Batman-Online.com

So it looks like they announced who will play both Clark and Lois:


David Corenswet for Clark/Superman and Rachel Brosnahan for Lois Lane.

(https://assets.popbuzz.com/2020/17/david-corenswet-tipped-for-next-superman-1588289145-view-0.jpg)

(https://www.hawtcelebs.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/rachel-brosnahan-at-2018-peabody-awards-in-new-york-05-19-2018-5.jpg)

Maybe I'll end up having to put my foot in my mouth, but God how milk toast can you get? The most vanilla actors you can possibly muster.

Edit. I've listened to some of their interviews and it is clear in the case of Rachel Brosnahan that they are deliberately trying to evoke Kidder. She even has the same slight speech impediment.

I'll be the a-hole who says it.

This casting is 100% less woke than I was expecting.

I'd like to claim that I predicted this, since I posted the following last year.

Quote from: Silver Nemesis on Thu, 15 Dec  2022, 11:55So that brings us to the question of who will succeed him. The fan favourite to replace Cavill in recent years seems to be American actor David Corenswet. He's 29 years old, 6'4 and has that classic chiselled blue-eyed Superman look. He resembles a cross between Welling and Cavill.

(https://i.postimg.cc/6QrF9BYy/Corenswet.png)

Like Christopher Reeve, Corenswet is also a graduate of Julliard. I've never seen him in anything, so I can't comment on his acting abilities, but he has quite a few credits to his name and definitely looks the part. He'd just need to spend a few months bulking up at the gym.

https://www.batman-online.com/forum/index.php?topic=4075.msg67747#msg67747

But if I'm being honest...

Quote from: thecolorsblend on Tue, 27 Jun  2023, 21:30This casting is 100% less woke than I was expecting.

Same here.

I don't think I've seen either of these actors in anything, but they both look the part. And it's nice that they've upheld the tradition of casting a Superman actor whose surname begins with R or C.

Reeves, Reeve, Routh.

Collyer, Christopher, Cain, Cavill, Cage, Corenswet.

How convenient to announce this news while Flash is flopping hard at the box office. ::)

Make no mistake, this is a PR tactic to distract people from the disastrous news about the Flash projecting to make even less money than Black Adam, and how the stupid studio may lose between $200-300 million because of it. With the way WBD is struggling financially, who knows if this reboot is even going to get made?

But even if it does get made, the Cavill fiasco will long haunt them, and hiring another actor who has a resemblance to him is just laughable. On top of the fact that Gunn hijacked this project, how he describes Superman as a "galoot", yeah, he can shove it. If that isn't amusing enough, he wants to project to be set in a world where DC heroes already exist, and have as many cameos as possible. And people thought BvS was rushing it, how rich.

Quote from: thecolorsblend on Tue, 27 Jun  2023, 21:30I'll be the a-hole who says it.

This casting is 100% less woke than I was expecting.

If they went with woke casting with the leads the reboot would've been instantly dead on arrival for me and I imagine many others. That's not to say I suddenly don't have concerns about Gunn and the way this all came about to begin with. But give me 'vanilla' actors who actually look like the comic characters every day of the week. Corenswet was the best choice from the shortlist IMO.

It seems Superman's new solo movie will feature Hawkgirl, Mister Terrific, Guy Gardner and Metamorpho. So... how exactly is it a solo movie? Did cramming Black Adam and The Flash with lots of extra heroes help them at the box office? Is this really a winning formula at a time when fans are crying out for smaller and more focused solo films?

I also question the move to heavily integrate DCU characters into the mix so early on and gambling on the assumption the universe you're creating will be well received and have legs.

Well, I just find it comically ironic, because one of the main gripes that people levied at Snyder, was that he rushed into his universe too quickly with too many characters, and that he needed to take the time to build it up like the MCU. And to their credit, there are some merits to those claims, but that was Snyder's second movie, this is Gunn's first, and he already has more DC characters in it than BvS, and I'm not seeing these criticisms.

I dunno, I'm not mad or anything, I just find it funny how fickle people can be. lol

Quote from: Travesty on Wed,  2 Aug  2023, 13:54Well, I just find it comically ironic, because one of the main gripes that people levied at Snyder, was that he rushed into his universe too quickly with too many characters, and that he needed to take the time to build it up like the MCU. And to their credit, there are some merits to those claims, but that was Snyder's second movie, this is Gunn's first, and he already has more DC characters in it than BvS, and I'm not seeing these criticisms.

I dunno, I'm not mad or anything, I just find it funny how fickle people can be. lol

If it came out tomorrow that 50% of the "fan opposition" that Snyder's films faced was astroturf perpetuated by Disney's Twitter bots, I would believe it.

Gunn incorporating a mosaic of characters into one film doesn't honestly surprise me in the least bit.

That's his schtick.

Remember when Gunn said Cavill wasn't Superman in his script because he said he wanted to write the story about a younger version of the character?

(https://boundingintocomics.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/2023.03.22-09.07-boundingintocomics-641b6e286d748.png)

(https://boundingintocomics.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/2022.12.16-12.18-boundingintocomics-639bb95694f7a.png)

(https://boundingintocomics.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/2022.12.16-12.21-boundingintocomics-639bba07e2a02.png)

Well, now he's saying he's not really doing a young Superman after all.

(https://boundingintocomics.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/2023.08.17-01.12-boundingintocomics-64de1cd2076d2.png)

This prick is just making stuff up as he goes along.

I wouldn't be surprised if he's writing the script while the strike is still happening. What a scab.

Some casting updates.

Nicholas Hoult is playing Lex Luthor: https://deadline.com/2023/11/nicholas-hoult-superman-legacy-lex-luther-1235630393/

Skyler Gisondo is playing Jimmy Olsen and Sara Sampaio is playing Eve Teschmacherr: https://variety.com/2023/film/news/superman-legacy-skyler-gisondo-jimmy-olsen-sara-sampaio-eve-teschmacher-1235804248/

Gotta say, while the prospect of this movie thrills me not one bit, they are assembling a pretty good cast so far. Corenswet, Brosnahan, Hoult and Gisondo are all good choices.

Jesse Eisenberg Says His Sundance Jewish Buddy Movie Is 'Not Political' and Gives His Advice to New Lex Luthor Nicholas Hoult: 'Don't Watch Me!'

https://variety.com/2024/film/news/jesse-eisenberg-lex-luthor-advice-nicholas-hoult-superman-legacy-1235878072/




Jesse Eisenberg is officially giving his Lex Luthor advice to Nicholas Hoult, and it's blunt: "Don't watch me!"

During an interview at the Variety Studio presented by Audible while attending the Sundance Film Festival, Eisenberg suggested Hoult should forge his own path and not pay attention to Eisenberg's own work as Lex Luthor in Zack Snyder's DC Universe.

"Whenever you play a role you feel connected to it," Eisenberg added to Variety's Matt Donnelly about playing the DC villain for a short time. "There's no way around it. Any time you do anything, even if it's a movie that's a Hollywood kind of thing, you connect."

Australian actress Milly Alcock has been cast as Supergirl: https://deadline.com/2024/01/supergirl-milly-alcock-1235807989/

I'm really liking the casting so far.

I still think they have way too many characters, but we'll see how it all balances out once the movie releases.

Isn't Guy Gardner supposed to be in the film? Let's see if they manage to cast an actual redhead in the movie.

Quote from: Travesty on Tue, 30 Jan  2024, 16:30I still think they have way too many characters, but we'll see how it all balances out once the movie releases.

The casting seems decent so far, but I'm concerned about the presence of other superheroes like Supergirl and Hawkgirl. We haven't had a proper live action Superman solo movie in over a decade now. I just hope this doesn't turn into some kind of JLA-lite ensemble movie like The Flash did.

Quote from: thecolorsblend on Tue, 30 Jan  2024, 16:49Isn't Guy Gardner supposed to be in the film? Let's see if they manage to cast an actual redhead in the movie.

You know how modern Hollywood DEI trollcasting works. All redheaded characters must henceforth be race swapped. For example, this is how Vicki Vale looked in the Merry Little Batman movie that came out last month.


It's important for all people to 'feel seen' and be represented. Except people with red hair, apparently.

Quote from: thecolorsblend on Tue, 30 Jan  2024, 16:49Isn't Guy Gardner supposed to be in the film? Let's see if they manage to cast an actual redhead in the movie.

Yeah, I think it's Superman, Lois, Jimmy Olsen, Lex Luthor, Guy Gardner, Supergirl, The Engineer, Metamorpho, Hawkgirl, Mister Terrific....and I think that's it. lol

Quote from: Silver Nemesis on Wed, 31 Jan  2024, 16:07

(https://i.postimg.cc/jqcFqRNz/New-Picture.png)

jfc

Okay, I'm getting some bourbon now.

In brief, this YouTuber is skeptical of the Gunnverse's prospects. He outlines his reasons as to why. Some of which have already been mentioned in this thread and others.

And, like me, he's even more skeptical of Superman's prospects as a successful film franchise. Obviously, I love Superman and want to believe that he'll always have massive, enduring popularity.

But "massive and enduringly popular" is not how I would summarize Superman's big screen exploits since 2006 going right on through to right now.

To be clear, I'm not rooting for SL's failure. Yet. I'm just saying that I don't think Superman has the mainstream appeal now that he had back in the Fifties and Sixties.

The title has been changed to just 'Superman'. Not a fan. We've already had that with the 1978 film and at least Legacy was distinctive. Changing the title also makes me feel uneasy because it communicates chaos and uncertainty, regardless if that's real or imagined. This movie feels like make or break for the cinematic fortunes of the character. If people aren't interested now when will they be? Even if the movie is good it still needs to make money. It's possible Superman has been left behind for a number of reasons. It's a shame Gunn is the man behind the camera. He is a creep and a liar. Let's see what happens.

 

James Gunn: "The biggest problem with superhero movies today is cameo porn".

Also James Gunn: Praises The Flash when it's loaded with cameos and is making a Superman movie with too many heroes taking the spotlight away from the main character.

If this farce doesn't get shelved, I hope it flops faster than a speeding bullet.

Okay, so Gunn released a glimpse of the Superman ("Legacy" is no longer part of the title) suit.


There are obvious similarities to this symbol and Kingdom Come.


What's less obvious, and what pretty much nobody else is talking about, is the similarity to the Superman- Earth One symbol.


Specifically, the gold outline. This design element is unique to JMS's Earth One Superman. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any other version that ever included this feature.

One question I've got is whether the cape will include a symbol on the back. Bryan Singer omitted the cape symbol to simplify life for the visual effects team. Zack Snyder deleted it because he thought the cape would look better without the symbol.

So, it would be kind of nice if someone would add it back to Superman's cape. I'm getting a little tired of the cape symbol getting written out of existence.

Anyway. Thoughts?

Like the yellow emblem for Batman that had been absent for too long, I'm hoping the yellow logo is back on Superman's cape. While I think this should serve as a celebration of classic Superman tropes (he needs it after so many evil/brainwashed plot lines), I'm also hoping we see a ton of stuff that's new to the films as well. Don't hold anything back thinking there will be other films to expand into. Put it on the screen now. Krypto. Brainiac. Galactic travel. A proper Fortress decked out with futuristic technology and relics.

(https://variety.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/GM6GPb8bsAAlasQ.jpg)


Man, I've been trying to be positive about this new cinematic reboot, but man, I really hate this suit reveal. It's too baggy with lots of padding. It just looks incredibly cheap.

😬

I'm usually wait and see with these suits, but this is an official still image. I agree completely. Looks cheap and too baggy. Given all the discourse about Snyder and Cavill being too dark, the Gunn reveal is set at night and not bathed in sunshine. Which makes it feel like an inferior knockoff to the real deal we just had. Superman also has a dead in the face expression. Where's the smiling we always apparently needed to have? He looks like a weary firefighter sick of going out to work, reluctantly putting on the uniform.

-- The Good
I sort of like the composition going on here. It looks like it could be a comic book cover. Big Giant Threat outside the window. And Superman is so accustomed to this type of thing that he resolutely gets his other business suit on to take care of Big Giant Threat.

I also like the colors in this photo. They pop pretty well. Considering my reintroduction to Superman on film was in that bland, dull publicity photo released from Superman Returns, anything is better than that.

Speaking of colors, I like how colorful the suit is. The SR suit was dull and muddy. I never approved of that wine-colored Fruit Rollup SR cape. So, the coloring on this new suit is right in my wheelhouse.

It LOOKS like the red trunks have been restored, which I think is also a bonus.

-- The Bad
I think I'll always prefer the low collar on the tunic that Snyder favored. It should show a bit of Superman's chest. The high collar seems influenced by The New 52. In fact, the high collar, the piping on the sleeves and chest, the clunky boots, ALL of that seems very New 52 to me. On that note, this uniform seems to be a strange amalgamation of the Earth One uniform, that New 52 uniform and a bit of Kingdom Come thrown in.

I don't think blending those various aesthetics together is creatively successful.

The enterprise looks cheap, like something you'd expect to see in a CW show. In fact, this looks like only a minor upgrade over the Superman outfit Tyler Hoechlin has been running around in for the past several seasons.

I, for one, NEVER needed them to bring the Reeve outfit out of mothballs. You all know me better than that. But I do believe there's a lot of mojo to the idea of a simple Superman outfit. Singer disregarded that. Snyder disregarded that. And now, it sure looks like Gunn is disregarding it too.

I called the red trunks above a bonus. And I stand by that. But I also question if modern audiences will accept them. There are reasons to think they won't. In fact, there are reasons to question Superman's entire box office viability at this point. And that would be my opinion even if comic book cinema wasn't the train wreck that it is today. But considering how the market appears to be shifting, I would've figured the best approach would be to make the most commercial aesthetic possible. And I don't think the red trunks fit into that equation, frankly.

-- The Ugly
Wtf is going on with that bulk? Is it padding or something? It's most noticeable in the shoulders and lower torso. Of all characters, I thought Superman's suit should look as skintight as possible. He is his own armor. Plus, it seems dramatically appropriate to emphasize his muscularity. Padding (or at least a bulky outfit) ruins that aesthetic.

-- Summary
I'm... not overly confident about this outfit. I don't think this is the visual direction that Superman in cinema should be headed into. The confused aesthetic influences, the strangely fitted uniform, the clunky boots, they all fit together to create a deep sense of reluctance on my part.

Yes, I wanted the Snyderverse (starring Cavill as Superman) to continue/be restored. But I was willing to give a reboot a fair shot. I'm not blinded by devotion here. Even so, this uniform design isn't inspiring very much in the way of confidence.

For all I know, Gunn will make the masterpiece Superman film that I've wanted my entire life. But even if he does, I'll still have to find a way to reconcile this suit design instead of celebrate it.

I look back at Dean Cain's Superman uniform from L&C's fourth season. For everything that show was and wasn't, that uniform was consistent with the rest of the series. Specifically, it had a homemade quality to it with a big and highly stylized chest symbol. Just to look at Cain wearing the outfit, you instantly understood something about L&C's approach to Superman as a character AND the tone of the show. Yes, it WAS a simple design. But it was also an effective design.

Gunn's Superman outfit is NOT a simple design. And it also doesn't seem to be a very effective design either.

My reluctance about this film has not been assuaged in the slightest.

Snyder had the right idea in removing the red diaper. It was modern, fresh and simply time to move in that direction on film IMO. The argument there's too much blue without them doesn't hold water anymore for me. Having them back just feels like a giant regression. Batman films since 1989 have gone without diapers and it's been fine. It's okay in animation and comics, but right now in a 2024/5 movie it's just out of place and a source of amusement. Don't worry, I get all the historical meaning behind them.

The pose is an odd choice for a reveal shot, but the costume itself... I don't know, it looks all right to me.

I don't like the tubing. I don't know why every modern superhero costume has to have that now. All those lines needlessly complicate what should be a simple design. I'm also not sold on the New 52 collar. But it might work. I'll wait and see what that looks like in other pictures. The texture looks a little rubbery, which I'm also not mad on. It's not as bad as Routh's costume, but I'd prefer a simpler fabric.

However, I do like the colours. I'm glad they've brought the trunks and belt back. The creases in the suit might look awkward in this pic, but they suggest a thinner and more flexible material that's a welcome change from the sculpted armour look. When it comes to Superman's costume, as a matter of personal preference I like it kept simple. These are my favourite live action Superman suits.


The Kirk Alyn and Superboy (1988-1992) costumes were good too. I know many people would say these costumes look silly. But then some would say a grown man flying through the sky wearing a blue bodysuit and red cape is silly anyway, regardless of the design specifics. I say embrace the fantasy and don't overcomplicate it.

Sculpted muscle suits are best reserved for slim average-build actors like Michael Keaton. All of the Superman actors have been tall and muscularly built. As long as the actor has the right body shape, he doesn't need padding or sculpted muscles. I don't know if Corenswet's suit has padding, but judging from this picture his personal trainer posted he doesn't need it.


I also like that they've brought back the spit curl. Corenswet's got that classic chiselled blue-eyed Superman look that Reeves, Reeve, Welling and Cavill all had. He's 6'3 or 6'4, depending on different sources, and he certainly looks the part. I'd like to see some better images of the costume – to see what he looks like standing up and striking a more heroic pose – but based on this early glimpse I think the suit looks ok. It's not my ideal Superman costume, and I'm not blown away by it. But so far it doesn't look terrible to me.

I like what the picture is trying to convey, but I must admt it looks very...cheap. I also think that the pose, while nice for what they're going for, is ill suited for the costume. My meaning is that the suit is obviously not built in a way that comidates the position and pose we see here. That's something that ought to have been considered before the taking of this picture. The material creasing and the obvious muscle suit don't look very nice scrunched like that, especially since its likely that the addition of the muscle suit is the major problem here. As Silver mentioned, the actor playing Superman got super jacked for the role. They added a muscle suit anyway, which is never good, because the bigger the guy the weirder the suit gets with all those layers. Either you show off the muscles or you let the actor stay slim and use the padding. I don't like the tubing either.

Now that I think about it, I probably ought to comment on Corenswet himself. He certainly looks the part. I'm not predicting anything. But if this film's legacy is that Corenswet is the best part of it, that wouldn't be a big surprise at this stage in the game. He looks powerful. If you ask me, Superman should always look large and in charge. And Corenswet is definitely on the right track as far as appearances are concerned.

Which fits with everything else, frankly. Gunn does seem to have assembled a great cast. I was battening down the hatches for what casting a Superman film in the modern era might lead to. But for the most part, the casting choices for this film have been very high quality.

If I had to guess, it'll probably be six or eight months before we see a teaser for the film. But I am very curious to see how this film will depict Superman flying.

I don't have the same buzz about Gunn's Superman that I had about The Batman and, to a greater extent, JOKER. But I am allowing for the possibility of this film winning me over.

Still not digging that Superman uniform tho, no doubts there.

I concur about the casting of Corenswet. He looks the part. As for the suit, I'm willing to see how it moves in live action opposed to this still. Which I maintain wasn't the best pose or scenario to go with.

I would say the majority of the cast look the part, so I'm good on that, but again, that suit looks pretty bad. Granted, I'm willing to see what it looks like in motion, and I can easily change my mind if it happens to look better, but yeah, not a good first look.

Oh well, we'll just have to wait for more in the coming year or so.

^ I remind myself that it could ALWAYS be worse. For example...

Quote from: Travesty on Thu,  9 May  2024, 23:38I would say the majority of the cast look the part, so I'm good on that, but again, that suit looks pretty bad. Granted, I'm willing to see what it looks like in motion, and I can easily change my mind if it happens to look better, but yeah, not a good first look.

Oh well, we'll just have to wait for more in the coming year or so.

Indeed, but the suit still isn't something I'll ever be on board with because of this:
(https://i.imgur.com/ScdxoO3.jpeg)
It's just a joke to me for a contemporary film, showing the character is a relic. It sticks out like a sore thumb and I really wish they didn't go back down this road after Snyder had the guts to go another route.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2024/05/07/james-gunns-first-superman-image-looks-like-ai-and-the-suit-doesnt-fit/?sh=47eed2d54555

This mediocre costume has been memed to death, to the point that Forbes ran an article saying the photo reveal looks AI-generated. The backlash must've been a huge blow to Gunn's ego. Never mind Cavill's suits, Brandon Routh's Kingdom Come costume in the Arrowverse COIE suit looks WAY more cinematic than this. Even Hoechlin's suit in Superman and Lois is better.

I noticed that Gunn tried to pander to the Twitter crowd by showing off with him taking a picture with a group of Superman comics writers who were all wearing generic S logo t-shirts the following day, but this is just a PR attempt to distract people from the negative reaction to the costume.

However, who really gives a sh*t if the costume is good or bad? Leave it to the internet to freak out over a costume reveal, but shrug its shoulders over the creepiness and shadiness of the director.

The cape has a symbol on it. That one design element elevates the Gunn outfit considerably.

Our first look at Clark Kent.


And some more pictures of Superman.

The new outfit is growing on me. I'm sort of reaching the point now where I wonder what Gunn was thinking in releasing that first pic of Corenswet in the suit when all of these other "spy pics" present it in a much more flattering light.

As to what works about the suit for me, I'm not sure if it's the boots, the trunks or the cape. Maybe even the colors? But something about this uniform is slowly working its way into my imagination.

I'm less enamored of the Clark disguise. And yes, it does seem like Clark is definitely the disguise in the Gunnverse. Which I'm fine with, for the record. But it just looks believably like Clark should look. I suppose I'm happy that fans are so receptive to this version of the Clark disguise. But I guess I'm just not seeing what's so amazing about it. It's fine. I don't have a problem with it. But I just don't see what's so brilliant about it.

Still, fans seem to be mostly getting on board with this new version. After all these years of fans nitpicking stuff (rightly or wrongly), it's kind of a welcome change of pace for people to be excited about what's coming.

I'm totally blanking on who the male character in the black leather outfit is supposed to be. I'm guessing the woman is The Engineer but no idea who the guy is.

Nowadays superhero costumes are usually digitally improved in post-production. Keaton's latest Batman costume didn't look all that great in the location pics, but it looked good in the finished film. Based on how the Superman costume appears in these pics, I think it'll look fine when we see it on screen. I'm still not mad on the rubbery material or all those lines/seams, but I don't think it looks bad at all. Corenswet resembles Superman in these pics, and that's the most important thing.
 
Here's an image of Frank Grillo as Rick Flag Sr.

Quote from: Silver Nemesis on Thu, 27 Jun  2024, 19:14Nowadays superhero costumes are usually digitally improved in post-production. Keaton's latest Batman costume didn't look all that great in the location pics, but it looked good in the finished film. Based on how the Superman costume appears in these pics, I think it'll look fine when we see it on screen. I'm still not mad on the rubbery material or all those lines/seams, but I don't think it looks bad at all. Corenswet resembles Superman in these pics, and that's the most important thing.
 
Here's an image of Frank Grillo as Rick Flag Sr.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GQ9OyklWcAEsPrA?format=jpg&name=large)

More or less my take. The big thing is that it looks like Superman. People like it when Superman looks like Superman. Dave looks like Superman. There's the cape, the shield, the boots, the hair. It's Superman. Sometimes it doesn't have to get more complicated than that. And Honestly...at least in my own opinion...non of the major tent pole live action versions have ever messed that up. Even Timmy's unproduced version eventually said 'ah to hell with it, just make it look like Superman.' Anyway, that was my two cents

Here's a glimpse of Hawkgirl and Nathan Fillion's Guy Gardner.

I get the idea of secret identities (and Corenswet's look is definitely that), but something about Clark Kent always annoyed me when thinking of myself being that character. In a lot of incarnations and even by default Bruce Wayne gets to be Bruce Wayne. He's a billionaire, runs a successful company and lives in a mansion. He doesn't always lower himself to act the complete chump. He's not wealthy but Peter Parker also gets to be Peter Parker largely warts and all. The suit completely covering him gives that advantage. When Clark is presented normally and not a goofball, like Cavill, it then makes the secret identity even less believable.

Before Twitter started hiding likes, there were screenshots of a VFX artist working on Gunn's farce that liked a pretty offensive post by some dickhead about Zack Snyder paying tribute to a deceased fan.

https://youtu.be/2KzrdM0MRaM?t=259

More than ever, if this sh*t comes out, I f***ing hope it flops hard. Disgusting.

Here's our first look at Krypto.


This picture is based on a panel from All-Star Superman #6.

I was going to mention the All-Star Superman thing if you didn't.

The good will for this movie is apparently unabated. People seem fairly open to whatever this movie is shaping up to be.

(https://i.imgur.com/6vtOeWb.jpg)

WB has released a new poster accompanied by a vocal rendition of Williams' classic theme: https://x.com/i/status/1868654814432784592

A short teaser has also been posted which states the trailer will be released on Thursday: https://x.com/wbpictures/status/1868657333058073053

Quote from: Silver Nemesis on Wed, 31 Jan  2024, 16:07The casting seems decent so far, but I'm concerned about the presence of other superheroes like Supergirl and Hawkgirl. We haven't had a proper live action Superman solo movie in over a decade now. I just hope this doesn't turn into some kind of JLA-lite ensemble movie like The Flash did.

Returning to this point, I saw an interview The Critical Drinker and Nerdrotic did with Mark Millar a few months ago where this concern was raised. Millar responded with an interesting theory. I've since seen several online sources claiming Millar's theory is correct.

Basically the idea is that Gunn is presenting a variation on the Kingdom Come concept where there'll be a generation of darker heroes already in place before Superman debuts. Heroes who kill their enemies and espouse cynical worldviews. Then Superman will arrive, embodying a more idealistic and hopeful Golden/Silver Age heroism, and he'll provide the younger generation with a more optimistic example to follow.

If this is indeed the approach Gunn's taking, it would mean the inclusion of other superheroes is less a matter of plugging spinoffs and more a way of contextualising the cynical world to which Superman brings hope. I can see that approach working. Right now I feel optimistic about this movie and I'm looking forward to watching the trailer.

A teaser for the trailer, ugh

I guess I'll wait for the full trailer, but do the aesthetics look a bit cheap? Kinda CWish?

Absolutely agree. It doesn't look cinematic based off that brief preview. I'm also disappointed they're going for the Reeve style font and music...again.

I guess since we're on the subject, the thumbnail of the video does a good job of illustrating my complaint for me.

I don't even know how to describe that look. There's something... uneven about it. And it's so common. Dim interior lighting with blown out exterior lighting, dinge colors and so forth.

It's late and I'm getting punchy so I'm not sure if I'm doing a good job of describing it. But this type of aesthetic is so common in films nowadays and I wish I knew who to blame for it because it looks like dog $#!+ and I would love it if that style went away forever.

No idea of this is Old Man Yells At Sky or what. But that style is just unpleasant to look at.

It looks like a blend of AI and an attempt to make the footage look real, like it's from an eyewitness or a handheld camera if that makes sense. As Travesty said, it looks cheap and TV show-ish. I'm guessing Gunn may be trying to make it feel real world, as if what it would be like to see Superman as a civilian on the street. But if this is the aesthetic and not just a few bad shots from a preview, I'm going to have issues.

Quote from: thecolorsblend on Thu, 19 Dec  2024, 13:59

Meh. Not feeling it.

Brosnahan gives me Kidder vibes in some moments of that teaser.

I'm willing to give the movie a day in court. If nothing else, Guy Gardner is representing, which counts for a lot in my book.

I don't wish to pour a steaming pile of Krypto dung over the project too much because I know Superman fans are crying out for some quality content. So this is just my opinion as a casual at best observer. The trailer fell flat for me. I don't feel a huge sense of excitement or hype after seeing the new footage. I'll check it out when the day comes, but I'm not counting down and having sleepless nights. The way the film looks is off putting to me. Just not feeling it right now. I don't know what I was expecting exactly but I don't think it was this.

Quote from: The Dark Knight on Thu, 19 Dec  2024, 14:23I don't wish to pour a steaming pile of Krypto dung over the project too much because I know Superman fans are crying out for some quality content. So this is just my opinion as a casual at best observer. The trailer fell flat for me. I don't feel a huge sense of excitement or hype after seeing the new footage. I'll check it out when the day comes, but I'm not counting down and having sleepless nights. The way the film looks is off putting to me. Just not feeling it right now. I don't know what I was expecting exactly but I don't think it was this.

I think, at least for me, it's not overly stylized like the Superman we've had the last 10 or so years but a lot not really as flat as a lot of the MCU movies. It's kind of in between and feel like a step down visually from the Snyder films since much of that was filmed in a studio and this looks to have a good amount of practical shooting (drones/onset). Visually it reminds me of Wonder Woman 84

There's also this.

Something else is Guy Gardner. I'm not sure I'd call him my favorite Green Lantern. But I do love Gardner. Cool character.

So, if nothing else good comes from this film, at least Guy Gardner will FINALLY make his theatrical debut.

Initial gut reaction – I like it.

The teaser didn't blow me away or anything, though it's hard to imagine any CBM trailer doing that at this point, what with the genre being so played out. But I'm not detecting any major red flags so far. It's the third attempt at a cinematic Superman reboot in the past twenty years, and I'm hoping this time we'll get some solo sequels and not just JLA movies. It could be a misfire, or it could be the beginning of an exciting new era for cinematic Supes. Time will tell.

I'm happy for them to reuse the iconic Williams theme and other familiar elements that were successful in earlier films (if it ain't broke, don't fix it), just so long as they break new ground when it comes to the storyline. I don't want a repeat of a Lex real estate plot, a Zod invasion plot, or a Doomsday plot. Those stories have been told, and there are many other great Superman villains and comic arcs they could adapt. The potential's all there.

The worst I'd say about this trailer is that it feels a bit generic, as though it's pieced together from all the other superhero movies that have come out over the past twenty-five years. But when you're this late to the party, that's probably inevitable. Still, I'm cautiously optimistic.

One thing I've noticed is the overall friendly reception the film seems to be getting. From the set pics to yesterday's teaser of the teaser, the response looks to have been mostly positive on X. People seem pretty interested.

In today's world, it's rare to see a lot of enthusiasm for any comic book movie. It's rarer still for a DC property. And it's practically unheard of for a DC property other than Batman. And for the specific character to be Superman, we're pretty much in unknown territory now.

Yes, there's a huge difference between social media impressions and a big opening weekend at the box office. I'm just saying that the warm reception the movie has been getting is hard not to notice.

As for comic book influences, Kingdom Come seems obvious. But All-Star Superman is prominent as well. Both of those stories are The End Of Superman in some form or another. That could be a coincidence. But the film's original title was "Legacy". So, make of all that what you will.

By this equivalent point in Superman Returns's production, we generally knew that Singer was adhering (to whatever degree) to the Donner canon and that the story of the film would revolve around Superman returning to Earth after a prolonged absence. We know FAR less about Gunn's film so far.

So, I personally am not ruling out the possibility that Gunn is essentially resurrecting Superman on film to remove him from the DCU franchise. Maybe that's cynical on my part. But there it is anyway.

Quote from: eledoremassis02 on Thu, 19 Dec  2024, 15:21

Quote from: The Dark Knight on Thu, 19 Dec  2024, 14:23I don't wish to pour a steaming pile of Krypto dung over the project too much because I know Superman fans are crying out for some quality content. So this is just my opinion as a casual at best observer. The trailer fell flat for me. I don't feel a huge sense of excitement or hype after seeing the new footage. I'll check it out when the day comes, but I'm not counting down and having sleepless nights. The way the film looks is off putting to me. Just not feeling it right now. I don't know what I was expecting exactly but I don't think it was this.

I think, at least for me, it's not overly stylized like the Superman we've had the last 10 or so years but a lot not really as flat as a lot of the MCU movies. It's kind of in between and feel like a step down visually from the Snyder films since much of that was filmed in a studio and this looks to have a good amount of practical shooting (drones/onset). Visually it reminds me of Wonder Woman 84

I don't think the success of this is guaranteed at all. How much of this is real, genuine hype vs just wanting this to be good? Superman on film has been mixed at best in terms of finances and getting sequels. There is a risk to announcing big shared universes but I get the feeling they'll push ahead regardless of what happens here. So yeah. This trailer doesn't grab me like it should. Seems rather generic and I'd say the supposed leaked plot is pretty much it, so nothing really groundbreaking in terms of new plot lines differing from the past despite obvious departures like Krypto and other heroes being around. My prediction is that the final reviews will be decent but the movie itself won't set the world on fire.

Honestly? I can't say that I am all that interested in this. I wanted to reserve judgement until I saw a actual trailer, and ehhhh ... it just looks like more of the same. A fanciful and whimsical "world" where Superheroes are literally all over the place. So, effectively, just like what we've already been getting for nearly 20 years with the Disney's MCU now? Doesn't exactly scream fresh does it? I get that the film will try and make Supes the standout amongst the established heroes and all that jazz (Gunn literally cannot help himself in littering his superhero films with a mosaic of characters), but it's just a little too "Smallville: The Movie" to my liking.

If anything, I can't help but get Bryan Singer "Superman Returns" vibes from this. Another film that had positive reactions from teasers/trailers/ect, and why wouldn't it? Singer was coming off of X1 and X2, so he certainly had the wind to his back with Superman (I also distinctly remember if you said anything contrarian about Singer's SR, you were usually met with a Kevin Spacey Lex Luthor "WRONG" meme ad nauseam lol).

Then the film came out, and there was a element of stodginess to the proceedings. Which I can't shake with this as well. As it comes across as a barrage of "best of", rather than going with something truly bold, unique, and unwonted by what we've already seen. That, I think, was just one of the major mistakes with Bryan Singer's take, and it could very well hold true here as well. Since, yeah, we're getting crystal Krypton/Fortress (again), goofy/clumsy Clark Kent (again), a variation of the John Williams theme (again ... which let's say I am of two minds. One it's a masterful theme, but at the same time, I very much think the same of Danny Elfman's Batman theme. Do I think it should've been included in Nolan's films, or in the Reevesverse? Not particularly. We're back to the stodgy point again with this.), and a (again) a more whimsical world compared to Sndyer's MOS. Which, unfortunately, isn't anything new these days since we've been absolutely saturated with that sort of "superhero cluttered world" with all the stuff that's happened with the MCU narrative of movies from 2008!

I also agree with TDK about nothing being a sure thing with it comes to Superman. To expand upon this, when SR came out in the summer of 2006, it was accompanied with merchandise and promotional tie in products up the wazoo. Also, it enjoyed the distinction of having a director who previously enjoyed major success within the comic movie genre, and outside of the genre as well (Usual Suspects). SR also had the distinction of being the very first cinematic Superman since Christopher Reeve about 19 years prior to 2006. Yet, it was the slowest crawl to $200 million domestic in recent memory. Where I think it finally hit that milestone just a week or two prior to the DVD release that Nov. Snyder's MOS was somewhere in the $600 million range I think, and that was during the height of the Superhero movie craze. We're on the other side of that, so yeah, I get that WB has essentially bet the farm on this, so to say they have a lot riding on this is an understatement.

Wasn't super surprised the trailer didn't mention anything about "The Suicide Squad", are you?

Colors, I think I would be a little more enthusiastic if Guy looked a little bit more like how EVS depicted him during the GL Rebirth era, and not like as if he literally just walked off the CW back lot. Or to a lesser extent, a SNL skit. I guess we gotta get those chuckles in there somewhere.

Quote from: The Joker on Fri, 20 Dec  2024, 01:41Honestly? I can't say that I am all that interested in this. I wanted to reserve judgement until I saw a actual trailer, and ehhhh ... it just looks like more of the same. A fanciful and whimsical "world" where Superheroes are literally all over the place. So, effectively, just like what we've already been getting for nearly 20 years with the Disney's MCU now? Doesn't exactly scream fresh does it? I get that the film will try and make Supes the standout amongst the established heroes and all that jazz (Gunn literally cannot help himself in littering his superhero films with a mosaic of characters), but it's just a little too "Smallville: The Movie" to my liking.

If anything, I can't help but get Bryan Singer "Superman Returns" vibes from this. Another film that had positive reactions from teasers/trailers/ect, and why wouldn't it? Singer was coming off of X1 and X2, so he certainly had the wind to his back with Superman (I also distinctly remember if you said anything contrarian about Singer's SR, you were usually met with a Kevin Spacey Lex Luthor "WRONG" meme ad nauseam lol).

Then the film came out, and there was a element of stodginess to the proceedings. Which I can't shake with this as well. As it comes across as a barrage of "best of", rather than going with something truly bold, unique, and unwonted by what we've already seen. That, I think, was just one of the major mistakes with Bryan Singer's take, and it could very well hold true here as well. Since, yeah, we're getting crystal Krypton/Fortress (again), goofy/clumsy Clark Kent (again), a variation of the John Williams theme (again ... which let's say I am of two minds. One it's a masterful theme, but at the same time, I very much think the same of Danny Elfman's Batman theme. Do I think it should've been included in Nolan's films, or in the Reevesverse? Not particularly. We're back to the stodgy point again with this.), and a (again) a more whimsical world compared to Sndyer's MOS. Which, unfortunately, isn't anything new these days since we've been absolutely saturated with that sort of "superhero cluttered world" with all the stuff that's happened with the MCU narrative of movies from 2008!

I also agree with TDK about nothing being a sure thing with it comes to Superman. To expand upon this, when SR came out in the summer of 2006, it was accompanied with merchandise and promotional tie in products up the wazoo. Also, it enjoyed the distinction of having a director who previously enjoyed major success within the comic movie genre, and outside of the genre as well (Usual Suspects). SR also had the distinction of being the very first cinematic Superman since Christopher Reeve about 19 years prior to 2006. Yet, it was the slowest crawl to $200 million domestic in recent memory. Where I think it finally hit that milestone just a week or two prior to the DVD release that Nov. Snyder's MOS was somewhere in the $600 million range I think, and that was during the height of the Superhero movie craze. We're on the other side of that, so yeah, I get that WB has essentially bet the farm on this, so to say they have a lot riding on this is an understatement.

Wasn't super surprised the trailer didn't mention anything about "The Suicide Squad", are you?

Colors, I think I would be a little more enthusiastic if Guy looked a little bit more like how EVS depicted him during the GL Rebirth era, and not like as if he literally just walked off the CW back lot. Or to a lesser extent, a SNL skit. I guess we gotta get those chuckles in there somewhere.

^ You can always trust the judgement of Uncle Bingo.

The suit doesn't translate that well from the set pics (it does have a cosplay appearance at times), nor do I like the Clark Kent hair. Corenswet has the general appearance but does he have movie star presence and charisma? That remains to be seen. The first we see Superman he's beaten up on the snow, which is an odd first reveal. Crashing down to the ground brings to mind the MoS first flight, but this looks like a visually inferior knockoff. Kal superwhistles for Krypto but there isn't any snow blowing up from that action, and why is the dog running and not flying? I think Jonathan Kent looks miscast, and they could've done better than Hoult IMO.

The movie might be better than my initial first impressions. But if it is, the ball has been fumbled with the marketing so far. Same goes with the first still photograph that revealed the suit. Just because it's Superman doesn't automatically equal bums on seats. If anything history shows that's a negative. In the character's filmic absence people have moved on, prefer other characters and those stances have hardened. I will be very interested to see the box office.

If you want, you can consider this post to be a down payment on the inevitable Superman (2025) Comic Book Influences thread. I suspect this movie will keep all of us, me in particular, very busy.

But as a preliminary, at one point in the teaser, Superman seems to battle a fire-breathing stegosaurus looking thing.

(https://i.imgur.com/Q4yuJNd.png)

I'm... simply not aware of a character like this anywhere in Superman's history. The closest I can think of is Krull, a one-off baddie quickly dispatched in All-Star Superman #03.

(https://i.imgur.com/NeLdM26.jpeg)

(https://i.imgur.com/f8vxpip.jpeg)

So, my best guess is that either the fire-breathing dinosaur is an original character or else it's a VERY reinterpreted Krull. No idea which is more likely. Or if I'm even right.

But speaking of All-Star Superman, Pruitt Taylor Vince's appearance...

(https://i.imgur.com/QVJ5FZq.png)

... somewhat reminds me of Jonathan's overall aesthetic from All-Star Superman #06.

(https://i.imgur.com/cG2ocbY.jpeg)

There's also All-Star Superman #09, which begins with Superman escaping from the underverse and crash-landing back on Earth.

(https://i.imgur.com/BbhA5iC.jpeg)

I'm not sure if this is another All-Star Superman reference or not. Honestly, crash-landing as shown in the teaser could have any number of possible influences behind it. But in light of all the other All-Star Superman elements going on around here, I figured that I'd at least toss this out as a possibility.

Anyway, if I'm right about the above, then this goes a long way toward supporting Gunn's claim that the film is very heavily influenced by All-Star Superman. Which is no bad thing in my book. I'm a huge All-Star Superman fan.

I'm also a little suspicious of this movie's version of Steve Lombard. What little we see of him reminds me of Steve Lombard as shown in All-Star Superman. So, I might revisit this matter when better images of Lombard become available.

One of the difficulties with any Superman film is striking a balanced tone. Audiences want some humour, but not so much that the movie skis off a skyscraper wearing a pink tablecloth. They want drama and emotion, but not so much that Superman spends half the movie moping over his ex-girlfriend and spying on her family with his x-ray vision.

I like how earnest the tone of this new trailer is. Some were expecting Gunn to go overboard with the goofiness and humour, but the trailer isn't played for laughs. I'm sure there will be plenty of comedy mixed in with the drama in the finished film, and I'm ok with that as long as it's balanced. But it certainly doesn't look as though Gunn's turning it into a pure comedy, as some fans feared he might. The tone of the trailer is pleasantly heartfelt.

Quote from: thecolorsblend on Thu, 19 Dec  2024, 17:48One thing I've noticed is the overall friendly reception the film seems to be getting. From the set pics to yesterday's teaser of the teaser, the response looks to have been mostly positive on X. People seem pretty interested.

In today's world, it's rare to see a lot of enthusiasm for any comic book movie. It's rarer still for a DC property. And it's practically unheard of for a DC property other than Batman. And for the specific character to be Superman, we're pretty much in unknown territory now.

Audiences have low expectations right now. For superhero movies in general, but especially for DC. Even so, many fans want to see Superman get his moment in the sun. Batman and Spider-Man have both had successful solo movie series over the past few decades, but Superman hasn't.

I don't imagine anyone is expecting this film to be a masterpiece, and I'm sceptical it will remedy the widespread feeling of superhero fatigue or revitalise DC's cinematic prospects as some are hoping it will. But if the genre really is on its last legs, I'd like to see Superman get one more shot at launching his own film series before it's too late. I was really excited to see a new Superman movie series launch back in 2006 and 2013, but in both cases things didn't pan out as I was hoping. This third attempt will probably be the last before the industry decides the superhero genre is no longer worth the effort. What have we got to lose?

For those lamenting the familiarity and lack of boldness in this new film, it's worth remembering how close we came to getting a very fresh, bold and different Superman movie from Jar Jar Abrams and Ta-Nehisi Coates. That fan-baiting film would've been well received by critics, but less so by fans. Considering the current ideological preoccupations of the film industry, the fact we're getting such a traditional and familiar take on Superman is a massive win in itself. The alternative, which came dangerously close to happening, could've been a lot worse.

Quote from: thecolorsblend on Thu, 19 Dec  2024, 17:48As for comic book influences, Kingdom Come seems obvious. But All-Star Superman is prominent as well. Both of those stories are The End Of Superman in some form or another. That could be a coincidence. But the film's original title was "Legacy". So, make of all that what you will.

By this equivalent point in Superman Returns's production, we generally knew that Singer was adhering (to whatever degree) to the Donner canon and that the story of the film would revolve around Superman returning to Earth after a prolonged absence. We know FAR less about Gunn's film so far.

So, I personally am not ruling out the possibility that Gunn is essentially resurrecting Superman on film to remove him from the DCU franchise. Maybe that's cynical on my part. But there it is anyway.

The theories I've seen online suggest this film is about Superman reclaiming his legacy. It's not an origin story, but takes place in a world where Superman is already established. One theory is that the film begins with Superman returning a la 2006, only to find a cynical generation of heroes has supplanted him. That the example he's set for others has given rise to unworthy imitators, and that he must correct his 'legacy' by showing them a better example.

Quote from: The Joker on Fri, 20 Dec  2024, 01:41If anything, I can't help but get Bryan Singer "Superman Returns" vibes from this.

I'm getting that vibe too, but I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing. I've always maintained that Singer's idea of using the Donner films as a launching pad, of starting off on familiar turf so he can hit the ground running, was sound. The problem is that Singer got bogged down in producing a nostalgic Force Awakens-style retread, when what he should have done was move forward and produce the sequels Donner would've made had he not been booted off the series in the late seventies. At least that's my take.

If Gunn is doing something similar, then Superman '25 could be the movie Superman Returns should have been.

Quote from: The Dark Knight on Fri, 20 Dec  2024, 02:54The first we see Superman he's beaten up on the snow, which is an odd first reveal.

Some are interpreting this as a metaphor for Superman's Hollywood journey, and in particular for how the character has been sidelined and mismanaged by the industry in recent years. At the beginning of the trailer he's lying wounded, and at the end he's soaring triumphantly. Rising from the ashes of defeat, so to speak.

Of course if this movie ends up bombing or turns out to be terrible, then the trailer will age about as well as the "This will make things right" line from The Force Awakens.

Quote from: thecolorsblend on Fri, 20 Dec  2024, 05:33Anyway, if I'm right about the above, then this goes a long way toward supporting Gunn's claim that the film is very heavily influenced by All-Star Superman. Which is no bad thing in my book. I'm a huge All-Star Superman fan.

I love All-Star Superman. It's probably my favourite Superman comic, so I'm happy to see Gunn taking influence from it.

Quote from: Silver Nemesis on Fri, 20 Dec  2024, 13:23For those lamenting the familiarity and lack of boldness in this new film, it's worth remembering how close we came to getting a very fresh, bold and different Superman movie from Jar Jar Abrams and Ta-Nehisi Coates. That fan-baiting film would've been well received by critics, but less so by fans. Considering the current ideological preoccupations of the film industry, the fact we're getting such a traditional and familiar take on Superman is a massive win in itself. The alternative, which came dangerously close to happening, could've been a lot worse.

You're not wrong there. Whatever this ends up being would automatically be preferable to the JJ project. I will say the one segment that did raise my interest was Superman punching through the glass, presumably being held captive by Lex. That had a spark about it. I wouldn't mind seeing more of that.

Quote from: Silver Nemesis on Fri, 20 Dec  2024, 13:23I love All-Star Superman. It's probably my favourite Superman comic, so I'm happy to see Gunn taking influence from it.

I'd say mine are Lex Luthor: Man of Steel, Earth One and Death of Superman.

I admire MoS and even BvS even more now as time marches on. It was a brief window that has gone and will probably never return. I loved how it was truly contemporary, wiping the slate clean without keeping its feet in the past visually or musically. Abandoning Zimmer's theme from WhedonLeague onwards was very disappointing to me and especially in that timeline it didn't make sense. Now Williams is here to stay full time and with the trunks. Snyder could have pushed the darkness too hard (your mileage may vary) but I think the groundwork made sense. But doing that was still a radical action for sections of the fanbase. I just don't accept that Superman only works with a Reeve foundation. But here we are again. No matter what is different it still feels like Groundhog Day. So indeed, while I'm not expecting spying on families, the Singerman comparison is still there.

Quote from: The Dark Knight on Fri, 20 Dec  2024, 02:54You can always trust the judgement of Uncle Bingo.

(https://media0.giphy.com/media/v1.Y2lkPTc5MGI3NjExb2Z2NGI5MGV3djA0MjliYTAxZ2Qwd2s5aHA0YmhiMDRnd3FpOWdiOSZlcD12MV9pbnRlcm5hbF9naWZfYnlfaWQmY3Q9Zw/HJeDngzKX8fiB0s8OT/giphy.gif)

Quote from: Silver Nemesis on Fri, 20 Dec  2024, 13:23I like how earnest the tone of this new trailer is. Some were expecting Gunn to go overboard with the goofiness and humour, but the trailer isn't played for laughs. I'm sure there will be plenty of comedy mixed in with the drama in the finished film, and I'm ok with that as long as it's balanced. But it certainly doesn't look as though Gunn's turning it into a pure comedy, as some fans feared he might. The tone of the trailer is pleasantly heartfelt.

I got that there will be dramatic sequences throughout the film, but much of that will be undercut by comedic scenes (the MCU formula if you will). Case in point, Krypto dragging Superman away by his cape. Which, I can only assume, is supposed to elicit a response from the audience. Which is to chuckle at the absurdity of what we are seeing. A classic Gunn trope.

Quote from: thecolorsblend on Thu, 19 Dec  2024, 17:48One thing I've noticed is the overall friendly reception the film seems to be getting. From the set pics to yesterday's teaser of the teaser, the response looks to have been mostly positive on X. People seem pretty interested.

As they say, different circles. I've seen reactions from embarrassingly gushing praise, to outright hatred, to just plain unimpressed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qYFxu39rbmk&t=352s

QuoteI don't imagine anyone is expecting this film to be a masterpiece,

To say the least.

To say the very least!

 

Quoteand I'm sceptical it will remedy the widespread feeling of superhero fatigue or revitalise DC's cinematic prospects as some are hoping it will. But if the genre really is on its last legs, I'd like to see Superman get one more shot at launching his own film series before it's too late. I was really excited to see a new Superman movie series launch back in 2006 and 2013, but in both cases things didn't pan out as I was hoping. This third attempt will probably be the last before the industry decides the superhero genre is no longer worth the effort. What have we got to lose?

I for one would just like a simple and straightforward Superman movie without all the usual trappings of having to establish a "shared universe" at the expense of the film itself (and we all are well aware how that tends to work out, rigbt?). Thus making the movie feel just like a trailer for the next one.

Let's see here, we have; Superman, Lois Lane, Perry White, Jimmy Olson, Cat Grant, Lex Luthor, The Authority, Mr. Terrific, Hawkgirl, Metamorpho, Jonathan Kent, Martha Kent, Krypto, Ultraman, Guy Gardner, Teschmacher (again), Rick Flagg Sr. (carryover from Creature Commandos .. yay), Maxwell Lord, and Otis (again), correct? Am I missing anyone? Brainiac? Is Starro back?

Nevermind the bloated cast list, what's the budget on this?

I don't know. This just comes across as more Superfriends than Superman. I understand not wanting to get out of your comfort zone with the usual road taken by incorporating a mosaic of characters, but it would've been appreciated when you're tackling something like Superman.

QuoteFor those lamenting the familiarity and lack of boldness in this new film, it's worth remembering how close we came to getting a very fresh, bold and different Superman movie from Jar Jar Abrams and Ta-Nehisi Coates. That fan-baiting film would've been well received by critics, but less so by fans. Considering the current ideological preoccupations of the film industry, the fact we're getting such a traditional and familiar take on Superman is a massive win in itself. The alternative, which came dangerously close to happening, could've been a lot worse.

Probably the worst case scenario, but at the same time, that would be just like something WB would do. Hell, I would gladly take a Superman Returns 2 over anything that Coates guy is associated with, but it's a very low bar.

QuoteI've always maintained that Singer's idea of using the Donner films as a launching pad, of starting off on familiar turf so he can hit the ground running, was sound.

Respectfully disagree, Silver.

I distinctly remember groaning out loud when I read that Singer was keeping the Donnerverse stuff as some sort of "vague continuity". To me, it just made it painfully clear that Bryan Singer was either unwilling, or unable to leave what Donner/Reeve did in the past, and begin anew. With a clean slate. We know it can be done. But for whatever reason, it's always two steps forward, and one step back with Superman. Where the refuge of Donner's version, and the whimsical silver age, is always there to go running back to. Perhaps this is me speaking as a child of the post-crisis Superman era (and I would place STAS in that as well, since it was definitely Post-Crisis adjacent), that achieved a quite admirable job in pushing past the silver/bronze age eras, but when it comes cinematic depictions? I'm afraid the that sort of earnestness we saw in the late 1980's and throughout the 1990s, almost always takes a back seat to playing it safe.

Comics aren't immune to this either to be perfectly honest. There's the New52, to a lesser degree, but compare John Byrne's Man of Steel to Geoff Johns' Secret Origin, and .... yikes. The regression and nostalgia was patently unconcealed. Hell, I'd take Birthright over playing it safe like Secret Origin. 

QuoteThe problem is that Singer got bogged down in producing a nostalgic Force Awakens-style retread, when what he should have done was move forward and produce the sequels Donner would've made had he not been booted off the series in the late seventies. At least that's my take.

I'd say the red flag for Singer, was Batman Begins. A film that neither needed, nor wanted, to be tied to the Burton films (much like Burton with William Dozier before him), and did it's own thing. It would either succeed or fail. Sink or swim. In my mind, BB and SR were polar opposites of one another. Where one was bold, and presented a new direction, the other got bogged down by nostalgia, retreading, and being unable/unwilling to let go of what came before.

When I heard the Top Gun-esque guitar riff of John Williams score, my feelings were very similar to how they were when I heard the Jon Ottman rendition of theWilliams score in SR...

Welp, here we go again.

QuoteIf Gunn is doing something similar, then Superman '25 could be the movie Superman Returns should have been.

We'll see. Unless a subsequent trailer is a banger, I really can't see myself rushing out to watch this next summer. I'll probably eventually get the blu ray though thanks to my OCD completionist mindset. As far as Singer and Gunn go, both men have their share of problems as human beings, but if I were to assess who's the more talented filmmaker, I'd say Singer wins that one pretty easily.

Quote from: The Joker on Sat, 21 Dec  2024, 02:03I got that there will be dramatic sequences throughout the film, but much of that will be undercut by comedic scenes (the MCU formula if you will). Case in point, Krypto dragging Superman away by his cape. Which, I can only assume, is supposed to elicit a response from the audience. Which is to chuckle at the absurdity of what we are seeing. A classic Gunn trope.

I think that scene is a nod to Grant Morrison's New 52 run. Specifically Action Comics V2 #16 (March 2013).


Gunn seems to be taking a lot of inspiration from Morrison, who was in turn heavily influenced by the Silver Age. The scene with Krypto tugging on Superman's cape is typical of that era.


My main concern about the inclusion of Krypto is that he might end up being this movie's answer to baby Groot, BB-8, baby Yoda, etc. A cute sidekick who's only there to sell toys. But I like Krypto, so I'm hoping he'll be used for more than just merchandising.

Quote from: The Joker on Sat, 21 Dec  2024, 02:03I for one would just like a simple and straightforward Superman movie without all the usual trappings of having to establish a "shared universe" at the expense of the film itself (and we all are well aware how that tends to work out, rigbt?). Thus making the movie feel just like a trailer for the next one.

Let's see here, we have; Superman, Lois Lane, Perry White, Jimmy Olson, Cat Grant, Lex Luthor, The Authority, Mr. Terrific, Hawkgirl, Metamorpho, Jonathan Kent, Martha Kent, Krypto, Ultraman, Guy Gardner, Teschmacher (again), Rick Flagg Sr. (carryover from Creature Commandos .. yay), Maxwell Lord, and Otis (again), correct? Am I missing anyone? Brainiac? Is Starro back?

I'd have vastly preferred that too. The overcrowding has been a consistent problem with DC's movies since Batman v Superman. I'd rather it was just Superman vs. Brainiac, with Lois, Jimmy, Perry, etc, appearing as supporting players. But sadly this is where we are now. Everything has to be a shared universe.

See the latest news about Amazon and the James Bond franchise for an even worse example.

Quote from: The Joker on Sat, 21 Dec  2024, 02:03Respectfully disagree, Silver.

I distinctly remember groaning out loud when I read that Singer was keeping the Donnerverse stuff as some sort of "vague continuity". To me, it just made it painfully clear that Bryan Singer was either unwilling, or unable to leave what Donner/Reeve did in the past, and begin anew. With a clean slate. We know it can be done. But for whatever reason, it's always two steps forward, and one step back with Superman. Where the refuge of Donner's version, and the whimsical silver age, is always there to go running back to.

When I say use Donner's movie as a starting point, I mean simply not retelling his origin story for the nth time. By 2006, Superman's origin had been repeatedly depicted in both animation and live action. In fact we'd had two prequel TV shows on the subject: Superboy and Smallville, the latter of which was still airing at the time of SR's release. Beginning the story with all the characters in place was, in my opinion, a perfectly reasonable strategy. If implemented properly, it would've saved Singer from a lot of groundwork and spared his movie from unfavourable comparisons with Superman I and II, or with the extended origin story that fans were following on television at the time.

Instead Singer ended up inviting those comparisons by reusing lines of dialogue and repeating images and plot beats from the earlier movies; in effect, pioneering the modern day 'legacy sequel'. Ultimately he got mired in member berries and nostalgia bait (Gunn might fall into that same trap, but it's too early to say for sure). But if he'd avoided that pitfall and had just started the story with the characters in place, like a James Bond movie, I think it could've worked.

Quote from: The Joker on Sat, 21 Dec  2024, 02:03I'd say the red flag for Singer, was Batman Begins. A film that neither needed, nor wanted, to be tied to the Burton films (much like Burton with William Dozier before him), and did it's own thing. It would either succeed or fail. Sink or swim. In my mind, BB and SR were polar opposites of one another. Where one was bold, and presented a new direction, the other got bogged down by nostalgia, retreading, and being unable/unwilling to let go of what came before.

I'd argue the Batman situation was different, as prior to Batman Begins Bruce Wayne's origin story had never been adapted into live action. It had been shown in the Galactic Guardians TV show and Mask of the Phantasm, but never in live action. Burton and Schumacher both gave us only brief flashbacks to the Wayne murders. Nolan was telling an important part of Batman's story that hadn't been depicted in live action before, and he did it well. When Matt Reeves rebooted Batman he skipped the origin and got straight down to business. I maintain Singer could've done the same thing in 2006.

Quote from: The Joker on Sat, 21 Dec  2024, 02:03As far as Singer and Gunn go, both men have their share of problems as human beings, but if I were to assess who's the more talented filmmaker, I'd say Singer wins that one pretty easily.

I thought the first Guardians of the Galaxy film was ok, albeit overrated, but other than that I can't say I've ever really enjoyed any of Gunn's movies. Singer, on the other hand, gave us The Usual Suspects, X-Men II, Valkyrie and Days of Future Past, which are all good films.

Regarding the teaser, I more or less agree with Nerdrotic's take.


I've been catching up on CBMs recently, and over the past month I've watched Venom 2, Black Adam and Morbius. I thought all of them were slop. In fact with the exceptions of The Batman and No Way Home, I think every superhero movie of the 2020s has been slop. Too many of them were either overstuffed or overly dependent on audience nostalgia. Will Gunn's Superman be any different? Perhaps not. But until I know for sure, I'm trying to keep an open mind. I felt the same way about Todd Phillips' Joker back in 2019. I wasn't hyped for it, but I wasn't totally against it either. I was on the fence, hoping it would be good. That's how I feel about this movie.

I'm pretty sure the superhero movie genre is dead. The bubble's burst and the trend has run its course. I doubt the reboot of the DC universe will be a success. At best, we might get one or two ok movies amid a wave of mediocrity. For that reason, I predict Corenswet will be the last big screen version of Superman we're going to get for some time. I'm rooting for him to succeed.

As superficial as this might seem, one reason I'm rooting for Superman25 to succeed is because Corenswet is more or less wearing the traditional Superman outfit with the red trunks and the yellow symbol on his cape.

Those two design elements have not both been included in a film since Superman IV back in 1987. So, including them in the film now even tho modern audiences have no familiarity with them is a pretty big step in my opinion.

As to what Singer should've done with SR, for me, the real answer is NOT make the movie. Or at least, hold off on making it until Singer himself had the life experience in his own right to tell a story about middle age, midlife crises, regret and so forth. As it stands, the movie never addresses its own premise. Namely, that Superman has been absent for five years. It's pretty much swept under the rug following the airplane rescue sequence. Only Lois holds onto it. And even that goes away before too long.

There is mojo to the idea of Superman being MIA for a while. But SR doesn't handle that issue in a graceful way. And like I say, it also doesn't handle his return in a graceful way.

For better or worse, SR is arguably the first major requel to be released by Hollywood. It's easier to contextualize its bizarre continuity now than it was twenty years ago.

By contrast, Nolan had to play the ball where it lay. And in 2005, that meant moving away from the previous franchise, zigging where Burton/Schumacher zagged and so forth. One thing that has aged BB age well is how dissimilar it is to what came before. There's a very strong argument that BB has aged the best of that entire trilogy, in fact.

Like SN, I have long suspected that the comic book trend is dying. There doesn't seem to be much room for originality anymore. The Superman fan in me would actually be quite happy if Superman25 puts a bow around the CBM era. In a sense, it ends where it began, with a Superman film. "It's like poetry, it rhymes."

Also, I forgot to mention this in my influences post from a few days ago. But is that Solaris menacing Metropolis near the end of the teaser? If so, then it's safe to say that Grant Morrison is quickly becoming an unindicted co-conspirator in this film.

Quote from: The Joker on Sat, 21 Dec  2024, 02:03But for whatever reason, it's always two steps forward, and one step back with Superman. Where the refuge of Donner's version, and the whimsical silver age, is always there to go running back to. Perhaps this is me speaking as a child of the post-crisis Superman era (and I would place STAS in that as well, since it was definitely Post-Crisis adjacent), that achieved a quite admirable job in pushing past the silver/bronze age eras, but when it comes cinematic depictions? I'm afraid the that sort of earnestness we saw in the late 1980's and throughout the 1990s, almost always takes a back seat to playing it safe.

Absolutely true. There's a part of me that would like to see this movie fail for that very reason, and to cheer on Doomsday while he pounds Superman into the ground and kills him permanently. Imagine Schumacher, Nolan, Snyder and Reeves films all with the same Elfman Batman Theme and general aesthetic. Imagine what we would've missed out on just because they wanted to be lazy and play it safe.

I'm feeling f***ing over a lot of things now anyway. And that includes The Batman series with Reeves. This is a Superman thread but the more I think about that incarnation of Batman the more I find fault with character choices. The genre does feel played out or simply just not the same in general. I'm still wondering if it's me that changed or the genre. I'm thinking it's a bit of both.

Quote from: The Dark Knight on Sun, 22 Dec  2024, 00:22The genre does feel played out or simply just not the same in general. I'm still wondering if it's me that changed or the genre. I'm thinking it's a bit of both.

I've been wrestling with the same thing.

To use a potentially inappropriate analogy, it's like your first high. For me, seeing that matte painting of Gotham City at the start of B89 on June 23, 1989, that was it for me. I've been chasing that feeling ever since.

Not completely unsuccessfully, I might add. But not completely successfully either.

I think back on the major CBMs of my lifetime. That is, those released during my lifetime. And there are many. The ones that, for my money, hit like a fist to the jaw.

The Crow, Batman Returns, Batman Forever, X2, Spider-Man 2, The Dark Knight, Watchmen, the first Iron Man, the first Cap, Days Of Future Past, BVS and probably others.

And yet, for as great as I consider those films to be, the common denominator for all of the above is that none of them quite give me that punch that the Gotham City matte painting from B89 gave me. And still gives me. I could stare at that matte painting for hours. I am simply unable to express the impact that moment of the film had on my child imagination. I don't think it's an exaggeration to say it changed my life.

Even so, no question about it, I've changed over the years. It's true.

But... CBMs have changed themselves. The quality has undeniably declined.

I've seen that Reeves The Batman film exactly once. And that was on opening day in theaters. I haven't revisited it. I remember enjoying it, aside from Catwoman's semi woke "You must be rich" comment and some of the PC casting decisions. It's objectively a good film.

But it's an exception to the rule. The last good MCU film seems to have been Endgame (since Deadpool & Wolverine isn't really MCU, now is it?) almost six years ago. The other Marvel films since then have mostly been letdowns.

On the DC side of the aisle... geeze. There's plenty to choose from. Black Adam, Shazam 2, Aquaman 2, the list just goes on. They are undeniably, objectively bad films.

Yes, I've changed. But they've changed too. It isn't just me. And I don't think it's just you either.

Another realization I had is that I simply prefer superhero comics over superhero films. I don't see what the fuss with Captain America: Civil War is all about. But reading the (numerous) Civil War comics should show anyone just how weak an adaptation of that storyline the film version is. Realistically, Civil War should've been an entire MCU Phase unto itself. And even that might not have done the comics full justice. But it would've been better than the single film we got.

Comics are simply the superior medium for telling huge epic stories.

tl;dr- Yes, you and I are aging out. But the quality of CBMs is in steep decline as well, that much is clear. It's not all on us.

Quote from: thecolorsblend on Sun, 22 Dec  2024, 03:51tl;dr- Yes, you and I are aging out. But the quality of CBMs is in steep decline as well, that much is clear. It's not all on us.

I've read the His Dark Materials books and I'm not going to watch the TV series so I can preserve that world in my head. Same thing after I re-read Harry Potter. I hardly play video games anymore...but even then I don't think games are as good as they used to be. Hell, just look at Gotham Knights and Suicide Squad Kill The Justice League in comparison to the Arkham series. Games also take much longer to develop.

I've been finding myself preferring big jigsaw puzzles while listening to podcasts, usually about heists, tales of survival or mysteries. I cycle but nowhere near as much as I used to. After a while you've done something so many times it's just not as exciting and it feels like going through the motions.

So indeed, while I genuinely do think CBMs and entertainment in general had deteriorated, my mindset plays a part. For example I occasionally think if being such a strong Batman fan/collector is even what I should be focused on or spending money on. I have enough now, surely? I get the feeling the best has already been. I also have this thought that my generation isn't up to standard of yesteryear, meaning the current crop of actors and creatives behind the scenes lacking the same charisma and talent. I really don't think they're up to it. Paraphrasing Tarantino here, they're not starts but placeholders. Movies do seem to come and go without much fanfare now.

Anyway. Let's see what happens with Superman. I'm not going to hide my biases about how I've been seeing things. I used to think taking time away from something made you appreciate something anew, almost like the first time. But that's not entirely true from my experience. If Corenswet and Gunn end up pleasing the fanbase with this Reeve era bedrock that's fine. It seems that's what they want even if I don't agree with the philosophy. I'm not a huge fan so why should I care so much if they don't?

Quote from: thecolorsblend on Sat, 21 Dec  2024, 15:57As superficial as this might seem, one reason I'm rooting for Superman25 to succeed is because Corenswet is more or less wearing the traditional Superman outfit with the red trunks and the yellow symbol on his cape.

Those two design elements have not both been included in a film since Superman IV back in 1987. So, including them in the film now even tho modern audiences have no familiarity with them is a pretty big step in my opinion.

I'm reasonably happy with the costume. I still prefer the simpler suits of yesteryear over this busier and more rubbery version, but I'm glad they've stuck to the classic design. The collar doesn't bother me now that I've seen it in motion. The overall impression I'm getting is a mixture of Frank Quitely's Superman and the New 52 version.

Quote from: thecolorsblend on Sat, 21 Dec  2024, 15:57Also, I forgot to mention this in my influences post from a few days ago. But is that Solaris menacing Metropolis near the end of the teaser? If so, then it's safe to say that Grant Morrison is quickly becoming an unindicted co-conspirator in this film.

I hadn't picked up on that, but it could be Solaris. The damaged robot appears to be Kelex or one of the other robots from the Fortress of Solitude.


In All-Star Superman, the Fortress robots sacrificed themselves helping Superman battle the Tyrant Sun. Note that Quitely depicted them with blue capes, like the damaged robot in the trailer.


Could be another Morrison influence at play.

Quote from: The Dark Knight on Sun, 22 Dec  2024, 05:24So indeed, while I genuinely do think CBMs and entertainment in general had deteriorated, my mindset plays a part. For example I occasionally think if being such a strong Batman fan/collector is even what I should be focused on or spending money on. I have enough now, surely? I get the feeling the best has already been. I also have this thought that my generation isn't up to standard of yesteryear, meaning the current crop of actors and creatives behind the scenes lacking the same charisma and talent. I really don't think they're up to it. Paraphrasing Tarantino here, they're not starts but placeholders. Movies do seem to come and go without much fanfare now.

An interesting video came up in my YouTube recommendations earlier this year. It was all about how western culture seems to have stagnated since the turn of the century. If you look back at films, TV, comics, technology, music and fashion from the twentieth century, you can guess with some degree of accuracy which decade it was produced in. The culture was constantly evolving and changing, driven by innovation, and each decade had its own distinct identity. Compare that with the 21st century, where things produced in 2004, 2014 and 2024 really aren't all that different. There are exceptions, of course, but our culture seems to have become trapped in a cycle of nostalgia. The last really successful new multimedia franchise was arguably Harry Potter, and that was created in the late nineties. People are yearning for something new.

I was reflecting on all the movies I saw on the big screen this year, and I realised that most of my trips to the cinema were to see rereleases of old films, with the most recent being Planes, Trains and Automobiles (1987). I saw some new films too, but not many. My Christmas list includes the Legacy of Kain: Soul Reaver collection, and my brother's Christmas list includes the Tomb Raider collection; both collections of games released over two decades ago. Most of the books, comics and TV shows I've consumed this year have been old. I think many of us feel like modern western pop culture isn't giving us anything but hollow epigonic imitations of superior works from the past. While entertainment media chases the nonexistent 'modern audience', the existing audience feels apathetic and disinterested in everything on offer.

The good news is that a cultural shift seems poised to happen in the US right now, which might set things on the right path. Maybe then we'll start getting more creative stories, stop recycling the same old IPs, and start rewarding merit over DEI so the most talented and creative people can rise to the top. Hopefully that'll happen. Right now things look bleak for 2025 as far as movies go. But we'll get through it.

When you bottom out the way western pop culture has in recent years, there's nowhere else to go but up.

I don't know, this one is weird for me. All of my friends seem to be totally jazzed for it. I didn't hate it, but I'm just not wowed by it, and I want to be. I really do. I've watched the trailer over 20 times, hoping something clicks, and yet, it's not there for me. Surprisingly, the thing I was worried the most about, I actually like the greatest: Krypto. But aside from Krypto, something feels off. And I'm having a hard time putting my finger on it, but something is...off. I still attest that this movie looks and feels very CW-ish. Which is odd, cause we have a CW Superman show, and it looks better than this(from what we can see from this first trailer).

I don't know....something is off about it, and yet, I don't feel like watching the damn trailer again. The only reason why I've watched it so many times, is to try and figure out why I don't love it, and I can't figure it out overall. I do know I'm not a fan of the suit. I think it looks like bad cosplay. I think the monsters look like bad CGI. I also think this movie looks overtly stuffed with other characters/heroes/villains. And this is me watching it on mute, because my biggest offense, is easily the score. Look, I love the John Williams score. It's one of the most iconic scores of all time, and it totally embodies Superman....but why are we using it here? Is this a new Superman/DC universe, or is this another Singer deal, where this is back in the Donner-verse? The Elfman score for Batman is still my favorite, but if a new Batman movie comes out, and they use the Elfman score for a totally different Batman, I'm going to be put off by it. The Elfman score is specifically for Burton and Keaton. When I hear that score, that's the universe that I'm associating it with. That association means something, or, it SHOULD mean something! I feel like I'm being tricked with the John Williams score. Plus, it's not even the actual score, it's just some rock riff of it. It's a fugazi.

I guess typing all this out, maybe I did figure it out? And it basically comes down to smoke and mirrors. I'm being tricked into liking this, when I want to organically like it. I can see the bunny in the hat, and they're trying to gaslight me into thinking this is real magic, and that I didn't see anything. I want the these movies to succeed. I love DC, and I don't want these things to fail, but damn, are they making it hard right now.

I dunno, whatever....

Quote from: thecolorsblend on Sun, 22 Dec  2024, 03:51CBMs have changed themselves. The quality has undeniably declined.

I've seen that Reeves The Batman film exactly once. And that was on opening day in theaters. I haven't revisited it. I remember enjoying it, aside from Catwoman's semi woke "You must be rich" comment and some of the PC casting decisions. It's objectively a good film.

But it's an exception to the rule. The last good MCU film seems to have been Endgame (since Deadpool & Wolverine isn't really MCU, now is it?) almost six years ago. The other Marvel films since then have mostly been letdowns.

On the DC side of the aisle... geeze. There's plenty to choose from. Black Adam, Shazam 2, Aquaman 2, the list just goes on. They are undeniably, objectively bad films.

Yes, I've changed. But they've changed too. It isn't just me. And I don't think it's just you either.

I believe there is an element, a very important element, that has many CBM's over the years being resistant to stray too far away from 'formula'. Studio thinking wise, I guess I can understand this to some extent, since Disney enjoyed so much success for 10 years solid, but at the same time, it eventually results in a sameness with the proceedings. Whether that's Marvel or DC. It's just a different skin with the same old, tired, and formulaic approach. Warners attempted to differiniate itself briefly away from Disney's Marvel films, but was met with holy hell from critics and noticeable box office drop offs following the first weekend. Culmulating to Warners chasing their "White Whale" by copying the MCU formula for the most part, and being met with apathy from much of the theater going audience. Nothing sticks out. Everything looks the same, and the approach isn't all that different. CGI, snark and humor, and a by-the-numbers plot. It's unfortunate that there's now a entire generation (probably ... generally) that were raised on MCU, and would likely find something like "Taxi Driver" to be absolutely foreign, or slow in terms of pacing, ect.

QuoteAnother realization I had is that I simply prefer superhero comics over superhero films. I don't see what the fuss with Captain America: Civil War is all about. But reading the (numerous) Civil War comics should show anyone just how weak an adaptation of that storyline the film version is. Realistically, Civil War should've been an entire MCU Phase unto itself. And even that might not have done the comics full justice. But it would've been better than the single film we got.

Comics are simply the superior medium for telling huge epic stories.

tl;dr- Yes, you and I are aging out. But the quality of CBMs is in steep decline as well, that much is clear. It's not all on us.

CA:Civil War does feel Disney-sanitized and rather minute, compared to the event it was in the comics. Picking and choosing "best of" moments from story lines like that, and copying and pasting them into something else, generally speaking, is rarely satisfying. I would probably have a fairly difficult time finding a long-time Incredible Hulk comic reader who would actually think Thor Ragnarok was a satisfying adaptation of the Planet Hulk story line from the comics. Which was arguably one of the more notable arcs in that character's 60+ year history, that somehow found itself brought to life cinematically for a Thor movie. Badly.

Quote from: The Dark Knight on Sun, 22 Dec  2024, 05:24So indeed, while I genuinely do think CBMs and entertainment in general had deteriorated, my mindset plays a part. For example I occasionally think if being such a strong Batman fan/collector is even what I should be focused on or spending money on. I have enough now, surely? I get the feeling the best has already been. I also have this thought that my generation isn't up to standard of yesteryear, meaning the current crop of actors and creatives behind the scenes lacking the same charisma and talent. I really don't think they're up to it. Paraphrasing Tarantino here, they're not starts but placeholders. Movies do seem to come and go without much fanfare now.

You know, I've had this thought about the previous generations of famous actors, where an element of their success/fame was due to many of them having a unique and/or distinct voice. Where, just by hearing them, you knew exactly whom that was. To some degree, this was emphasized in the past. I think it's a key factor that's being largely overlooked by Hollywood nowadays. Where it's about the assembly line 'look' and 'attractiveness' rather than the, let's say, unique qualities/personal eccentricities that can often make one stand out from the pack... 

Quote from: Travesty on Mon, 23 Dec  2024, 05:36I don't know, this one is weird for me. All of my friends seem to be totally jazzed for it. I didn't hate it, but I'm just not wowed by it, and I want to be. I really do. I've watched the trailer over 20 times, hoping something clicks, and yet, it's not there for me. Surprisingly, the thing I was worried the most about, I actually like the greatest: Krypto. But aside from Krypto, something feels off. And I'm having a hard time putting my finger on it, but something is...off. I still attest that this movie looks and feels very CW-ish. Which is odd, cause we have a CW Superman show, and it looks better than this(from what we can see from this first trailer).

It's baffling to me that a HBO Max show like "The Penguin" actually looks more cinematic than a $300+ million dollar Superman movie, but here we are.

Quotemy biggest offense, is easily the score. Look, I love the John Williams score. It's one of the most iconic scores of all time, and it totally embodies Superman....but why are we using it here? Is this a new Superman/DC universe, or is this another Singer deal, where this is back in the Donner-verse? The Elfman score for Batman is still my favorite, but if a new Batman movie comes out, and they use the Elfman score for a totally different Batman, I'm going to be put off by it. The Elfman score is specifically for Burton and Keaton. When I hear that score, that's the universe that I'm associating it with. That association means something, or, it SHOULD mean something! I feel like I'm being tricked with the John Williams score. Plus, it's not even the actual score, it's just some rock riff of it. It's a fugazi.

Yeah, that's pretty much what I was getting out in my previous post about the Williams score being sorta/kinda used here. I'm aware some fans consider it THE Superman theme, and that's fine, but at the same time, I personally couldn't honestly place it along the same lines as the James Bond theme as some people tend to want to do, because we've seen too many examples of different cinematic/tv Supermen being introduced with brand spanking new themes. It was baked into the cake, and also differintiated the different Supemen from one another. Different Superman. Different universe. Different theme.

Easy. Simple. Effective.

Your point about Elfman's score is apt. Even though Elfman's Batman score was influential, I didn't particularly need the  exact Elfman Batman score, or a guitar riff of it, to be retained back in 1992 for BTAS, and the same goes for the Nolan films, and Matt Reeves' The Batman. This is also very true with the Williams score being refrained from with "Lois and Clark" with Dean Cain, or STAS. Wasn't necessary, nor needed. I actually like the different themes, because it further gives the character a "new run" that feels like a breath of fresh air, rather than continually piggybacking on a past iteration. Which, I think, makes the character feel stunted to some degree.

QuoteI guess typing all this out, maybe I did figure it out? And it basically comes down to smoke and mirrors. I'm being tricked into liking this, when I want to organically like it. I can see the bunny in the hat, and they're trying to gaslight me into thinking this is real magic, and that I didn't see anything. I want the these movies to succeed. I love DC, and I don't want these things to fail, but damn, are they making it hard right now.

I dunno, whatever....

Memberberries, and nostalgia is a powerful tool with these things, but like you, I'm just not getting anything to get intrigued about with CW/reskinned MCU Superman.

Quote from: The Joker on Sat, 21 Dec  2024, 02:03Nevermind the bloated cast list, what's the budget on this?

Gunn denies it, but it's documented that the budget costs $363 million. I'm sure Hollywood's creative accounting will do whatever it takes to make it look less expensive. The Flash's budget was supposed to be $220 million, but The Hollywood Reporter later revealed its real budget was $300 million and possibly more, thus making it more of a flop than it already was.

I'll say it before, and I'll say it again: it goes to show how hypocritical how Snyder got heavily criticised for "rushing" the Justice League in BvS, but then turn around be sycophants for justifying the amount of other superheroes in a Superman movie. Idiotic excuses like it's "similar to the DCAU".

A friend of mine showed me the trailer against my wishes because he wasn't impressed with it. What can I say? It's rubbish. Everything about it looks cheap, from the cinematography, the VFX, the costumes. I gotta love how Gunn stated took inspiration from Richard Donner AND Zack Snyder, knowing he sabotaged Cavill's return. But you can see how derivative the shots are from many other Superman movies, with Superman and Lois floating up in the air holding each other, a shot of an angry crowd showing their contempt for Superman similar to the Capitol scene in BvS. Knowing Gunn, he'll use Krypto for cheap sentimental factor and possibly crude attempt at humour, if that awful GOTG Vol. 2 is anything to go by, and will shake up all the darkness in his film with cheap jokes and hokey attempts at "hope and optimism". I'm also not impressed that Clark Kent is going to be socially awkward again. Not only by the goofy broccoli hair but even in modern-day quirky stereotypes which I despise.

Joker, as much as I don't care for Ethan Van Sciver, he wasn't enthused by the trailer and even called out Guy Gardner's appearance from wig to costume "a humiliation". If costume designs look much better in an Arrowverse TV show than a big-budget feature film then that's a serious problem.

As I've said many times before, Gunn has hijacked the DC brand to line up his own pockets. The vast majority of stuff he greenlit are stuff he wrote, including crap like Creature Commandos where a fifty something year old Rick Flagg Sr apparently sleeps with teenage girls and Doctor Phosphorus gives enemies the middle fingers as he melts them to death, and another season of Peacemaker where you're subjected to this stupidity:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2gWkJTp0Ld8

https://youtu.be/A6_yCaI-grs

I don't care if the joke is about how stupid Peacemaker the character is, why the f*** would you associate such toilet humour with Superman? Do people seriously want this garbage to be part of the DC brand?

To demonstrate what a farce this soft reboot of the DC franchise on film is, it's now officially revealed that Jason Momoa is playing Lobo in the Supergirl reboot. Ten years ago, I'd say that's perfect casting. Now? That's just stupid for two reasons: 1) you go from playing Aquaman to a lesser-known character in the eyes of the public who'll definitely be a goofy clown (and let's face it, Momoa is lowering his standards like Chris Hemsworth by appearing in dumb comedies and commercials), and 2) this makes the DC timeline even more nonsensical as Peacemaker is confirmed to be canon - except for the JL cameo. What sort of world-building is this?

If people still think James Gunn is a great choice to be in charge of DC despite all the controversial sh*t surrounding him both professionally and personally and his juvenile at best, creepy at worst sense of humour...all I can say this without getting censored even further is God help them.

Quote from: Travesty on Mon, 23 Dec  2024, 05:36I guess typing all this out, maybe I did figure it out? And it basically comes down to smoke and mirrors. I'm being tricked into liking this, when I want to organically like it. I can see the bunny in the hat, and they're trying to gaslight me into thinking this is real magic, and that I didn't see anything. I want the these movies to succeed. I love DC, and I don't want these things to fail, but damn, are they making it hard right now.

I dunno, whatever....

For me, they've made it impossible. The Justice League saga, attempts to gaslight everyone over The Flash and squandering Keaton's Batman comeback, and the non-stop dirty politicking that screws up everything they promise to deliver. As much as I like DC characters, why support a brand where the decision makers treat everyone from creatives to fans with utter contempt?

The estate of Joe Shuster is attempting to block the release of Superman '25 in certain countries: https://deadline.com/2025/01/superman-estate-sues-warner-bros-discovery-dc-comics-summer-release-1236274354/

Maybe I've just been in fandom for too long. Maybe that's it. But it's almost there's a script to this sort of thing. A very predictable script.

In the lead-up to a new Superman project...

* The Siegel and/or Shuster estates will take some legal action or another. They don't have a snowball's chance in hell of winning, mind you. They just want another "final payout" from whoever owns Superman at the time. And the public domain clock is ticking on that so I guess make hay while the sun shines, you parasites.

* The actor playing Superman will state his admiration for the Alex Ross version of Superman.

* The actor playing Superman will also announce that his version is "more human" than all previous incarnations.

* The actress playing Lois will do a junket where she informs the world that her version of Lois is quite different from all the others because all other versions of the character were (apparently) shy, conservative, demure and passive damsels in distress while [the current Lois] is sassier and more modern.

I've been watching ish unfold for decades now, it's literally the gd same every single time.

Official promo art.


And here's Superman meeting Steel.