If Warner doesn't give Singer and Routh a second chance, I'm out.

I'm sorry, but like the rest of the American public, I sat through way too many shitty Superman films to finally get a good one. And when that good one finally came out, the nerds fucking backlashed as it was too much like Donner's vision and not original enough for them. I'm sorry that Donner was the only person to make an enjoyable Superman flick and Singer followed that up to make a worthy sequel 19 years after the fact. I'm sorry that people like myself have taste too. Maybe I'll go watch Fantastic Four and lower my appreciation in film (and IQ) while I'm at it.

And you know what? Fuck Mark Millar. How does it feel when the writers of the last two Fast and the Furious films wrote a superior story than he did?

Seriously. Bryan Singer has talent and the credentials. Let him do it.

It was more like a remake of the first film. Essentially the plot of the first Reeve film, right down to Luthor's land scheme, mixed with a half dozen ideas that should have been thrown out during development.

Considering it is a sequel to the first film, kinda makes sense... ;)

I have to say, after enjoying Wanted, a friend lent me the graphic novel of the first six issues, and I thought it was awful. It didn't help that I also got the first two volumes of Ex Machina at the same time, but even if I hadn't, Millar just isn't that good of a writer.

I don't know if it being a sequel justifies that; I mean should we be expecting Lex Luthor creating the Subprime Mortgage mess in the next one?

I see it now: Superman becomes an angry god when he defaults on the Fortress of Solitude.

Returns was based on the first two films. Clark wasn't with Lois until Superman 2. You just have to forget the part where Superman tells the president "he was sorry for being away, and won't let it happen again".

:)

:toast: :rock2: -smile-

I salute you. And I agree with you. Here's to Singer's SUPERMAN II.

Stick with Singer.

The budget was roughly $270 million - which included the costs of HOW many false starts, paid-for scripts, directors, actors, etc?? You can't blame that on Singer.

The film made almost 400 million worldwide. Add in DVD sales, merchandising licensing (did you SEE all the superman toys/clothes/etc that came out) and there is no WAY this LOST money.

What's the legal status on Superman right now? I thought the REAL reason we haven't seen a sequel greenlit is because Warners would have to dish out a big chunk of any profit to the Siegel family.

I thought that was with Superboy?

Beautifully said.

Blah. Sorry, but more then just nerds disliked the movie and like many of the American public, getting another uninspired Superman movie after all these years was disappointing.

I wouldn't mind Singer getting another chance because he's proven himself before with X2, but I could see why they would go another direction.

Really though, it's going to be the same arguments that have been around for the 2 last two years.

Superman Returns was a terrible disappointment, for reasons already detailed by others. It should have been great. With so much time having passed since the previous film, the return of the greatest superhero of them all should have been awesome, but it was awful. I thought Routh was great and I didn't hate Bosworth at all. I didn't care for Spacey, but I blame the writing more than him. The script was an absolute mess. Like some really bad fan-fic attempt.
They need a whole new creative team on the next one. Superman Returns was botched so badly that I don't trust them to get it right next time.

I can't see them restarting the franchise over. The Incredible Hulk proves it's kind of a bad idea, as it didn't make much of difference.

Besides that it seems just as many people liked and hated Superman Returns, it made 200 million, so a reboot, unless it's the greatest film ever, wouldn't do any better and has a good chance of doing worse. They're better off sticking with who they got, atleast Routh and Bosworth anyway, it can get confusing.

"Opinions are like assholes, everybody's got one."

Unlike the apparent vocal majority on this board, I loved the film and loved that Singer played in Donner's universe.

Returns rocked and I'm looking forward to more.

And when you have the urge to tell me otherwise, reread the sentence that starts off my post.

Thanks.

Look, call "Superman Returns" whatever you like. Lite, tame, a rehash or even weak. But it was not an awful film. Don't be ridiculous. "Superman IV" was an awful film.

It wasn't anywhere near awful. Could have used one more script polishing though and it would have been a near perfect film.

The production delays with Man of Steel are troubling but I'm interested to see Singer's team bring a credible villian into the franchise. It's pitiful that some of the classic Superman rogues have not been used yet, going into a sixth film. I blame WB for that though.

"Some of"? How about almost none? The only actual villain that has been used is Lex Luthor and that is pathetic.

I hope they give the Superman sequel to that French director who did The Incredible Hulk. That would be a nice Superman movie - action, good humor, good villains (Darkseid or Bizarro)...

You're right. My bad. Typing too fast.

Singer cant do superman.... case and point... superman returns was awful.... everything about it was bad.... he did a great job with the xmen but supes... nah

and please if anything... dont make superman a father.... that is the worst idea anyone could have ever made

The new Hulk would have done better if the Ang Lee version had never come out. A sequel to the Ang Lee Hulk would not have done the numbers that the latest Hulk has done.

^I dont think I agree. Even if a sequel to Hulk 03 wouldnt have done as good as Hulk 08 I think a sequel to Hulk 03 would do the same as a sequel to Hulk 08.

Don't Forget Zod.

Yeah. The Ang Lee version doomed this Hulk. It may of been a case of "too soon", but the fact remains, people kept thinking and wanting to compare it to Lee's '03 Hulk.