posted
Snyder was just announced as director. I was rooting for Arronofsky (who was in the running), but Snyder should do a good job (and is probably more marketable). He does make a pretty movie, whatever else you say about him.
Christopher Nolan: Producer David S. Goyer: Script Zack Snyder: Director
Some interesting rumors: - Jon Hamm is being considered for the title role?!? - Brandon Routh is "unlikely to return". - Snyder wants to "do with Superman what Nolan did with Batman".
Plot: - “I can tell you that Goyer’s story involves Luthor and Brainiac. It is NOT an origin and assumes audiences already know about Lois, Clark, Jimmy and Perry. I know the Daily Planet is struggling due to the internet. And I know it sets up a huge Kryptonian mythology.” - General Zod is rumored to be the primary antagonist.
posted
Oh, crap. What is with DC? What a bunch of idiots. Don't they get that people read comics because they're full of hope and joy and adventure? Not because they want a nasty downer. I mean, look at Marvel. There's plenty of pathos in Spiderman's story, but the movies had light moments and stayed fun. Same with the Iron Man movies. Meanwhile, DC tried to turn Superman into an angsty, depressing figure, and the movie tanked.
quote:Originally posted by Lisa: people read comics because they're full of hope and joy and adventure? Not because they want a nasty downer.
Do they? I don't.
Yeah, I'd say that the popularity of Image comics when I was growing up would contradict that idea. I also loved Ghostrider and that ilk from Marvel.
Posts: 8741 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Nolan's gone on record saying that he isn't going for the "dark" angle that he took with Batman. He recognizes that Superman's story is different.
I trust that he's a good storyteller (Inception, The Prestige). It will certainly be original and edgy, to an extent, but it won't just be another Batman movie.
And Snyder did Legend of the Guardians. Other than the fact that it was a little boring, it was a fanstastic movie -- full of joy.
Posts: 688 | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Superman and Captain America to me are two super heroes that represent absolute idealism. They don't have dark sides. There's more than enough heroes with moral ambiguity or dark sides for those stories. There are almost none representing just goodness without any trace of evil.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Superman and Captain America to me are two super heroes that represent absolute idealism. They don't have dark sides.
And yet people really seem to enjoy it when stories are told where they aren't purely good.
And people enjoy hentai where characters from popular anime have sex with each other. Doesn't mean it's good for the characters.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
There's a difference between a hero who resists temptation, and one who is never even tempted; and for the resistance to be heroic, you have to show that it could go either way. There must be a genuine struggle. Even Jesus is shown as being tempted, although since he just goes "Get thee behind me" it's not all that interesting. I suspect some pious editing of what may have been a longer tale at some point.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think the most interesting Superman movie to me would be one where he's forced to make actual complex moral decisions that have consequences. If you save the schoolchildren instead of Lois, you don't get to rewind time and fix it. If you DO want to save both, you're going to have to actual, you know, use your brain. And come up with a solution that requires CREATIVE use of your power. (Or if you're not good at that, call Batman up and have him do it for you).
Posts: 4136 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
And echoing what KoM said, since Superman himself is only vulnerable to lame plot devices, the best way for dramatic tension is for Superman's goodness to be the very thing at stake. At the end of the movie he emerges as clean and noble and optimistic as ever, but doing so requires serious effort on his part.
Posts: 4136 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Raymond Arnold: I think the most interesting Superman movie to me would be one where he's forced to make actual complex moral decisions that have consequences. If you save the schoolchildren instead of Lois, you don't get to rewind time and fix it. If you DO want to save both, you're going to have to actual, you know, use your brain. And come up with a solution that requires CREATIVE use of your power. (Or if you're not good at that, call Batman up and have him do it for you).
And that's fine. But it's when you try to get Superman to do bad things just because sometimes that feels good, or in a utilitarian sense it makes sense for Superman to do something bad so that people can live, that's where you start to lose my interest.
I like dark heroes just fine, I don't like every single hero being dark.
One major aspect of Superman to me is that he is given so much trust by the public precisely because he never dabbled/dabbles into being evil. It allows him literary wise to be immensely powerful. If your hero might misuse their powers because of say depression, fits of anger, or out of passion, then you have to put checks on him or else there's no way in hell anybody would feel safe with them alive.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have no interest in the red and blue godling, Id rather see Dr. Fate or Jason Blood get some screen time.
Or better yet they should make a movie about John Constantine, y'know... the blonde britsh guy who cant seem to wear a suit correctly but somehow warps reality around him to his benefit as he fights demons and the like. But they would have to be sure to cast a capable actor in the role.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
