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢
Posts: 73196
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel 🇮🇱
|
| Posted: Sun, 10th Oct 2010 19:47 Post subject: |
|
|
What was good in Singer's version? I was bored to death. The Luthor plot was hilariously bad, and he is supposed to be a genius.
It has been said, the only way a Superman (or his type of character) flick can work, is if the enemy itself is so over the top, it actually serves as a real threat. You cannot put him in The Dark Knight, call it The Red Knight. It just doesn't work. That is why I don't like this type of characters.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chiv
Posts: 27530
Location: Behind You...
|
| Posted: Sun, 10th Oct 2010 20:00 Post subject: |
|
|
well i liked who he chose as superman, i thought he worked as a kent and as a superman. i liked how it was shot, it was compotently put together, and spacey was a good luthor.
my only problem, as i said and as you also said, was the plot... it was insanely boring. production wise, was fine, its just everything about the story was incredibly bad.... and yes, by 'pointless' i was referring to lack of threat.. there was just nothing in the story that really warranted superman... a good/interesting plot was all his superman movie needed to be good..
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢
Posts: 73196
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel 🇮🇱
|
| Posted: Sun, 10th Oct 2010 20:00 Post subject: |
|
|
Oh, don't get me on that retarded premise where glasses = Kent and no glasses = Superman, and no one notices.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chiv
Posts: 27530
Location: Behind You...
|
| Posted: Sun, 10th Oct 2010 20:32 Post subject: |
|
|
yeah and noooo one could ever take a stab in the dark that wayne is batman 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 10th Oct 2010 21:47 Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢
Posts: 73196
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel 🇮🇱
|
| Posted: Sun, 10th Oct 2010 22:50 Post subject: |
|
|
But the Batman for example can disguise the voice and with fear and surprise attacks, it is easier to swallow that people won't recognize him in their panic. Spiderman can also disguise his voice I guess. It still involves suspense of disbelief, but with Superman it's just absurd.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
zipfero
Posts: 8938
Location: White Shaft
|
| Posted: Mon, 11th Oct 2010 00:28 Post subject: |
|
|
Plus Waynes rep in Gotham is that he's a playboy not a good samaritan at all
8 out of 10 dentists prefer zipfero to competing brands(fraich3 and Mutantius)!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chiv
Posts: 27530
Location: Behind You...
|
| Posted: Mon, 11th Oct 2010 06:09 Post subject: |
|
|
this is sad. were discussing the realism in something designed for KIDS! come on ffs, wheres your inner child ...wheres that spark that believes in magic 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
couleur
[Moderator] Janitor
Posts: 14327
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chiv
Posts: 27530
Location: Behind You...
|
| Posted: Mon, 11th Oct 2010 10:32 Post subject: |
|
|
just bearing in mind that his watchmen movie was pretty blow-for-blow taken from the comic, and i think its the same with 300.... no doubt hes a stylish filmmaker - thats why i said atleast it'll be action packed and hopefully fun to watch, but what can he do in terms of substance and originality when he cant directly copy everything from a comic book?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chiv
Posts: 27530
Location: Behind You...
|
| Posted: Mon, 11th Oct 2010 19:47 Post subject: |
|
|
ah jeez that was one guy who stumbled on to actual proof... im talking about everyone being able to take a stab in the dark.. like how he always conveniently excuses himself 5 second before batman swings in through the window.. youd think after the 80th time that happened, people would start to wonder!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢
Posts: 73196
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel 🇮🇱
|
| Posted: Mon, 11th Oct 2010 20:10 Post subject: |
|
|
True, but again, suspension of disbelief is much more easier, because he always disappears when chaos erupts and people in panic don't notice who is there and who is not.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Page 1 of 11 |
All times are GMT + 1 Hour |
|
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 vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB 2.0.8 © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|
|
 |
|
