That was only discussed because plot points in the film were brought up in your review of the DVD. Wrong forum.

And has been already said, all indications from those involved say that it takes place after Superman 2.

Just saw the teaser today and it made the hair on the back of my neck stand. One of the most effective teasers ever I think, and I'm a big fan of teasers/trailers. I don't see the issue with Routh's body size, you could barely see any of it for more than a split second anyway. And Smallville hasn't aired on Australian TV yet so I can't comment on similarities and for the most part I think that's a good think. What I have seen of Smallville makes it seem like a comic book version of The OC. Stylish, dumb and full of pretty faces for the sake of it. I could be wrong on it, but that's the impression I get.
I can see anyone who is 25 (I'm 28) and up that grew up with the original film being totally buzzing about this movie coming out. The younger generation obviously won't feel the effect of the teaser cause Brando's voice won't be familiar to them.
I showed the trailer to a guy at work in his late fifties cause I figured he'd have some fond memories of the original, and he said it sent shivers down his spine and can't wait for it to come out. I think it's a fair assessment that most people above 25 (in Australia anyway) can't wait to see this movie and have no problems with the teaser.

I understand why the OP feels the way he does. If it wasn't for Rogue and Shannon saying it (and I take you guys at face value), I would never believe it myself. They clearly show (at least in the trailer), parts of his origin, and Routh is WAY too young for it to realistically be in that timeline. Although it doesn't seem like a retelling, with Jor-El still being played by Brando.

Either way, still looking forward to it.

Exactly. His estate owned the rights to the deleted Superman II footage of Brando and Brian Singer bought the rights from Brando's estate.

I wonder if they are going to keep the original score as well. Hearing it on that teaser gave me chills. I still think that it's one of the best movie scores to date.

Why do we have to see, again and again, the origin of Superman? More smallville, more ma and pa kent, more Kal-El bullshit. I think the producers of this movie would already know that

EVERYONE ON THE FUCKING PLANET ALREADY KNOWS THIS AND HAS SEEN IT ALREADY

Superman doesn't need an origin story, Superman needs a good story.

Just want to jump on the pile...

1) You're wrong.

2) This is already being discussed in another thread.

Why is this so hard to understand? It's not a sequel in the traditional sense, Singer just said it would put Superman I/II in a "vague history". The world will already know Superman exists, he will have already tangled with Lex presumably, he will have already met Lois, etc. It's just like watching a new season of a TV show - it's not a "sequel" to the previous year, it's a a series of new adventures featuring characters you already know and already know each other.

Hell, the title is Superman Returns. Which assumes he was already here

Superman needs a good story... and i hope the one for Returns is a good one

haha - EXCELLENT point

I don't mean to get completely off topic or get too technically legal here, but what is your source for this information? I don't think there was ever a judgment or decision that Brando's estate had any legal stake in the unseen SUPERMAN II footage, nor is there any info that Singer himself purchased those rights.

Sources, please. I just want to know more about this subject.

There are only a select few shots relating to Superman's youth in the trailer. They are not redoing his origin, it's been done. These are most likely quick flashbacks that have direct bearing on the story Singer is telling. A couple of scenes with a young Clark discovering his powers, discovering perhaps for the first time that he is not one of us and he will never be one of us. No big deal.

I can't find any evidence of this, but I would assume the Salkinds owned the rights to everything in the movies but sold it off to Warner Bros. in 1993. So Warner Bros. would now own the rights to that footage, not Marlon Brando. The footage was never used because Brando stipulated that the Salkinds owed him more money for his performance, which they denied, so they reshot his scenes with another actor. The footage couldn't be used without paying off Brando the money he says he was owed without fear of reprisal. Now that Brando is dead, he can no longer sue.

That's the way I understand it.

I did find this Bryan Singer quote:

Marlon Brando Blooper Footage and the “Superman Returns” DVD: “It’s definitely fascinating to look at. Like any movie, sometimes when you’re filming you get the words right, sometimes you don’t and then sometimes you talk about it. So, I don’t know what would be appropriate, and what would be inappropriate to put on a DVD. It would also come down to the rights issue, the estate rights of Marlon Brando. We have the rights to use elements and aspects of him as Jor-El, but whether you can use my favorite, I like, I don’t even know if I’m violating any rights by telling you the Brando bloopers. But when he’s on, he’s on. He’s Jor-El. It’s amazing.”

So maybe Brando did own that footage. I have no idea.

EDITED to merge posts in a now merged thread.

Maybe the kid in the teaser is Lois' baby. That would reek of awesomeness!

I really don't have an issue with Routh's age because he's about the same age, maybe even slightly older, than Christopher Reeve was when Donner was filming Superman and Superman II.

Now the transition from Margot Kidder to Kate Bosworth is another matter entirely.

Saw the trailer this week - LOOKS AMAZING. The music was soooooooo great to hear in a theatre again, and although the new Superman has the Rushmore kid's eyebrows, he still looks the part... can't wait.

Brando was notoriously greedy with his image. Once he died, that greediness went with him. The estate has a much more levelheaded approach to selling his image and rights.

That's why Singer and WB got the rights so soon after he kicked. I'm sure they paid a carload of cash, but I think Brando was asking for two carloads when he was alive. There was also his uncomfortable personal history with the SUPERMAN films.

Well, I am assuming the rights to his footage on SUPERMAN II belong to the owners of SUPERMAN II, which is probably Warner Bros or the Salkinds at least in part.

Whether the WB owes Brando's estate anything for showing the unseen SUPERMAN II footage in whatever fashion (the upcoming special edition DVD, or in any other movie including RETURNS) depends on the contractual rights between the parties.

If, indeed, Warner paid his estate money to use his scenes from SUPERMAN II, I understand. Brando was removed from SUPERMAN II so the studio wouldn't have to pay for his appearance. That is well-documented.

But I was also under the impression that Singer was using footage and outtakes from the first SUPERMAN only, which is probably under Warner's full ownership.

Anyone know of a source to get the full story? (Superman Cinema is always on the lookout for reliable information.)

SUPERMAN is all WB, since Brando was paid for his work there and rights were secured.

What Singer is up to, nobody knows at this point. SUPERMAN II has (had?) crucial interaction moments between Kal-el and Jor-el, and that is thought to be the basis for the Brando footage (whatever that means at this point) in RETURNS.

I know you're hankerin' for sources, but this info is pulled from bits and pieces over the last year. A good Googling should get you to the facts you require.

Thank you, Scott. I might mention that SUPERMAN CINEMA is also an excellent resource for trivia and news on the movies. In fact, I contributed a few articles and write-ups to that site during its beginning stages. However, because internet rumors and information are far from trustworthy (one of the problems with everyone having access to post anything on the net is that there is no accountability or responsibility...but that is neither here nor there...), I really would love to see a press release on the material Singer is using instead of all this speculation.

Then again, I could just wait another eight months for the movie to come out and for the SUPERMAN II special edition to be released...

Well, I finally saw the teaser from last week's Smallville - and I have to admit it gave me goose-bumps (loved that voice-over by Jor-El). Can't wait to see what Mr. Singer has in store for us.

Since everybody is having so much fun arguing over here, I'll post what I put in the Smallville thread - even though I probably should have put it in here.

I'm really enjoying this season a lot. Sure there are some pieces that don't fit - Lex and Clark having "civil" conversation after all that has happen, Lionel/Chloe, etc., but by and far this is the best hands down becaues it is hitting so many other piece correctly.

As for the movie, this is what I know. If I am wrong, somebody please correct me.

- It is not a new origin story. Please keep in mind, that there has not been a new Superman movie in almost 15 years. So they will have to give you somewhat of a recap for those that do not know how he came to earth, etc. I doubt it would be longer than 15 minutes worth (if we're talking 2 hour movie - come on 2.5 baby!!!). That puts an entire generation who has never had a Superman movie released for the big screen. Furthermore, I'm talking Superman 4...so you can take that even further and go back to Superman 2, and say it has been even longer. On top of that, the last time an origin story (Superman I), was around, it was almost 25 years. Hell, I wasn't even around for that one, nor my sister (at least she wasn't old enough to remember). Also from what I have heard a lot of kids these days don't even know who Superman is. They have identified with other superheros - particularly Spiderman. I know, I know. How can somebody not know who Superman is.

- As for the movie itself, it takes place within Richard Donner's Superman continuity. If somebody wants to start a thread about the "original" Superman I/II please feel free to in the movie section. I'm sure I could even learn some stuff.

- This one takes place after Superman II.

- Below: "Official" movie synopsis that I have seen so far


Personally, this movie is shaping up to look better than I thought it would. However, Routh and Bosthworth could easily tank it IMO. Unfortunately, my roommate seems to think Singer can do no wrong simply becaue he made 2 very good X-Men movies....blind faith, blind faith... The way Smallville is shaping up this season and last, I'd really like to see Welling and Co. take over the true Superman roles even if it is only on the small screen. I really want to see how the man Clark Kent interacts with the man Lex Luthor. How Superman! interacts with Rosenbaum. How Lois interacts with Superman (pre relationship). How this Lois and Clark interact as adults at the Daily Plant (pre realtionship). How Lois changes once their relationship begins. Just imagine, you wouldn't have the following: Lana, Ma and Pa (cameos perhaps), Chloe (I assume) or any other baggage.

Anybody get this working? My system can't play it and tells me it's not an .avi file.

So will it have a young computer hacking Richard Pryor in it? Otherwise it won't link up with part 3? Maybe Dave Chappelle can play the young Richard Pryor. If you're out there Singer, at least consider the option

There was a part 3?