But it doesn't make as much sense when you take into account the situation: A new director with new actors, but they want audiences to remember the 1978 film, which it's a sequel to, but please, forget the already existing subsequent sequels like III and IV, because those are now out of continuity.

Yup. And if it's the TRUE sequel to Superman I and II, why not give us a new villain instead of using the campy Luthor, yet again?

I think they just want something different and good. I wouldn't mind if the Singer had directed the movie in some throwback style. For example, action movies from the 70s are much different from action movies from the 80s. This wasn't the case though. It was the fact that he was just reusing and rehashing alot of stuff that made it bad. Reusing the old theme music, reusing Marlon Brando, getting a Christopher Reeve's type of actors, using the campy Lex Luthor and his plot for land...

I was watching Castle this weekend and I'm wondering if Stana Katic would make a good Lois Lane or not. She has the looks and authority, but something seems off. Maybe the attitude/chip on her shoulder is throwing me off.

Heck, just cast Welling and Durance.

Well there is that and it was also boring as hell, a bad movie, and no one wanted a Superman movie with almost no action in it.

I don't think Returns being a sequel to II was a factor at all. The first two Superman flicks are well revered, why not build upon that? The problem was as d2cheer said, it's a boring fucking movie with no action. Hell even Spacey rehashing Hackman's land grab plot would be mildly tolerable if something remotely exciting happened in the movie.

Apparently Matthew Goode is in the lead for the part. http://www.movienewz.com/matthew-goo...perman-reboot/

I haven't seen anything he has been in, but if you look at pictures I can see how he could pull off both Clark and Superman.

Really? I didn't like him so much as Ozymandias, not sure how I'd like him as Supes.

Sounds like more Internet rumor mongering, but if it's not, I think it's a bad choice. I hated how he played Ozymandias; they COMPLETELY missed the point of the character by making him a dark, slightly sinister and mystrious character from the get-go. This was a problem of the script and the direction more than anything else, but I still think he's a poor choice for a character who is supposed to radiate "inspiration".


Still better than Routh or Welling, though...

Again with the "flop" inaccuracy. It made $200 million domestic, and nearly $200 million foreign. And I don't care about its production cost, most of which was spent on previous attempts before Singer even got a hold of it. Selling 200 million dollars worth of tickets certainly doesn't make it a flop. Meanwhile, because some other film cost little to make, yet only put 60 million dollars worth of asses in seats, it was a success? Despite the fact that less than a third of the amount of people ever actually saw it? Please. Despite whether it made or lost money in the end is irrelevant. People still wanted to go see it, and they did.

Call it unprofitable, call it a financial failure. But tying in whether something was popular or not by how much profit it made on a balance sheet is silly. Anyone remember Coming To America? According to the studio, that didn't turn a profit, despite it making almost $300 million on a $40 million budget. What a flop.

from the article:
Yeah, if this is true, Hack Snyder's gonna do a splendid job at this.

I don't like the reliance on CGI to portray Supes.

Bad casting if Matthew Goode gets the part as Clark/Supes in the next Superman movie. Ack!

If they're going to CGI-it-up, then why just just cast Verne Troyer for the role.

I think the point we should take away from this is no good Superman movie can be made without Terence Stamp.

LOL! Goode has the face but the body of Jack Skeleton.

Hell, cast Jackie Earle Haley as Supes if you'll going the CGI route.

Or Gabourey Sidibe.

The idiocy of an all-CGI-Superman over another actor's body/head sounds like pure fanboy conjecture piggybacking on the recent fracas over the GL CGI costuming, combined with utilizing an unlikely actor from a previous Zack Snyder affair. All of which sounding just controversial and "outrageous" enough to guarantee it'll spread like wildfire over the InnerTubes.

Quite a lot of Superman in Superman Returns was CGI, particularly in the flying scenes. Works fine when he's zipping around, but would look awful if he were just standing and talking to someone.

I'm probably the world's biggest CGI apologist, but this would be the worst idea in a long history of bad ideas WB has had regarding DC characters.

I don't want a CGI Supes body, and I really don't want Matthew Goode as in the role. No disrespect to his acting ability, but he simply is not right.

Excellent points all around. This should be copied and pasted every time the topic comes out.

Great. So not only will Supes look like a cartoon, he's gonna sound like Barbara Walters.

Although I bet there'll be some Snyder apologists claiming this'll be a homage to the old b&w serials where Superman became a cartoon whenever he took flight.

So then we've all agreed Superman Returns flopped last time around. How do you think this will affect the budget of Nolan/Snyder's movie?

Yeah, that was a bad choice. The reader/audience is suppose to think everyone but Ozymandias could be behind it.

The actor pretended that Ozymandias family were Nazi's so that's why he has a slight accent in the movie.

For Superman, my ideal casting would be Billy Zane as Superman and Jude Law as Lex Luthor and the actress from that Seinfeld episode, "The Race" to play Lois Lane.

You know SUPERMAN starts with Zod getting cast from Krypton and Jor-El sending his only son to earth. SUPERMAN 2 has Superman battling Zod and depending on which version you see Zod is handcuffs on his way to prison.
Looks like Mario Puzo used the Bible as a guide. God casts Satan from heaven. God sends his only begotten son to earth. Jesus battles Satan and Satan is chained for 1,000 years and then is set free and gathers the armies of the world for one last battle.
Why not have Zod get his power back and go off into space and gather help from other planets to battle Superman & earth for one last battle.
Better story line than another origin movie about Superman.

It may not have been a financial flop but it was certainly enough of a disappointment that Warner decided to not do a sequel or announce any type of live action Superman movie until this year. The movie obviously didn't do what Warner expected it to or wanted it to and in my personal opinion I believe they were expecting more after the success of Batman Begins. That's probably why they have decided to not bring back Singer as director and instead of doing a sequel to Superman Returns to do a restart of the franchise.