New Superman Movie

[thalaw2]

No Lex unless he's got on his supersuit.  It's time to FIGHT!

[BWPS]

idk about Lex but the costumes look sweet according to these figures


http://imgur.com/a/r3s4V

[Tomato]

Those maybe not so much, but as a toy collector I'm looking forward to some of the stuff Mattel's been showing.

[BentonGrey]

I don't necessarily agree that Lex would need his supersuit, but darn it, Thalaw is freaking right.  It's time for a super-powered smack down.  In fact, it's way past time.

Man, the Super suit just looks unfinished without the trunks.  It looks like Supes left the phonebooth before he was done getting into costume.

[oldmanwinters]

I wish the movie people would be confident enough to bring some of the Superman rogue's gallery to the big screen.  Brainiac, Parasite, Metallo, Toyman... we deserve to see the Man of Steel up against more threats than just Luthor and the occassional Kryptonian totalitarian.

[Tomato]

In this case, I think Zod's inclusion has more to do with his origin being an extension of Superman's own, which allows the movie to focus on one origin story rather than cramming in the origin of an additional villain (Especially since many villains, such as Metallo, have origins that occur as a result of Superman's existence). I think once we've established Superman in this film, the next film can expand into more of his universe. Granted, we're almost guaranteed to have a Luthor in the next film (assuming he isn't in this one at all, which is still a stretch) but I could definitely see Luthor/Metallo or something.

To be fair though, the only Superman franchise to last more than one movie was the Reeve films, and they just kind of ignored the comics in general.

[stumpy]

Not to be cynical, but I suspect it's more of a challenge to get a big name to play a villain most people haven't heard of. There are plenty of exceptions (e.g. Liam Neeson playing Ras in Batman Begins), but I suspect it'd be harder to convince a big box office draw to make his mark on the franchise by playing Brainiac or Metallo than by playing Luthor, who is considered THE Superman villain. After the disappointment in Superman Returns, it seems like they are trying to put a recognizable face behind most of the recognizable names in this one.

And, that's on top of the issue where actors don't get the same face time if they play masked or heavily-made-up villains. Even in movies where the stars get plenty of screen time while not in costume, they still keep taking their masks off for no reason. I always find that somewhat annoying and distracting to the story, even understanding the meta excuse that the actor can do a better job of acting when people can see his face. Though these heroes have gone through all sorts of contortions to create and maintain their secret identities, apparently it doesn't occur to them that a famous superhero standing in costume on a rooftop overlooking the city with his face exposed would have about 90 seconds before that picture was on Facebook.

Anyway, I am looking forward to this and I don't mind seeing Zod. We watched the extended cut of the original Superman a couple weeks ago and there was quite a bit of Zod and Krypton and it worked pretty well in the movie. And, really, that movie was better than I remembered. Yes, parts were campy and the special effects (especially the flying) were pretty unconvincing. But, with a couple exceptions, the story worked and the "first date" scene with Lois was actually one of the better ones of its kind.

[bat1987]

Those maybe not so much, but as a toy collector I'm looking forward to some of the stuff Mattel's been showing.

The Movie Masters? I saw pics of them and they look fantastic, especially Superman.

[Tomato]

Primarily those yes, but even the kiddie ones mattel's making (which I'm buying because Hasbro won't make Black Widow or Mark VII IM in 6" scale, and I want both movieverses in the same scale) look good, despite the lack of decent articulation.

[Mr. Hamrick]

Not to be cynical, but I suspect it's more of a challenge to get a big name to play a villain most people haven't heard of. There are plenty of exceptions (e.g. Liam Neeson playing Ras in Batman Begins), but I suspect it'd be harder to convince a big box office draw to make his mark on the franchise by playing Brainiac or Metallo than by playing Luthor, who is considered THE Superman villain. After the disappointment in Superman Returns, it seems like they are trying to put a recognizable face behind most of the recognizable names in this one.

Depends on the "big name" actor.  A lot of actors, even big name ones, would relish the opportunity to play a lesser villain to a character like Superman or Batman if the script was good, a good director was involved, and/or it was pitched to them well.  Tom Hardy took about 5 seconds to accept the part of Bane even with the mask coming into play.  He was eager to do it because of the director involved.  Robin Williams offered to play a random thug in the movie just because he wanted to be a part of the Batman franchise.

Getting a big name onto a franchise playing a lesser known villain usually comes down to how it is pitched to them and how good the script is that they are shown.  The problem there is that their agents are usually the ones who are approached first and some agents have a reputation for turning parts for their clients without the clients even being asked.   However, the "superhero/comic book movie" has become a genre unto itself and a lot of actors are surprisingly receptive to being involved with them.

[Tomato]

IIRC, Robert Downy Jr. actually took on the role of Iron Man (who had devolved into kind of a tool in the years prior to the movie) for less pay then he really deserved, just because he wanted to play a superhero. Yeah, he wasn't exactly at the height of his popularity like he is now, but the sheer fact that he took home less for IM 1 then Cuba Gooding/Rhodey did says a lot about how coveted even "minor" roles in superhero films have been, especially with Avengers running around beating the pants off everyone.

Again, I think this has far more to do with the fact that the focus of this film is to establish SUPERMAN. They don't want to waste time with a complex character like Lex Luthor or with more alien races or kryptonite powered robots. Zod's powers are the same as Superman's, his origin can be worked into the Krypton stuff with minimal effort, and it allows them to focus on establishing their main character.

Superman is not any easy character to work with. We're not dealing with someone with the pseudo-racial drama of the X-men, the poor-mes of Spiderman, or the brooding of Batman. We've seen it in comics for ages, this notion that Superman's too tough to write because no one can relate because there's no drama in his life and blah blah blah. It's even worse for a film, because you only have a few hours to convince non-comic fans that someone like this can exist, and you can't distract them with petty drama like you can for Spiderman.

[BWPS]

he took home less for IM 1 then Cuba Gooding/Rhodey did

Gee, I'd certainly hope that's not true. I felt Cuba Gooding's performance in IM1 was lacking substance to such an extent that it almost felt like he wasn't in the movie at all.

[thalaw2]

Errr...aahhhh....wasn't Terrence Howard playing the part of Rhodey in IM1?

LOL!  BWPS

[BentonGrey]

he took home less for IM 1 then Cuba Gooding/Rhodey did

Gee, I'd certainly hope that's not true. I felt Cuba Gooding's performance in IM1 was lacking substance to such an extent that it almost felt like he wasn't in the movie at all.

Ha!

[Tomato]

Teach me not to google first... whatever, my point is, the Guy who played Rhodey (who did nothing substantial relating to the plot, and who had less to do with that film than Coulson did) got paid more then RDJ did.

Edit: BTW, in my defense, I was scrambling to finish that post quickly because my dad decided to bring my two year old foster brother downstairs, and invariably that means I'm watching him because my dad just lets him do whatever while he gets on the computer.

[oldmanwinters]

I understand that the more obscure Superman villains (i.e., everyone not named Luthor and Zod) would be a hard sell for most studios, but that's why I give Marvel so much credit for taking a chance on the first Thor movie.  I never thought they would be able to convincingly integrate that mythology into the already established Iron Man universe, but they did.  And they even decided to feature Loki (in all his crazy horned green costume-ness) as the primary villain of The Avengers.  And it worked.  Somehow, it worked. 

So I certainly think WB ought to trust the Superman source material more when it comes to inspiration for movie characters.  I would love to see Brainiac on the big screen.

[Tomato]

And how would they include Braniac's origin with that of Superman, without taking away screen time from establishing Superman? Again, I think it has far less to do with recognition (Zod is not a big part of the comics, he's only remembered at all due to Superman 2) and more logistics. Zod is a character they don't need to devote much screen time to, at all.

[Midnite]

Man of Steel - Official Trailer 3 [HD]

[BWPS]

Man they are really taking themselves seriously. Can't wait.

[Tomato]

See, this is already my most anticipated movie for the summer, so it's tough for me to get any more excited then I am. WB's trying though.

[BentonGrey]

Ehh, it looks good.  I just am not super excited about this.

[Panther_Gunn]

Ehh, it looks good.  I just am not super excited about this.

I see what you did there.

[Tomato]

Meh... I can see why some fans are a bit apprehensive going into this one... much as I enjoyed TDK, I probably fall into the same group of "enough with the Nolanverse Batman" comic fans as Benton does. Nolan severely limited the scope of Batman's universe (Both in terms of the rogues gallery as well as the character of Bruce Wayne), and by the time TDKR came out, we were already bashing our heads on those limitations.

That said... I don't get that impression with MoS. I mean, it's a movie about a super-powered alien, so it's not like kryptonite powered robots or aliens with shrink rays are THAT far outside the realm of possibility here. I also don't feel like they're vainly trying to make him an everyman either... he's going to have flaws, sure, but this trailer in particular showcases him as every bit the earnest boy scout Superman is supposed to be. Combine that with the fact that this film is being directed by Zack Snyder (himself a huge comic fan) a director known for being able to direct action (Nolan's biggest flaw as a director)... Yes, I have high hopes for this one. I wish I could say those hopes extended toward a JLA movie, but... well, they don't.

[steamteck]

And how would they include Braniac's origin with that of Superman, without taking away screen time from establishing Superman? Again, I think it has far less to do with recognition (Zod is not a big part of the comics, he's only remembered at all due to Superman 2) and more logistics. Zod is a character they don't need to devote much screen time to, at all.

Like in the cartoon Brainiac could originally have been the Krytonian world computer that falsified Jor-Els findings to keep the people from keeping it busy trying to save them instead of itself.

[Tomato]

But then you still have to spend time justifying not only the existence of aliens, but also supercomputers that rebel against their creators. That takes away from Superman's story, potentially turns off an audience, etc.

I'm not saying it couldn't be done (as you said, STAS did it... which ironically adds on the additional problem of them avoiding ripping off a cartoon)  but this was a better solution for the origin movie. Based on everything I've heard about the film, Zod's inclusion actually adds more to Superman's story then if the villain was any other character.

[BWPS]

They could have written anyone in and while Zod is fine I guess, Braniac should be in the sequel, Braniac is awesome.

[stumpy]

There is a benefit to leveraging common elements in the origins of the hero and villains to do double-duty in developing both. To the extent they can do it, it's a synergy worth exploiting. And I certainly agree that a superhero origin story movie needs to spend time on the hero and that time spent developing villains takes away from the hero time. However, that line of reasoning only goes so far because, in a movie with finite time to tell a story, any time not spent on the hero can be said to take away from him in some way. But the goal of the movie isn't only to develop the hero. A well-developed villain adds something to the movie, even in an origin story. It's the trade-off between using more screen time developing the hero and giving him something compelling to do once we know who he is. The latter is what time spent on the villain does. If developing the villain means we don't understand that Kal grew up knowing he was the sole-survivor of an entire planet and that that tragic loss shapes his values and his determination to protect people, then the trade-off isn't worth it. On the other hand, if developing the villain means we don't get the second or third scene of young Clark hoping to get Lana's attention but being disappointed as she cozies up to a football player, then I would much prefer the compelling villain.

(Nevermind that using Zod immediately starts to undermine the sole-survivor aspect of his origin. I'll let the people who complain that Kara, and Krypto, and so on all undermine Kal's origin wrestle with that one.)

Overall, though, I am pleased with Zod as the first Big Bad in the series. For one thing, having someone that Kal has to deal with on physically equal terms does give free reign to create a visually stunning, no-holds-barred, action movie. More importantly, it sets a standard for the scale of threats he will face in future movies. If they can do Zod now, then Brainiac, Darkseid, Mongul, etc. should be on the table for later movies. And, as has been noted, many good Superman stories center around Kal confronting a problem that he can't solve by putting his fist through it. When they do add Lex to the rogue's gallery, he can present Kal with that problem. Hopefully, it will be something more original than a greedy businessman who weakens Kal with kryptonite long enough to threaten the world with some implausible money-making scam.

[Tomato]

See, I personally have never understood the necessity of making Clark the only kryptonian, just like I don't understand why Kyle suddenly had to be the only GL, or why the Doctor had to be made half human to separate him from the other time lords. Superman in particular is important because of WHO he is, not because he flies around and punches people. And from a narrative perspective, giving him that sense of lonliness is only important in the beginning, when he finds out he's an alien and suddenly he's all alone. Zod's inclusion actually adds to that particular narrative, because there's this brief hope in Clark that suddenly he isn't alone, only for him to realize how little he has in common with them.

[thalaw2]

Is it me or did the meaning of the 'S' change again?  How long has it stood for hope now?

[Tomato]

It's been the symbol of hope and the coat of arms for superman's family for almost a decade, since Mark Waid's Superman:birthright series in 2004. It may have been that on Smallville too for all I know, but I don't recall too well.