‘Man of Steel’: Zack Snyder says film has ‘date with destiny’

June 14, 2012 | 11:55 a.m.
mos 0001rv Man of Steel: Zack Snyder says film has date with destiny

“Man of Steel.” (Warner Bros. Pictures)

When the Warner Bros. film “Man of Steel” opens one year from today it will be flying in formation with history, which is  a source of considerable excitement for director Zack Snyder.

“The thing that’s really special and hasn’t really been acknowledged is that ‘Man of Steel’ comes out on the 75th anniversary of ‘Action Comics’ No. 1,” the filmmaker said just before a stage appearance at the recent Hero Complex Film Festival.  “That’s the very first appearance of Superman. I haven’t seen people talk about that yet.”

action 11 Man of Steel: Zack Snyder says film has date with destiny

The first Superman comic book. (DC Comics)

Well, that diamond anniversary will probably be mentioned a few times by DC Comics and Warner Bros. between now and June 14, 2013, when Snyder’s movie arrives with Henry Cavill (“Immortals,” “The Tudors”) wearing the cape, Amy Adams (“The Fighter,” “Enchanted”) as Lois Lane and Michael Shannon (“Revolutionary Road,” “Boardwalk Empire”) as the ruthless General Zod. The cast also includes Russell Crowe, Diane Lane, Kevin Costner and Laurence Fishburne.

Of the seven actors just mentioned, the 29-year-old Cavill is the only one without an Oscar or Oscar nomination on his résumé — a hint of the resources going into the project that is now in post-production. The movie is Warner’s bid to reenergize Superman as a feature film property (especially now that Christopher Nolan is in the Batcave packing his boxes) and the studio will begin the public side of that process next month with a panel and footage preview at Comic-Con International in San Diego.

That footage will show the brawniest of all Superman actors to date (a Snyder priority was matching up his star visually with the way he’s depicted in more contemporary comics) and the first foreign-born Superman (a Brit, he hails from the tiny isle of Jersey off the coast of Normandy, France). Although hasn’t the hero always been the ultimate immigrant?

zacksnyder Man of Steel: Zack Snyder says film has date with destiny

Zack Snyder (Dan Steinberg / Associated Press)

In June 1938, the refugee from another planet landed at newsstands that were full of headlines about the mighty Joe Louis knocking out Max Schmeling, the German fighter who many feared would be taking the heavyweight championship home to Adolf Hitler (who was about to start a very different fight in Czechoslovakia). With all the newsprint gray, the bright yellow-and-red cover of the inaugural “Action” issue seized young eyes — as did the blue-and-red figure who looked like a circus strongman or Hercules in long-johns.

The issue is prized like no other for comic fans; there were 200,000 printed back in 1938 but, by most estimates, fewer than 100 copies are still in existence. An auction gavel came down in December 2011 and one nearly pristine copy was sold for $2.16 million. And what was the newsstand price on that issue when it arrived? Just one thin dime.

joe shuster Man of Steel: Zack Snyder says film has date with destiny

Joe Shuster, shown in the 1970s, co-created Superman with Jerry Siegel. (Los Angeles Times archives)

Comics are only made of paper (or, now, pixels) but that collector was investing in the best fossil record  of something even more valuable: A perfect idea. That’s what writer Jerry Siegel and artist Joe Shuster may have had on their hands when they came up with a red “S”-symbol and put it over the heart of a man who could leap tall buildings in a single bound.

The idea ricocheted around the globe. It still does, according to Grant Morrison, the Scottish writer who is working on “Action Comics” these days. “Our greatest ever idea as a human species, if you ask me,” said Morrison, whom the New York Times recently dubbed the “vulnerable Virgil in the underworld of geek culture,” of the character.

There have been more than 900 issues of “Action” published and the hero has been in every one of them (it’s not the only Superman title, either, the series simply called “Superman” surpassed 700 issues last year). But in a big jolt, DC started “Action” (and every other series) with a new No. 1.

The “new” “Action Comics” No. 1 presented a Morrison tale of a younger Kal-El, who showed up for crime-fighting with the old familiar cape but with work boots and blue jeans. It was still Superman, who remains recognizable even if he never stays the same — like a beach that holds its shape even as the sand is in constant flux. It’s the great genius of Siegel and Shuster, Morrison says, to find a costume that can fit anyone and any story as long “as it looks to the sky.”

superman fleischer poster1 Man of Steel: Zack Snyder says film has date with destiny

Superman debuted in 1938 and reached the silver screen in 1941. (DC Comics)

Siegel and Shuster’s creation didn’t get any love when they first shopped the character around as a comic strip — it was too strange and too sci-fi. The first fan may have been Sheldon Mayer who was working for the McClure Syndicate — he recognized the allure of Clark Kent’s secret identity.

“I was crazy about Superman for the same reason I liked ‘The Scarlet Pimpernel,’ ‘Zorro’ and ‘The Desert Song,'” Mayer said years later. “The mystery man and his alter ego are two distinct characters to be played off against each other. The Scarlet Pimpernel’s alter ego was scared of the sight of blood, a hopeless dandy: no one would have suspected he was a hero. The same goes for Superman.”

Mayer’s endorsement was part of a series of events that got the strip rescued from the “slush file” and on the cover of a new venture called “Action.”

That’s all it took and the hero quickly went up, up and away with a syndicated newspaper strip starting in 1939, a radio series in 1940 and a silver-screen serial in 1941.

Siegel and Shuster, two former classmates from Glenville High School in Cleveland, watched that trajectory with mixed emotions because (like the hero’s parents on Krypton) they knew they weren’t going to be along for this ride.

georgereeves Man of Steel: Zack Snyder says film has date with destiny

George Reeves does a stunt in the “Adventures of Superman” TV series, which ran from 1952 to 1958. (Jim Bowers / TASCHEN Books)

In March 1938, Siegel and Shuster cashed a $412 check from Detective Comics Inc., giving up the rights to a hero that is rivaled only by Mickey Mouse when it comes to the world’s most instantly recognizable fictional characters. Shuster died in 1992 at age 78, Siegel died four years later at 81 and, needless to say, they were haunted by that transaction into their twilight years.

Their heirs continue a long legal quest to be part of Superman’s future but an April appellate ruling appeared to be a setback for their cause and, adding insult to injury, it arrived the same day an auction house sold the original cashed check from 1938 for $160,000.

Snyder has been too busy building his new Metropolis to dwell too much on this history. That might be wise considering that the most recent Metropolis movie, 2006’s “Superman Returns,” proved how difficult it can be to fly forward while simultaneously looking back.

christopher reeve flying Man of Steel: Zack Snyder says film has date with destiny

Christopher Reeve as Superman. (Warner Bros.)

“Superman Returns” was director Bryan Singer’s valentine to filmmaker Richard Donner’s version of the hero, which took flight in the 1978 smash. That film mesmerized a young Singer, and his movie was steeped in tie-ins to the past (he used a vintage John Williams score, added a cameo by the late Marlon Brando as Jor-El, etc.). The $250-million movie was remote and tentative — like a museum visitor who heeds the instruction to look but, please, don’t touch.

superman gallery2 Man of Steel: Zack Snyder says film has date with destinyIn an interview early last year, Snyder made it clear that if he makes mistakes they will be new ones.

“We’re making a movie that finally goes with the approach that there’s been no other Superman movies,” Snyder said. “If you look at ‘Batman Begins,’ there’s that structure: there’s the canon that we know about and respect, but on the other hand there’s this approach that pre-supposes that there haven’t been any other movies. In every aspect of design and of story, the whole thing is very much from that perspective of ‘Respect the canon but don’t be a slave to the movies.’”

There’s been so many versions of the hero — Christopher Reeve and George Reeves , the Fleischer cartoons and “Smallville,” Kirk Alyn in serials and Bob Holiday on Broadway, etc. — you wonder if even Superman can carry the weight of all that mythology.

Seventy-four years ago it was different — it was uncluttered. There was one superhero in the world and, in his first 12-page story, he was stopping the execution of a woman framed for murder (and crashing through the door of the governor’s mansion to do it), cracking the jaw of a wife-beater and gleefully spooking a kidnapper with a rooftop view of the city (which was Gotham before there was a Gotham).

portrait Man of Steel: Zack Snyder says film has date with destiny

Henry Cavill, star of “Man of Steel.” (Genaro Molina / Los Angeles Times)

In a world without supervillains (at least none outside Berlin), Superman was defined by the need of others and call of duty: “Early Clark decided he must turn his titanic strength into channels that would benefit mankind and so was created..Superman,champion of the oppressed, the physical marvel who has sworn to devote his existence to helping those in need.”

In a way Superman is the one in need now. He’s watched Batman and Spider-Man fly to greater heights in recent years — and those heroes can’t even fly, technically speaking. In an age of irony and antiheroes, he’s also a little stiff and painfully wholesome (although Captain America has shown that red, white-bread and blue isn’t a total deal breaker at the box office). But a 75th anniversary might be a piece of cake for a guy that can crush coal into diamonds with his bare hands. Snyder likes the sound of that — and he’s fine with history as long it shows up in the nick of time. “It’s like a date with destiny, if you will, or a date of destiny.”

— Geoff Boucher

RECENT AND RELATED

zack snyder ladder Man of Steel: Zack Snyder says film has date with destiny

Snyder: ‘There have been no other Superman films’

‘Man of Steel’: Cavill and speeding bullets

Morrison to Snyder: Make Superman a ‘brawler’

Snyder: Superman is a tough one to crack

Henry Cavill, raised to fly?

Henry Cavill: ‘Red Son’ was ’essential’ for me

‘Dark Knight Rises: Anne Hathaway’s research

U.K. actors now as Superman, Batman, Spidey

Eastwood: I was offered Superman role in ’70s

‘DKR’: The Bat, the Cat and the Rat

.

Comments


32 Responses to ‘Man of Steel’: Zack Snyder says film has ‘date with destiny’

  1. Frankie says:

    The problem with Superman Returns is that it eschewed the "stiff and wholesome" to become the Steven Tyler of Steel. Superman can have a sense of humor, and doesn't have to be all smiles and sunshine; but he should never be some schlub who knocked up his chick.

    • RAMBO 1st Blood John J. says:

      Agree, they made Superman into a stalker and Lois Lane into a Whore. Superman had nothing better else to do but fly around and watch Lois Lane have a conversation with her boyfriend. The story line was weak. The Director focused on Richard Donner’s storyline instead of the comic book’s.

      FYI to all these comments about immigrants, blacks, Whites ect. Superman in Lois and Clark was Asian. Nobody Complained. So Get over it. All these comments are stupid. Let’s just hope this new Superman movie is as good as Superman, the movie, Superman 2, Superman, the 1948 Serial and many other great Superhero movies combined. One year to go.

  2. I am looking forward to MoS with great anticipation. I also like the mindset,”There have been no Superman movies.” I love Chris Reeve’s movies, and let’s face it; Superman Returns wasn’t awful. But I believe this mindset freed Chris Nolan to shape Batman how he thought he should be. I hope the same strategy works for Superman. I would love to see this turn into it’s own epic trilogy.

    • Uh, sorry Bub, but in case you didn’t notice, “Superman Returns” WAS awful. It was slanderous and iconoclastic to Lois Lane (giving her bad lines and faux romantisme), The Daily Planet (by perverting “Truth, Justice and The American Way” into “Truth, Justice, and…… uh…… all that stuff”) and — yes, Superman himself — by adding a ton of CGI wherever and whenever it wasn’t wanted or needed. Instead of making Superman look rugged and invincible, “Superman Returns” made Superman and Lois Lane behave psychologically warped-down and in grave need of a therapist.

      The best Superman movie was, is, and always has been, the first (1978).

      • TMLS says:

        Nope, I agree with the other guy. Superman Returns wasn’t “awful” by any stretch. But that’s the beauty of subjectivity and opinions, we’re ALL right! :D

    • JohnnyTee says:

      It won't. Superman is not a dark comic. I love Christopher Nolan's version of the Dark night Trilogy. But Superman is not Batman or 300. What's up with super mans new suit. It makes him look like an evil superman exposed to red Kryptonite.

  3. winegeek says:

    Superman has not been in every single issue of Action Comics. Before this current reboot Superman was MIA in Action Comics for almost two years.

    In 2009 Action Comics (written by Greg Rucka) featured Chris Kent. Chris Kent was Lois Lane & Clark Kent's foster son also known as Zod's biological son. Meanwhile Kal-El (aka Clark Kent) was living on New Krypton.

    Then in 2010 because of DC's incomprehensible decision to have Superman walk across the country in the Superman title he couldn't be in Action Comics for yet another year. So Lex Luthor starred in the title. It was a very compelling story by Paul Cornell although sadly at this point after the prior year of no Superman in the title people were fleeing the book in droves.

    Superman showed up for a couple issues in Action near the end of Cornell's run prior to the reboot. Action 904 being the last issue.

    However, for the most part Action Comics was Superman free from 2009-2011. And in fact during the 2009 ill conceived "World of New Krypton" event the tag line of both Action Comics and Superman was "World without Superman" . Yes, Superman wasn't even in his self titled book during 2009, that title written by James Robinson. The only place to find Superman during this event was a book called "World of New Krypton.

    To reiterate, this current reboot is the first time we've seen Superman and/or Clark Kent consistently in two years.

  4. Mast Qalander says:

    The "ultimate immigrant"? What are you talking about? I know he's from Krypton, but look at him, he's WHITE! Cast a person of color as Kal-El/Clark Kent/Superman and watch all the racists flip out. I bet the "ultimate immigrant" argument wouldn't be so persuasive, would it? Got white privilege?

    • Smee says:

      Your comment in and of itself is racist. So the only 'true' immigrants have to have a certain amount of pigment to their skin? There were plenty of immigrants who came to America who had white skin, and no, they were certainly not priviledged. Irish, Jews, Italians, Polish, Russians…shall I go on?

      Just for the record…what skin tone or color do you think is required in order to be called an immigrant? Maybe America just shouldn't have let the WHITE ones in, huh?

      • Mast Qalander says:

        Talking about white privilege isn't anti-white. Do your homework (via google) and read about it. It's more than just about skin color. I never denied those realities about the Irish, Jews, Polish, Russians, etc., but I'm addressing a larger point about society as it exists today. The "immigrant experience" is not the same for all immigrants. The challenges that a Russian immigrant faces, for example, is not going to be the same as a darker-skinned South Asian immigrant's experience. There are struggles for both, but they are different experiences. Some groups have it worse than others and hate crime statistics demonstrate that difference (again, google it, read the FBI statistics or Human Rights Watch reports). Last time I checked, the word "immigrant" isn't used in a positive way.

        All I was saying is that there isn't a big uproar about a British person being cast as Superman (and there shouldn't be). A Welsh actor plays Batman and people are cool with it. I'm a Superman fan and one of my favorite parts about his character is that he *is* from somewhere else, but don't call him a "foreigner" or "immigrant" when that term is largely used in today's society as code for people who are non-white. Superman easily passes for white, so it's ridiculous that he's referred to as "the ultimate immigrant," but be honest, you know this argument would NEVER work if, *gasp*, someone decided to cast a brown or black guy as Superman. The late Dwayne McDuffie would include more black superheroes and racist fans would flip out and accuse him of trying "kick out" the white heroes. Look at the hell that broke loose when DC created a Muslim Batman in France.

      • atomic1fire says:

        Superman is an immigrant, He's not even from this planet.
        White Privilege is just as stereotypical as black criminal. The idea that all whites have it better off because they are white, is just as moronic as all asians being smarter because they are asian.
        People are going to treat people who look similar better, regardless of race, but that doesn't mean you can blame someone else for your problems.

        It makes no sense to make superman black because the whole idea is he's a white farm boy.
        It makes no sense to change a character's Identity to fit a market when the identity is a part of the character,
        It's like giving batman living parents. Don't do things that don't make sense just because marketing says it's okay. Or making black panther a ex gang banger with a heroin addition, because people don't connect with actual Africans.

        If you want a black super hero, make a black super hero.
        Static shock, black panther, storm, etc. Nobody cares if they are black because that's who they are, Black panther is essentially a black batman who is also a king.

        Nobody gives a crap if they make a minority superhero, Just don't fundamentally change a existing character just because someone wanted to feel better about themselves.

      • Mast Qalander says:

        You're the reason why fans of color like myself don't fit into white-dominated fan spaces. Seriously, anyone who says "white privilege" is "just as stereotypical" needs to really do their research and read up on facts. You are oblivious to racism existing because you deny it even exists, including in nerd culture.

        And you make it sound like making a black superhero character as popular as Superman, Batman, or Spider-Man is a piece of cake.

        Your white privilege is showing and it is ugly.

      • Dan says:

        And your racism is showing and it is pathetic.

      • Dan says:

        Apparently you haven't heard of War Machine, Luke Cage, Spawn, Cyborg, the new Nick Fury, The Black Panther, The Black Falcon….and the list goes on and on. So , not only are YOU racist , but you unable to effectively support any the arguments you make in your ignorant racist agenda. You are however good at one thing I must admit, I'll give you a hint at what it is : Ha Ha Ha Ha lolololol ! Figure it out yet Einstein ? oh wait a minute…Einstein was Whit! Wouldn't want to insult you no would I ?! lol

      • Dan says:

        It is people like you , that breed racism to keep it alive and going. I hope you are sterile.

    • So what you're saying is that just because Superman skin is white he's not an immigrant even though he's not from earth and is considered another race of species known as Kryptonians who have their own language.Your argument over Superman not being the ultimate immigrant has literally just collapsed on itself.

      If I and everyone else were to follow your logic then we might as well say everyone who's skin is white and they are from countries Britain,Germany,Greece,Italy,Ireland,Paris and any other part of the nation and aren't born in America is not immigrant.

      You are trying to justify your weak argument over the color of Superman's skin."Oh he looks like a white man so he's not an immigrant," even though technically the people of earth would consider him as such because he's not from here and the race of people he came from have their own foreign language.

      You obviously got issues with white people that you need to get over, because all I'm hearing from you is illogical babble.Just because someone skin is white doesn't mean that they are not an immigrant.Superman is not of Earth and so they use the term the ultimate immigrant.Get over it.

      • Mast Qalander says:

        So, are you saying that white people are treated like "immigrants" in the United States? Obviously, we know that this land belongs to Native Americans, but don't act like white people are being told "go back to your country" all the time. People of color hear "go back to your (insert non-white country here)" far more than white folks ever will. *That's* the ultimate immigrant experience, my friend.

      • Dan says:

        And just how do "WHITE PEOPLE" act ?? Do I detect yet another subtle racist comment ?? !

    • Boo magic says:

      Shut up

    • 7 ps says:

      What an utterly ridiculous and equally ignorant statement to make. The word immigrant isn't exclusively used to describe people of colour moving from one country or continent to another.
      In fact, the dictionary states… "Immigrant: a person who migrates to another country, usually for permanent residence"
      Please note the key word being PERSON! Not black person, or white person, just person! I do believe that it's you who has twisted such an innocent statement, turning it into an issue of race therefore making your statement one that could be perceived as being racist in itself and at the very least discriminatory.
      We are talking about a fictional comic book character here aren't we?, lighten up!
      After all people or persons in glass houses, regardless of ethnic origin or race, shouldn't throw stones.

    • Mute says:

      I smell a troll…

    • jamesdohertydmublog says:

      your level of racism is upsetting. I get that you may have had a bad experience based on skin colour, but you are now perpetuating generalisations, stereotypes and uneducated definitions. I could arrive in america next week and be put in a category based on my accent. It's on me to show that the popular generalisation is wrong and that i don't fit your preset assumptions about me. Not every guy wants to be an angry young tupac, a political obama or a junkie smack head, just like not every irishman is called paddy, likes to fight or has a fantastic sense of humor. They are generalisations.. don't allow yourself to be the victim. So people generalise in order to categorise, so what? Some may do it by what they see… show them something different and shift the focus if all they see is colour. I think it actually more your obvious grand canyon sized chip on the shoulder they see first with you. People can feel an attitude you know? You can tell if someone is defensive as a preset. The problem is theirs, but you're allowing it to become yours. Get over it and bring more than bubbling hate to the world, as you know, we have enough of that. Forget plymouth rock.. you stand on it forever, you'll starve and fall through the cracks.

  5. Craig Hindes says:

    I love pretty much all comic book films, even the bad ones, cuz, ummm, they are based on comics. Some I enjoy more than others (hard to believe X2 spawned X3, for example.) That being said, what killed Superman Returns were the actress for Lois Lane and the plot device for Lex' quest for …..wait for it….. more land. Now that I understand how much of an impact the Christopher Reeves' Superman had on Singer, it makes a litle more sense, but we all wanted the film to be so much more. And not only did I not want to see Supes' evidence of unprotected sex, but I hated those emo-panties he wore. Plus Nolan didn't have an exactly original take on him, I am sure "The Dark Knight Returns" and/or Batman Year One influenced him. Good or bad, I 'm just glad Snyder is doing is presenting his interpretation of Supes and not an homage.

    • The Daily Decibel says:

      "we all wanted the film to be so much more." Hear, Hear. You're spot-on with that one. "S.R." was such a perversion of Supes that it is decidedly un-watchable. The screenplay was absolutely abominable. If they had different producers, different directors, a different screenplay, removed Kevin Spacey, and not added a ton of CGI (example: Superman flailing in the ocean), and given us a stronger Superman, a stronger Lois Lane, then we would have gotten somewhere.

      I am hoping that this film will return Superman to the glory he held in the first movie.

      • Doc says:

        Funny. I agree with everything you said except for one thing. I rather enjoyed Kevin Spacey's Lex Luthor. Gene Hackman is a wonderful actor, but he played Lex poorly. Call it bad writing or whatever, I just didn't see him as Lex, but as someone who was simply pretending to be bad in a comedic fashion.

        Kevin felt evil and twisted as Lex. Of course, Rosenbaum from Smallville, showing Lex's fall from grace, was probably the best Lex yet.

        As for "Returns"… did anyone else have a problem with the fact that Superman's son's first super-powered act was to kill someone? Granted, it was to protect his mother as well as himself, but Superman's policy on killing clearly wasn't represented. I would have thought that Lois and the fireman… what's-his-name… would have taught the boy that one kills only when one has no other choice.

        I know, I know… it was probably an accident, right? But no one seemed to have an issue about it at all! The boy was right as rain shortly after and no one seemed to care that this young kid had just killed someone with his superpowers. *grumble*

  6. Izoto says:

    I have alot of hope in this movie being pure epic. Please do one of the all time greatest heroes in fiction justice!

  7. willyslickness says:

    You guys are funny.

  8. Matt says:

    Superman Returns wasn't completely awful. It wasn't great either. I try to view each movie I see as a "stand alone movie" so to speak. I enjoyed watching Superman Returns for what it was. I wasn't comparing it to the Christopher Reeve movies when I watched it because I knew going in that it wasn't Christopher Reeve, and this wasn't the Superman I grew up with. Yet still, there were times in the movie that made me smile a little bit, like hearing the old superman music score/song in the background playing, and other things that Bryan Singer had put in the movie out of respect to the original. (Superman Returns in my opinion was an attempt to show respect to the movie we all love, and by no way or means an attempt to out do or replace the Superman we all grew to love and know–Christopher Reeve in the original movie.) Again, this is is just my personal opinion about what the director wanted to do with this movie based on the tone and feel of the movie. But I would like to say, that on an added note, I personally liked Superman Returns more as a movie than say, Superman IV: The Quest For Peace (which I thought was horrible even though Christopher Reeve was in it and Chris was and still is the best Superman). I remember even as a young person being incredibly let down and disappointed by Superman IV: The Quest For Peace. So just in that regard only, I personally liked Superman Returns a little bit more than that fourth movie.

    I also (and again this is just me personally) liked the idea of Superman having a son with Lois, and that his powers would grow as he got older, etc… It was a good idea that could have been developed out a little better maybe? The scene of Superman watching over his son in the bedroom was touching I thought–the idea that he would always be watching out for him as he grew up even he couldn't actually play the role of his "father". Like I said, that idea was good, but maybe the circumstances of how it came about could have been developed better as far as the whole Lois and her husband thing. And there were other things I enjoyed as well. I did like watching Kevin Spacey walking around on screen giving us his version of Luther (even though its just not the same as Hackman in the original—it was still fun to watch Spacey giving respect to Mr. Hackman's Luther) Anyways, like I said, that's just me personally.

    But honestly, even though Superman Returns didn't have the best script or story, and even though it did not come close to meeting our expectations with the overall experience we wanted Superman to be for us again, weren't there any parts in the movie that made you smile just a little bit? Just a little bit at all? Like the original Superman song starting to play when things were getting revved up, and etc…?

  9. I am on the verge of a heart attack with anticipation of Man of Steel. For the record, Superman Returns in inferior only to Superman: The Movie (1978) and Superman II. I loved it, actually, even with it's flaws — but it part because I'd waiting 20 years for another Superman movie. I was 13 when Chris made us believe in 1978, and I've not recovered. EVERY superhero movie stands in its shadow, IMO.

  10. Joe says:

    I’m looking forward to seeing what kind of tone they are going to set up for the man of steel. Right now we know nothing so it’s anyone’s guess as to how this thing shapes up. Hollywood tends to make the same mistake over and over with these “franchises”. I’m particular they try to make everything a formula. Vampires sell, make more vampire movies. Batman good, make more batman. Now they have the dark knight franchise… Undoubtably one of the if not THE most successful trilogy of superhero movies. Now, warners thinks… Can we give superman a Chris Nolan treatment… Take his film success with TDK and make that formula work for superman. As much as I hope it does, I am a little worried that it might be so similar to TDK trilogy that it doesn’t work. Chris Nolan took his risks and took batman where he wanted it to go. He took a risk! It paid off. But in this age of marketablity, brand recognition, and basically humping an idea till its dead, I am worried they’re too concerned with following a winning formula, rather than taking their own risk. Best of luck to it, I hope it’s something we all enjoy.

  11. jamesdohertydmublog says:

    having spent my whole life defending my love for the blue boy, i got done with verbally trying so i wrote it down. I have written what it means to me on my wordpress blog in the piece "why the world needs a Superman". I then went on to explain in more detail why i hold on to it still in the most recent entry "The nature of things, as best as i can find". Please give it a read and comment for me, it would mean a lot. http://jamesdohertydmublog.wordpress.com/2011/10/
    and the follow up http://jamesdohertydmublog.wordpress.com/2012/08/

  12. david hoffson says:

    they should have made in 2006 but we are getting it now . like it was first time in years making superman that you can not come pare to anything that is the way it should be then it will feel more new to ever one again. that way

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Close
E-mail It
Powered by ShareThis