If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(TMZ)   Producer of the original Superman films says he's not a fan of 'Man of Steel', cites lack of big cellophane S-Shields and amnesia date rape kisses as reasons for his dislike   (tmz.com) divider line 155
    More: Interesting, Man of Steel, Superman, superman movies, date rapes, Christopher Reeves, breaking newses  
•       •       •

1653 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 30 Jul 2013 at 11:40 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



155 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-07-30 10:52:23 AM
"Producer" isn't a real job.  I read "Sleepless in Hollywood" by the lady that produced a bunch of romantic comedies and after 350 pages, I can't tell you what she does or ever did.  Neither can she.  "Producer" seems to largely consist of sitting on your ass waiting to take credit for other people's work, or traveling all over to "scout" locations for movies that never get made.  Mind you, the producer won't actually schedule shooting locations, that's someone else's job.
 
2013-07-30 11:07:52 AM
Date Rape Kisses. Dibs.
 
2013-07-30 11:16:24 AM

Lsherm: "Producer" isn't a real job.  I read "Sleepless in Hollywood" by the lady that produced a bunch of romantic comedies and after 350 pages, I can't tell you what she does or ever did.  Neither can she.  "Producer" seems to largely consist of sitting on your ass waiting to take credit for other people's work, or traveling all over to "scout" locations for movies that never get made.  Mind you, the producer won't actually schedule shooting locations, that's someone else's job.


As I understand it, a movie producer is typically the person who pays for the movie or an executive at the company that pays for the movie. Often the money man, but may be the person who hustles enough big names together to successfully get the project greenlit.

In many ways it is the same thing as what you described though, it's probably a lot of high end wining and dining and golfing and you know, the stuff the 1% does while taking a huge paycheck. And prototypically, it's men stroking each other off above the glass ceiling in some tit for tat exchange.

TV producers, on the other hand, typically have a much bigger role.
 
2013-07-30 11:25:33 AM
To be honest, subby is referring to a fantasy, made-up version of Superman II, not the real version that kicked all sorts of ass and was almost on par with the first film.
 
2013-07-30 11:26:05 AM
It also didn't have Super Rebuild Great Wall of China Vision
 
2013-07-30 11:46:34 AM

bluorangefyre: To be honest, subby is referring to a fantasy, made-up version of Superman II, not the real version that kicked all sorts of ass and was almost on par with the first film.


I agree, the Donner Cut is the superior version in almost every way. My only issue is with its ending. Superman turning the world around was supposed to originally happen at the end of part II, not part 1 (back when the first two films were originally conceived as one giant story told over the course of two films). But, when tensions between Richard Donner and the Salkinds were boiling to a head and they were beginning to run out of money, Warners decided to tie off part 1, release it in theaters, and see what they could make from it. Thus, spinning the world around became the finale of one, not two. The Donner cut reflects the original ending, however. And so, now both movies end with the same plot mechanism. Making it look like Superman's only course of action is to simply say "Welp, when in doubt, gotta get BACK IN TIME!"

Other than that, however, the Donner Cut outweighs the theatrical in almost every respect. From reinserting Brando, to the pacing, the taking out the cellophane S and the whole Paris segment. Better, better, better.
 
2013-07-30 11:46:48 AM

bdub77: As I understand it, a movie producer is typically the person who pays for the movie or an executive at the company that pays for the movie. Often the money man, but may be the person who hustles enough big names together to successfully get the project greenlit.


I saw some interview where the producer was described as "the guy who gets what the director needs."  If the director wanted to make something happen, the producer needed to get it done.

An executive producer, on the other hand, is someone who slaps his name on the project in exchange for a paycheck.
 
2013-07-30 11:52:36 AM
Loved the movie

Real star of the movie:

img546.imageshack.us
 
2013-07-30 11:56:07 AM
Aren't the Salkinds supposed to be terrific douches who earned the ire of everyone on the Superman sets?

A bad producer has the easiest job on set.  A good producer has the hardest.
 
2013-07-30 11:57:06 AM
The Salkinds haven't done sh*t except Superman and they made it unnecessarily campy.

He doesn't like Man of Steel?  It MUST be a masterpiece.
 
2013-07-30 11:57:55 AM
Forgot:

www.andybaird.com
 
2013-07-30 11:59:12 AM

movieman_1979: bluorangefyre: To be honest, subby is referring to a fantasy, made-up version of Superman II, not the real version that kicked all sorts of ass and was almost on par with the first film.

I agree, the Donner Cut is the superior version in almost every way. My only issue is with its ending. Superman turning the world around was supposed to originally happen at the end of part II, not part 1 (back when the first two films were originally conceived as one giant story told over the course of two films). But, when tensions between Richard Donner and the Salkinds were boiling to a head and they were beginning to run out of money, Warners decided to tie off part 1, release it in theaters, and see what they could make from it. Thus, spinning the world around became the finale of one, not two. The Donner cut reflects the original ending, however. And so, now both movies end with the same plot mechanism. Making it look like Superman's only course of action is to simply say "Welp, when in doubt, gotta get BACK IN TIME!"

Other than that, however, the Donner Cut outweighs the theatrical in almost every respect. From reinserting Brando, to the pacing, the taking out the cellophane S and the whole Paris segment. Better, better, better.


Except I like the "General, would you care to step outside?" line which was awesome and much better than, "General, haven't you ever heard of freedom of the press?" which totally sucked.
 
2013-07-30 12:01:40 PM
Ilya is the guy who brought Superman to the big screen way back in the 1970s. He produced "Superman" and "Superman II" ... i.e. his opinion matters.

No, his opinion does not matter.  He's a hack and he ran the franchise into the ground after chasing Donner away.
 
2013-07-30 12:01:46 PM

chewielouie: movieman_1979: bluorangefyre: To be honest, subby is referring to a fantasy, made-up version of Superman II, not the real version that kicked all sorts of ass and was almost on par with the first film.

I agree, the Donner Cut is the superior version in almost every way. My only issue is with its ending. Superman turning the world around was supposed to originally happen at the end of part II, not part 1 (back when the first two films were originally conceived as one giant story told over the course of two films). But, when tensions between Richard Donner and the Salkinds were boiling to a head and they were beginning to run out of money, Warners decided to tie off part 1, release it in theaters, and see what they could make from it. Thus, spinning the world around became the finale of one, not two. The Donner cut reflects the original ending, however. And so, now both movies end with the same plot mechanism. Making it look like Superman's only course of action is to simply say "Welp, when in doubt, gotta get BACK IN TIME!"

Other than that, however, the Donner Cut outweighs the theatrical in almost every respect. From reinserting Brando, to the pacing, the taking out the cellophane S and the whole Paris segment. Better, better, better.

Except I like the "General, would you care to step outside?" line which was awesome and much better than, "General, haven't you ever heard of freedom of the press?" which totally sucked.


Ooooh, good call. I had forgotten about that exchange.
 
2013-07-30 12:02:15 PM
As much as I think both Superman I and II are fantastic movies, I still think that Man of Steel was a great update of the character, did an amazing job giving an insight and had a great balance between a personal story and epic battle scenes.

All in all, a great movie.

/People act like the new movie somehow erases the existence of the previous versions.
 
2013-07-30 12:04:14 PM
There should have been a taped scene showing the 3 villains getting arrested by the North Pole police or whoever, seeing them powerless for even a minute would have been sweet, instead we get a far shot of them being hauled away
 
2013-07-30 12:05:38 PM
Like most people, that producer knows must of what they know of Superman from those films.
 
2013-07-30 12:06:19 PM

Lsherm: "Producer" isn't a real job.  I read "Sleepless in Hollywood" by the lady that produced a bunch of romantic comedies and after 350 pages, I can't tell you what she does or ever did.  Neither can she.  "Producer" seems to largely consist of sitting on your ass waiting to take credit for other people's work, or traveling all over to "scout" locations for movies that never get made.  Mind you, the producer won't actually schedule shooting locations, that's someone else's job.



A producer is nothing more than a high class shylock, which is why Get Shorty was such a brilliant film.
 
2013-07-30 12:20:48 PM

bdub77: Lsherm: "Producer" isn't a real job.  I read "Sleepless in Hollywood" by the lady that produced a bunch of romantic comedies and after 350 pages, I can't tell you what she does or ever did.  Neither can she.  "Producer" seems to largely consist of sitting on your ass waiting to take credit for other people's work, or traveling all over to "scout" locations for movies that never get made.  Mind you, the producer won't actually schedule shooting locations, that's someone else's job.

As I understand it, a movie producer is typically the person who pays for the movie or an executive at the company that pays for the movie. Often the money man, but may be the person who hustles enough big names together to successfully get the project greenlit.

In many ways it is the same thing as what you described though, it's probably a lot of high end wining and dining and golfing and you know, the stuff the 1% does while taking a huge paycheck. And prototypically, it's men stroking each other off above the glass ceiling in some tit for tat exchange.

TV producers, on the other hand, typically have a much bigger role.


After reading that book, I can assure you movie producers don't pay for anything themselves.
 
2013-07-30 12:29:27 PM
t.qkme.me
 
2013-07-30 12:33:46 PM

Lsherm: "Producer" isn't a real job.  I read "Sleepless in Hollywood" by the lady that produced a bunch of romantic comedies and after 350 pages, I can't tell you what she does or ever did.  Neither can she.  "Producer" seems to largely consist of sitting on your ass waiting to take credit for other people's work, or traveling all over to "scout" locations for movies that never get made.  Mind you, the producer won't actually schedule shooting locations, that's someone else's job.


Depends on the producer.  If you have a Chris Nolan or a JJ Abrahms producing your film they're going to do more than help raise money and schmooze.  They'll be on call to give advice and will likely be on set or in the editing room at various points if they're wanted.
 
2013-07-30 12:37:29 PM

DarkPascual: As much as I think both Superman I and II are fantastic movies, I still think that Man of Steel was a great update of the character, did an amazing job giving an insight and had a great balance between a personal story and epic battle scenes.

All in all, a great movie.

/People act like the new movie somehow erases the existence of the previous versions.


...because they changed Supe so much that he's no longer recognizable as the character he has been in the past.  Sorry, but the attitude of "I killed a quarter of a million people during that fight?  Meh, not my problem" is kinda completely the wrong attitude for Superman.
 
2013-07-30 12:40:52 PM

Mad_Radhu: [t.qkme.me image 310x287]


that movie has a coherent plot, a likeable enemy, for the time good FX, humor, a hot chick in tight clothes and ends on a high note.  It doesn't bog down the film with an origin story that we already know.

what's not to like?

/Superman 3 is my personal favorite superman film.  it is the only one that is actually fun to watch and has a comic book feel.  If Marvel made Superman films, Superman 3 is likely the film they would produce.
 
2013-07-30 12:41:12 PM

DontMakeMeComeBackThere: DarkPascual: As much as I think both Superman I and II are fantastic movies, I still think that Man of Steel was a great update of the character, did an amazing job giving an insight and had a great balance between a personal story and epic battle scenes.

All in all, a great movie.

/People act like the new movie somehow erases the existence of the previous versions.

...because they changed Supe so much that he's no longer recognizable as the character he has been in the past.  Sorry, but the attitude of "I killed a quarter of a million people during that fight?  Meh, not my problem" is kinda completely the wrong attitude for Superman.


Superman vs the Elite really showcased that well, too.
 
2013-07-30 12:44:40 PM
can we stop with super hero movies already?
 
2013-07-30 12:45:00 PM

DontMakeMeComeBackThere: DarkPascual: As much as I think both Superman I and II are fantastic movies, I still think that Man of Steel was a great update of the character, did an amazing job giving an insight and had a great balance between a personal story and epic battle scenes.

All in all, a great movie.

/People act like the new movie somehow erases the existence of the previous versions.

...because they changed Supe so much that he's no longer recognizable as the character he has been in the past.  Sorry, but the attitude of "I killed a quarter of a million people during that fight?  Meh, not my problem" is kinda completely the wrong attitude for Superman.


41 year old life long comic book and superman fan.  Man of Steel is surpassed only by Green Lantern in sucktitude.  The movie's praise and box office is unwarranted and it will be forgotten - much like sony's The Amazing Spiderman.  problem is that the story was just too well told in the original film and man, you just can't make Superman dark and gritty.
 
2013-07-30 12:46:28 PM

The Stealth Hippopotamus: Loved the movie

Real star of the movie:

[img546.imageshack.us image 850x478]


Pissed me off that Faora went out like she did. She was an awesome character, they should have kept her around longer and had Supes facing off with both her and Zod in the final battle. Of course it's going to come down to a one on one between Supes and Zod, but Faora could have been there for part of it.

Then again, we actually never saw her die. Bring her back for the sequel.
 
2013-07-30 12:48:15 PM

pacified: can we stop with super hero movies already?


no.  we are just now reaching a point where super hero movies can look completely believable.  The Avengers and Iron Man stand up not only as great comic book movies, but as great MOVIES.  Well written super hero movies are FANTASTIC.

It is just when mediocre crap is released (Man of Steel, Green Lantern, Green Hornet, ect) that it seems tiresome.

Oh, and stop casting big names like Kevin Bacon in them.  I liked First Class, but it was jarring every time he was onscreen (why is KEVIN BACON fighting the XMen??)

4.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-07-30 12:49:51 PM

DontMakeMeComeBackThere: DarkPascual: As much as I think both Superman I and II are fantastic movies, I still think that Man of Steel was a great update of the character, did an amazing job giving an insight and had a great balance between a personal story and epic battle scenes.

All in all, a great movie.

/People act like the new movie somehow erases the existence of the previous versions.

...because they changed Supe so much that he's no longer recognizable as the character he has been in the past.  Sorry, but the attitude of "I killed a quarter of a million people during that fight?  Meh, not my problem" is kinda completely the wrong attitude for Superman.


Except for the fact that most of the body count was actually caused by Zod and the other Kryptonians, producers have stated that the aftermath of the Battle of Metropolis will be adressed in the next movie and that this Superman is clearly one that is still trying to develope a code for himself.

A Superman now knows how his power affects the rest of humanity, now his quest to be an example for us to strive has more weight.

Besides, the basic character traits of Superman ARE there. Could those be better explored? Of course.

But all in all, I think it does give a new dimension to the character while still keep his core.

My opinion of course
 
2013-07-30 12:51:14 PM

Popcorn Johnny: Then again, we actually never saw her die. Bring her back for the sequel.


Exactly.

Hell they may use her to build off a Supergirl story.
 
2013-07-30 12:52:25 PM

DarkPascual: As much as I think both Superman I and II are fantastic movies, I still think that Man of Steel was a great update of the character, did an amazing job giving an insight and had a great balance between a personal story and epic battle scenes.

All in all, a great movie.

/People act like the new movie somehow erases the existence of the previous versions.


That is maybe the best description of Man of Steel I have heard...+1 sir
 
2013-07-30 12:55:04 PM

frepnog: pacified: can we stop with super hero movies already?

no.  we are just now reaching a point where super hero movies can look completely believable.  The Avengers and Iron Man stand up not only as great comic book movies, but as great MOVIES.  Well written super hero movies are FANTASTIC.

It is just when mediocre crap is released (Man of Steel, Green Lantern, Green Hornet, ect) that it seems tiresome.

Oh, and stop casting big names like Kevin Bacon in them.  I liked First Class, but it was jarring every time he was onscreen (why is KEVIN BACON fighting the XMen??)

[4.bp.blogspot.com image 384x288]


Really?! You're throwing Green Hornet in there? I can argue that Man of Steel and Green Lantern are good (I really enjoyed them) movies. But no one can defend Green Hornet.
 
2013-07-30 12:55:12 PM

DontMakeMeComeBackThere: DarkPascual: As much as I think both Superman I and II are fantastic movies, I still think that Man of Steel was a great update of the character, did an amazing job giving an insight and had a great balance between a personal story and epic battle scenes.

All in all, a great movie.

/People act like the new movie somehow erases the existence of the previous versions.

...because they changed Supe so much that he's no longer recognizable as the character he has been in the past.  Sorry, but the attitude of "I killed a quarter of a million people during that fight?  Meh, not my problem" is kinda completely the wrong attitude for Superman.


Because Superman is obviously not feeling any kind of regret or sadness or emotional pain at all at the end of that battle.
 
2013-07-30 12:58:10 PM

The Stealth Hippopotamus: Loved the movie

Real star of the movie:


Agreed.
 
2013-07-30 01:01:01 PM

ExcedrinHeadache: Because Superman is obviously not feeling any kind of regret or sadness or emotional pain at all at the end of that battle.


Well when he downs the drone at the end of the movie some time has passed since the battle. Enough time that Superman has realized that the US military isn't going to stop looking for him and he has to make them stop.

I thought our problem with Superman Returns was that he was too emo. Now you want emo?

img268.imageshack.us
 
2013-07-30 01:02:09 PM

The Stealth Hippopotamus: frepnog: pacified: can we stop with super hero movies already?

no.  we are just now reaching a point where super hero movies can look completely believable.  The Avengers and Iron Man stand up not only as great comic book movies, but as great MOVIES.  Well written super hero movies are FANTASTIC.

It is just when mediocre crap is released (Man of Steel, Green Lantern, Green Hornet, ect) that it seems tiresome.

Oh, and stop casting big names like Kevin Bacon in them.  I liked First Class, but it was jarring every time he was onscreen (why is KEVIN BACON fighting the XMen??)

[4.bp.blogspot.com image 384x288]

Really?! You're throwing Green Hornet in there? I can argue that Man of Steel and Green Lantern are good (I really enjoyed them) movies. But no one can defend Green Hornet.


Greet Hornet was easily as good as Green Lantern and Seth Rogan's performance was on par with anything he has done (in that he simply plays Seth Rogan in whatever film he is in).  It was a coherent good looking movie whose biggest flaw was that NO ONE gives a shiat about the Green Hornet making it a firmly mediocre movie.

And not one should admit to "really enjoying" Green Lantern.  I like Ryan Reynolds.  Green Lantern is one of my all time favorite characters.  That movie was a severe misstep.
 
2013-07-30 01:05:20 PM

pacified: can we stop with super hero movies already?


I wish.

Unfortunately, they're making money, and Hollywood will wring every last dollar out of them throwing every piece of shiat they can at the wall hoping it sticks until they're no longer profitable, and not make a superhero movie again for a decade or so.
 
2013-07-30 01:10:17 PM

FirstNationalBastard: pacified: can we stop with super hero movies already?

I wish.

Unfortunately, they're making money, and Hollywood will wring every last dollar out of them throwing every piece of shiat they can at the wall hoping it sticks until they're no longer profitable, and not make a superhero movie again for a decade or so.


thousands of movies are released each year that are not super hero films.  don't like them, don't watch them.
 
2013-07-30 01:12:33 PM

DontMakeMeComeBackThere: ...because they changed Supe so much that he's no longer recognizable as the character he has been in the past.  Sorry, but the attitude of "I killed a quarter of a million people during that fight?  Meh, not my problem" is kinda completely the wrong attitude for Superman.


Of all the complaints about Man of Steel, this is the most baffling.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTZ7QjuHRjw">http://www.youtube.com/w atch?v=JTZ7QjuHRjw

Check that out and tell me how Superman fighting with the Kryptonians in Metropolis is all that much different in Superman 2 than in Man of Steel.  They are throwing each other through buildings, and doing as much damage as could be put on the screen given the budget and technical limitations of the time. 10 seconds into that clip Superman throws one of them through the clearly populated Daily Planet building.   In fact, in Superman 2 it's Superman that starts the fightwith Zod in Metropolis by asking him to step outside.

And setting aside all of that, the reason the fight takes place in Metropolis in both movies is because people like watching shiat like that.  Superman somehow forcing the Kryptonians to fight him on the dark side of the moon to avoid human casualties simply isn't interesting to watch.  It's the same reason it happens like that in the comics, over and over again, decade after decade.
 
2013-07-30 01:12:38 PM

frepnog: Greet Hornet was easily as good as Green Lantern and Seth Rogan's performance was on par with anything he has done (in that he simply plays Seth Rogan in whatever film he is in). It was a coherent good looking movie whose biggest flaw was that NO ONE gives a shiat about the Green Hornet making it a firmly mediocre movie.


Maybe it's my dislike of Rogan or my blinding hatred of Diaz but that film was horrible. Jay Chou was absolutely perfect.

frepnog: And not one should admit to "really enjoying" Green Lantern. I like Ryan Reynolds. Green Lantern is one of my all time favorite characters. That movie was a severe misstep.


There was nothing wrong with it. It didn't dazzle but it was a solid telling of the Green Lantern original story. It went with too many bad guys, and a cloud just isn't a good villain. You would have thought they would have learned that from FF2

And did you see Blake Lively?! I don't care what you say they spent some special effects money on her, no one looks that good.
 
2013-07-30 01:19:42 PM

Detinwolf: bdub77: As I understand it, a movie producer is typically the person who pays for the movie or an executive at the company that pays for the movie. Often the money man, but may be the person who hustles enough big names together to successfully get the project greenlit.

I saw some interview where the producer was described as "the guy who gets what the director needs."  If the director wanted to make something happen, the producer needed to get it done.

An executive producer, on the other hand, is someone who slaps his name on the project in exchange for a paycheck.


Pretty much. The producer's job is to oversee production. At the end of the day, they're responsible for seeing to it that everything from the actors to the sets to the props to the craft services table is in place. On big budget features they are likely going to have subordinates managing all those things, but probably at least is involved in budgeting those different elements of the film making process. As far as smaller projects, watch any behind-the-scenes stuff on early Kevin Smith movies and watch the crap Scott Mosier had to deal with. Ideally, that's what a producer is supposed to do.

You're right on about Executive Producers: basically, they're there to either finance the movie or just raise the profile of a project to help it get financing/support from the rest of the hollywood machine (ex. Tom Hanks and Rita Wilson's role in getting My Big Fat Greek Wedding to the big screen).
 
2013-07-30 01:21:02 PM

Shrugging Atlas: Check that out and tell me how Superman fighting with the Kryptonians in Metropolis is all that much different in Superman 2 than in Man of Steel. They are throwing each other through buildings, and doing as much damage as could be put on the screen given the budget and technical limitations of the time. 10 seconds into that clip Superman throws one of them through the clearly populated Daily Planet building. In fact, in Superman 2 it's Superman that starts the fightwith Zod in Metropolis by asking him to step outside.

And setting aside all of that, the reason the fight takes place in Metropolis in both movies is because people like watching shiat like that. Superman somehow forcing the Kryptonians to fight him on the dark side of the moon to avoid human casualties simply isn't interesting to watch. It's the same reason it happens like that in the comics, over and over again, decade after decade.


Exactly and if reading is to diffectulty for them just direct them over to Superman The Animated Series. Great show. Metropolis gets torn up more than Angel Grove!

If you have the powers of a god and you are battling other gods. Well, things are going to go boom


img838.imageshack.us
 
2013-07-30 01:22:36 PM

FirstNationalBastard: I wish.

Unfortunately, they're making money, and Hollywood will wring every last dollar out of them throwing every piece of shiat they can at the wall hoping it sticks until they're no longer profitable, and not make a superhero movie again for a decade or so.


It's a genre that makes a ton of money, just like any other.  And fortunately for you it also shares the trait of not being legally required to view.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_in_film

244 movies slated to be released this year in the US alone.  Roughly 5% of those are comic related.  Only 2 of the top ten grossing are comic related.

Tell us again why this is something to be so upset over.
 
2013-07-30 01:23:09 PM

The Stealth Hippopotamus: frepnog: Greet Hornet was easily as good as Green Lantern and Seth Rogan's performance was on par with anything he has done (in that he simply plays Seth Rogan in whatever film he is in). It was a coherent good looking movie whose biggest flaw was that NO ONE gives a shiat about the Green Hornet making it a firmly mediocre movie.

Maybe it's my dislike of Rogan or my blinding hatred of Diaz but that film was horrible. Jay Chou was absolutely perfect.

frepnog: And not one should admit to "really enjoying" Green Lantern. I like Ryan Reynolds. Green Lantern is one of my all time favorite characters. That movie was a severe misstep.

There was nothing wrong with it. It didn't dazzle but it was a solid telling of the Green Lantern original story. It went with too many bad guys, and a cloud just isn't a good villain. You would have thought they would have learned that from FF2

And did you see Blake Lively?! I don't care what you say they spent some special effects money on her, no one looks that good.


saying Green Hornet was HORRIBLE is as out of line as saying Green Lantern was GOOD.  Both were simply mediocre.  I had no problem with GL's cast and the origin was told as well as you could tell it, but then they just gave him nothing to DO and the costume...  well, it sucked.  Not Bat-Nipples bad but pretty awful.  As far as Rogan...  meh, I'm a fan, GH was just mediocre.

By the way...  Rogan's new film, This is the End, is FANTASTIC.
 
2013-07-30 01:27:36 PM

DarkPascual: As much as I think both Superman I and II are fantastic movies, I still think that Man of Steel was a great update of the character, did an amazing job giving an insight and had a great balance between a personal story and epic battle scenes.

All in all, a great movie.

/People act like the new movie somehow erases the existence of the previous versions.



I agree, great movie. Actually, I think it's a masterpiece.

The critics and geeks are acting like it gave them AIDS, though. I've read their lengthy online rants, and I can't tell if they just weren't watching the movie, or they have the reading / visual / language comprehension skills of a tomato, or - most likely - they walked in the theater wanting to hate it, probably because WB didn't make a movie of their nit-picky vision of the story and character.

I really like Nolan's, Goyer's, and Snyder's shared vision, and I hope they can continue what they started. I'd really like to see them make more stand-alone Superman movies, though. I know WB wants its Avengers, but they don't have to make it. They've made billions on Batman, and can make just as much or more on Superman.

I mean, it seems like it's the Android's Dungeon crowd that wants to see Justice League on film, but maybe, since  Man of Steel crushed their fragile little souls so irreparably, they'll be too busy crying and punching their pillows to care.
 
2013-07-30 01:37:37 PM

pacified: can we stop with super hero movies already?


cdn.i.haymarket.net.au
 
2013-07-30 01:37:57 PM

Lernaeus: The critics and geeks are acting like it gave them AIDS, though. I've read their lengthy online rants, and I can't tell if they just weren't watching the movie, or they have the reading / visual / language comprehension skills of a tomato, or - most likely - they walked in the theater wanting to hate it, probably because WB didn't make a movie of their nit-picky vision of the story and character.


I wanted it to be amazing, and the spectacle of the film was pretty good.  I didn't want to hate it, and I don't hate it.

It just is a lousy Superman film that ultimately will be forgotten in time as a mediocre film with little re-watchability and I maintain that there is not one scene in the film that rivals the scene in Superman Returns when Superman catches the plane.

My biggest problem (other than the overlong super battles) with Man of Steel is that is is basically a mashed together remake of Superman 1 and 2. I have seen those films.  Give me something new.  I give them a bit of credit for intertwining the origin instead of wasting 50 minutes of screen time with it, but the Krypton intro went on far too long in its place and then it was just the same old "here comes Zod from the phantom zone".  Same basic problem Superman Returns had - being a straight rehash of Superman 1.
 
2013-07-30 01:39:58 PM

The Stealth Hippopotamus: And did you see Blake Lively?! I don't care what you say they spent some special effects money on her, no one looks that good.


They had Blake Lively, but they didn't manage to get her into this costume, even for a post-credit sequence:

fc06.deviantart.net

FAIL OF THE CENTURY.
 
2013-07-30 01:42:13 PM
Detinwolf: bdub77: As I understand it, a movie producer is typically the person who pays for the movie or an executive at the company that pays for the movie. Often the money man, but may be the person who hustles enough big names together to successfully get the project greenlit.

I saw some interview where the producer was described as "the guy who gets what the director needs."  If the director wanted to make something happen, the producer needed to get it done.

An executive producer, on the other hand, is someone who slaps his name on the project in exchange for a paycheck.

Pretty much. The producer's job is to oversee production. At the end of the day, they're responsible for seeing to it that everything from the actors to the sets to the props to the craft services table is in place. On big budget features they are likely going to have subordinates managing all those things, but probably at least is involved in budgeting those different elements of the film making process. As far as smaller projects, watch any behind-the-scenes stuff on early Kevin Smith movies and watch the crap Scott Mosier had to deal with. Ideally, that's what a producer is supposed to do.

You're right on about Executive Producers: basically, they're there to either finance the movie or just raise the profile of a project to help it get financing/support from the rest of the hollywood machine (ex. Tom Hanks and Rita Wilson's role in getting My Big Fat Greek Wedding to the big screen).


So are Producer and Executive Producer's responsibilities the same for television as it is for film?  I ask because I see shows like Dexter and Bones list the stars of those shows as producers/executive producers and I don't see how they can oversee production or finance the show while simultaneously acting in it as well.
 
2013-07-30 01:47:05 PM

Shrugging Atlas: DontMakeMeComeBackThere: ...because they changed Supe so much that he's no longer recognizable as the character he has been in the past.  Sorry, but the attitude of "I killed a quarter of a million people during that fight?  Meh, not my problem" is kinda completely the wrong attitude for Superman.

Of all the complaints about Man of Steel, this is the most baffling.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTZ7QjuHRjw">http://www.youtube.com/w atch?v=JTZ7QjuHRjw

Check that out and tell me how Superman fighting with the Kryptonians in Metropolis is all that much different in Superman 2 than in Man of Steel.  They are throwing each other through buildings, and doing as much damage as could be put on the screen given the budget and technical limitations of the time. 10 seconds into that clip Superman throws one of them through the clearly populated Daily Planet building.   In fact, in Superman 2 it's Superman that starts the fightwith Zod in Metropolis by asking him to step outside.

And setting aside all of that, the reason the fight takes place in Metropolis in both movies is because people like watching shiat like that.  Superman somehow forcing the Kryptonians to fight him on the dark side of the moon to avoid human casualties simply isn't interesting to watch.  It's the same reason it happens like that in the comics, over and over again, decade after decade.


I just got done watching Superman: Doomsday, and they destroy the city fighting even more so than in Man of Steel.  Godlike beings fighting each other tends to have disasterous results.

Too bad Avengers never fight anyone with real superpowers, and apparently giant flying whales bounce off buildings rather than crushing them.

Superman cried at the killing of Zod and the destruction of the city.  Avengers got schwarma.
 
Displayed 50 of 155 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report