Ain't It Cool News (
Movie News

Harry talks with JJ Abrams for a Couple of Hours about SUPERMAN

Hey folks, Harry here. So there I was in my room talking with Johnny Wad about the Alamo Drafthouse screening a 3D print of DISCO DOLLS starring John Holmes, when the call-waiting note went off and I figured I'd grab it.


"Hey there, this is J.J. Abrams," in a perky happy cheerful voice.

I let him know that I had to get rid of the other line and I came back and started into a long conversation of on-the-record and off-the-record subjects. A very frank conversation about the document that Moriarty read, where he currently is in the writing process and why he's on this project.

How did this conversation come to happen? Well first off, to be frank I've known J.J. Abrams for a few years. We never talked a great deal with one another, but he expressed what a fan of the site he was and it was just those casual small talk conversations back and forth.

Now folks... Here's the first thing. The script that Moriarty has and that has escaped the clutches of Warner Brothers was written in 4 weeks. Why was it rushed? Why did J.J. sit at the table and pound it out so quickly? BATMAN VS SUPERMAN. You see, the whole reason that J.J. had come to my site in the first place all those years ago was because of his pure hatred for BATMAN & ROBIN. He had heard a basic story for the film that seemed to be marginalizing the Superman character in favor of the darker Batman character and he'd heard that Akiva Goldsman was brought on board to "fix" Andrew Kevin Walker's screenplay. Given his absolute kneejerk fear of that project he pounded out a screenplay and an idea for a trilogy that he felt would be a springboard to reintroduce all the characters. He didn't want the first appearance of SUPERMAN in 20 some odd years to be as some sidebar character to BATMAN. He strongly felt that especially in the times we live in today, that a character like Superman needs to be reintroduced in a grander fashion.

OK... That's all well and good. I've talked with Joel Schumacher about BATMAN & ROBIN and he didn't set out to make one of the worst films since the advent of eyeballs, but he did. Joel loved making a BATMAN movie. Ed Wood loved making a flying saucer aliens attack film, and it wound up being PLAN 9 FROM OUTER SPACE - mislabelled as the worst film of all time, and the first film to play at any BUTT-NUMB-A-THON ever! The point is intentions... versus impact. J.J. had set out to stop a nightmare, but had he himself created a new nightmare?

He floated a few things about how it felt like Moriarty had an axe to grind, wanted to make a big splash, and I interupted telling J.J. that in fact, I was online with Moriarty the second he cracked the first page of the script, and he described the first page, and then told me how excited he was to read this script. Moriarty is a fan of ALIAS, all you have to do is read Mori's DAREDEVIL set report and what he says about Jennifer Garner and the absolute worship he gives her and that show. I told him how Mori felt that the experience of producing and writing ALIAS had ideally suited JJ to create a multiple film Superhero arc where he could set things up, spread things out, tease the audience and play with them a bit.

J.J. then protested that that is exactly what he's doing with SUPERMAN. How sure he isn't retelling the ACTION #1 origin story, but then neither did Richard Donner and Mario Puzo. I remember my father going apeshit angry over those white suits and nasty ass New Age Crystal Krypton. Hell, my dad was pissed that Marlon Brando had white hair and that the Christmas ornament flying snowflake went through a bad 1969 Light Show, that he did better when he did lightshows for the ATLANTA POP FESTIVAL back in his day! So fact of the matter is, what exactly is the origin of Superman?

Nearly everyone explodes Krypton. Sometimes there's survivors in bottles or upon a huge floating fragment. Sometimes Jor-El and Lara survive by throwing themselves into the Phantom Zone, sometimes they die by falling debris. Sometimes Kal-El lands on Earth and is found right out of the Rocket by the Kents... Sometimes he went to an orphanage and caused hell there, before being forced upon the Kents.

Technically, according to the history of SUPERMAN in the comics, the Puzo/Donner film really fucked up, because... Where's Superboy? Krypto? Big Yellow Key? Luthor and Superman knew each other as children and when Luthor tried to create a potion for Superman to take that would make him immune to Kryptonite and a lab fire broke out and Superboy blew out the fire... All of Luthor's hair was blown away and he swore from that day forward to be Superboy(man)'s arch-enemy for life because he no longer had hair.

Folks, that is THE HISTORY. Or is it? Because technically Luthor originally had Red Hair and a Beard and was a crazed angry scientist. But wait... Wasn't all that reinvented in the early eighties when John Byrne did that miniseries that basically rewrote SUPERMAN's entire origin - now he still had the planet explode, but god it was freaky. All sorts of weirdness. I have hated it everytime they turn Luthor into a business man. I like the Mad Scientist Luthor of the Curt Swan years. And if I were to write my Superman movie, I'd set it back in the timeframe of the 1930's and 40's. Have Superman crash into a field in and around 1915, be a reporter at the Daily Planet circa the time period of the 1939 World's Fair. Luthor was a scientist there... and just have killer robots terrorize the Fair as Luthor sets out to take over Metropolis via Super Science. I'd have him jailed at the end. Then when WWII broke out, the government recruits Luthor to create weapons to fight the Nazis and Japanese... giving him the power to create mass destruction, which Luthor then turns into a huge industry for himself, and that's how he builds his fortune, and secretly fights against Superman... Oh shit... that's revisionist as hell. Fuck, there I go, I have my dream story to tell with SUPERMAN... So does J.J. Abrams, just as Paul Dini has and Alex Ross and John Byrne and Julius Schwartz and Curt Swan and... so did Jerry Siegel and Joel Shuster... as did Mario Puzo. So why not J.J. Abrams?

As we talked and geeked about SUPERMAN for a couple of hours, I learned something about J.J. I didn't hear him shuffling through materials, clicking a mouse or pulling up documents. He was focused on the conversation.

So... Where is the project? SUPERMAN is going to get made. It will happen. However, J.J. Abrams has been hard at work for quite some time now on the 2nd Draft, which will be the first real draft that the production will be using. Luthor will not be Kryptonian. Did Moriarty cause that? Apparently not, that was a note from Alan Horn when he read it, quite some time ago. So the big battle at the end of the script between Super-Luthor and Superman... Ixnay. The gigantic funeral sequence... Gone - pacing concerns. Will Krypton explode in this film? "We'll see." Is the response. Rather coy, don't you think?

There is something that J.J. is very set in doing, and that is not plagarizing Mario Puzo's script and putting his name on it. He likes the Richard Donner film quite a bit, and likes a lot of SUPERMAN 2 as well. He doesn't want to tell that story exactly the same way. He wants to tell it, where he keeps the spirit, but reorganizes how the information gets to you. So you can come to a SUPERMAN movie and be surprised that it isn't quite the way you remember it, but that you can look at it and see SUPERMAN... and he'd be in his Costume and it'd look like the Superman costume... and there'd be no polar bears or giant spiders. Where the film would be being written by someone that sits down with his kids and watches the Fleischer SUPERMAN cartoons on DVD non-stop. Where SUPERMAN can get the air knocked out of him. The introduction of these new characters isn't borne out of contempt for the existing characters, but because you'll have never read this particular SUPERMAN story before. And he feels that's exciting. He also feels that Moriarty got hung up on a few sticking points and kind of wrote the script off, not going into all that works, not being constructive with the criticism, but rather going for the jugular.

Well... Moriarty hated the script. And Moriarty speaks his mind.

I told J.J. that the problem that is going on here is a complete lack of trust between the fans and the corporation known as AOL/TIME/WARNER. Because we had to watch BATMAN FOREVER, BATMAN & ROBIN and ... STEEL with Shaq! Because we've followed the development of the SUPERMAN and BATMAN and WONDER WOMAN franchises and every single time they have a go at it, they either write a piece of shit script, or they get a good script and then give it to the wrong director and it implodes. J.J. then noted that everyone responsible for BATMAN & ROBIN isn't there anymore, and I agreed. We celebrated for a bit, then I said that there is still no evidence that Warners has grown a brain.

We're a bit sensitive as fans now. Everyone that loved D.C. as much or more than MARVEL has had a sudden and uncomfortable role-reversal. Back in 1989 through 1994 the D.C. fans where cheering as the Marvel fans stared at Dolph Lundgren and wept. Now, we look at SPIDER-MAN and see the right directors, actors, writers and film... and look at Warners... Loving the Animated shows and stating... "Warners can't do Live-Action Superheroes!" I told him that that is how it is going to be until the fans are proven otherwise.

BATMAN & ROBIN wasn't just a bad movie... It nearly killed the comic industry. I mean, it just wasn't bad, it made folks embarrassed to walk into comic shops and ask for comics. Adding to that the poor state of the comic industry creatively speaking in that time period, and stores were going out of business left and right. Comic geeks were against the ropes. Until BLADE, X-MEN, BLADE 2, SPIDER-MAN.... the trailers for DAREDEVIL, HULK and X-MEN 2 all kicking our ass... Suddenly you start talking to Comic Shop owners and there's life again. D.C. still has the best toys and take home items... though my Thor Hammer rocks pretty fucking hard... But we all remember what Warners did.

J.J. was concerned about the folks talking about killing his wife, beating him up at his signings and I tried to explain to him the Joe Hallenbeck method of acting out one's fantasies through written words hurled upon a computer screen... but agreed that the hate hate hate being directed was mainly coming out of ignorance and fear. Ignorance, because all that we have to react to right now is the word of Moriarty. And that word scares us.

I think J.J. was a bit shocked when i admitted that my reaction was based on fear and ignorance. I think folks don't usually expect to hear that. But if the DAWN OF THE DEAD script by James Gunn taught me anything it is that you must react to each thing personally. I reacted to the announcement, but I still read it for myself... and my reaction was not the reaction that was shared by a friend. Moriarty loves Superman, but we have very different histories with the character. I grew up in a comic shop, I know not just the OFFICIAL origin, but the ton of others that came out. How Donner's film was pieced together from a ton of sources, not all of them originating in Comics. While that film started with the cover of Action 1, did Superman ever hold a car over his head like he was going to swat someone with it? Nope. And was the film set in the 30's and 40's? No. Where'd the DAILY PLANET globe go from the opening shot? When was it replaced with a helipad?

Hey... did ya know that Clark Kent worked for quite some time as a Television Reporter in the comics? Yup, they even threw out the Daily Planet there for a while. And at somepoint in the future, someone may even make Clark be an Internet Reporter, because if Kent was Matt Drudge, he'd hear everything first. Don't laugh... that'll hit the comics some day.

Talking to J.J. alleviated a lot of the basic fears... He's a bit shocked at the reaction, but not severely when he reads Moriarty's depiction of his script. On the page, he felt the Jimmy Olsen gay comment was a joke, not necessarily being something that meant Jimmy Olsen was gay, but just that he was so pretty that he was probably gay... and J.J. was shocked at the homophobia on AICN about that... and I told him that there is something rather unique about SUPERMAN... With SPIDER-MAN we never had Aunt May comics... J. Jonah Jameson and Mary Jane and Gwen Stacy and Harry Osborne didn't have their own comics. But in SUPERMAN... Lois did, Jimmy did, Superboy did... And each of those different titles explored unique storylines. Like when Jimmy had those Bouncing Boy pills and did his own Superhero adventures... but we knew he dated Lois' sister... that gorgeous blonde stewardess. And for this red-haired boy growing up... That red haired boy in the comics that was SUPERMAN's best friend was a role-model in those early years. It isn't the issue of "gay" it is the fact that Jimmy wasn't that. And sure he's a fictional character, but he lives in the minds of the readers. I remember panels where he tied that green bowtie to get ready for a date with that pillbox hat wearing babe. J.J. said that he couldn't include all of that, and that it can't be everything to everyone. Agreed, but it is also not advised to shit in the cereal you're selling for breakfast.

The point is this though. J.J. is passionately telling his story of SUPERMAN. There will be some changes, but what Moriarty read will not be the script for the film that will hit the screen. There are changes being made, changes that we all would want done to the script Mori described, but J.J. passionately feels that the most important thing to preserve is the magic of who SUPERMAN is, what he stands for, his actions, beliefs and spirit. Krypton exploding or not is a detail for him, but the more important detail is that he was an orphan with strange powers beyond those of mortal man, and he didn't know why he had them, he was scared to use them, and then at some point in his life he became a hero. He wants to make Lois a strong female character that isn't just a bubbleheaded nosey reporter that absent-mindedly gets in trouble... but a character that through her sheer existence inspires others to be more than what they have been. That's nice. I like that.

Doesn't mean he's going to write a film that ends up being worth a shit, but it does mean that he knows how to sound sincere, that he knows what to say to a geek like me to want to give him the benefit of the doubt and to read the script with my own eyes.

By all means, sign your petitions and voice your opinions. It is all feedback that strengthens your case for what is important to you folks. SUPERMAN is obviously important and we all want to see a good movie. Can J.J. Abrams write that film? Is this first draft a rough sketch that he'll hone into a diamond based upon the notes he's getting from friends, the studio and geeks? Well... I don't know. I'm not too familiar with J.J. Abrams' work. I have never seen an episode of ALIAS, though I did get an impassioned letter from Hercules the Strong defending J.J. Abrams' writing abilities... and I know enough to know that his credits on Bruckheimer films don't mean squat because those films have so many writers on them that you never know who did what where.

I'll be reading the script for this SUPERMAN, which by the way... it will be called SUPERMAN, not SUPERMAN 5 as folks like to call it, but I'll be reading it looking for what works and doesn't. And I'll write my thoughts about that, but with the full knowledge that this is going to go forward, and that it is a work in progress, and that this script is a very rough part of that process that J.J. is halfway through revising.

So... if you go to J.J.'s book signing, speak your mind, but be prepared to listen too. That's a two way street. J.J. isn't out to destroy the hero we love, he's out to make a film that he hopes is entertaining as hell, but has all the right messages that a Superman film is supposed to have. I, for one, hopes he pulls it off.

Folks - I am by no means "On Board" this project. However, I am willing to take a look at the script and the future drafts with the hopes that Moriarty's opinion is not mine... and I guarantee you Moriarty will feel the same way. He hopes this movie gets on the right path. He wants J.J. Abrams to do a good job. The last thing we want to see happen is a bad film made out of SUPERMAN. As for the reversal on my feelings from two days ago... Two days ago, all I had to react to was Moriarty's review. Today, I talked to the man that wrote the material and heard some of the changes for the next draft and the spirit of where he was coming from. I love SUPERMAN in many different forms... There is a chance that Moriarty and I will not see eye to eye on this when I read the script, or I could very well come back here and say... Thank god he's making changes, but I don't think it'll be enough. However, I do know that once I read the script, I'll at least have a firm place to base my fears, as opposed to an interpretation by a very good and perceptive friend.

All I'm saying in this piece is that there will be changes from the draft Mori wrote about. That J.J. is a Superman geek - he knows his stuff. He wants to have a positive contribution to the history of SUPERMAN. And those are all good things. Doesn't mean the movie won't suck, but it does mean there's a chance it might not.

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • Sept. 28, 2002, 4:15 a.m. CST

    Luthor: Not Kryptonian.

    by MCVamp

    I will not bitch about the movie until I see it. That's all I wanted to hear. Thanks, Harry. And thanks to JJ too.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 4:16 a.m. CST

    Just not i hate him

    by jspot

    enough said...but they guy is shit

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 4:34 a.m. CST

    Same old story...

    by MrBabbage

    Harry, don't apologise for these people. If JJ has something to say to the AICN audience, why not write to us directly? So many times you come across as an apologist or a mouthpiece, usually in the furtherance of a personal agenda to make yourself sound more important to the industry than you actually are "Oh JJ Abrams called me up today". Good for you. So, this script was penned in four weeks. It's not the quality of the script that it is being taken to task here, it's the absolute betrayal of the core values of who Superman is and where he came from - and how he is perceived by the people he has sworn to protect. The movie Spider-Man is a world apart from Amazing Fantasy 15, but the themes and the basic essence of Peter Parker were pretty much there and everyone - not just the Spider-Man fans - responded to the basic truth in the character. And it was the same with the Donner Superman movie back in the 70s. Who cares how long the script took to write, it's the core beliefs in there (which Abrams does not apologise for) which are fundamentally wrong. Harry, the idea of getting balance into AICN, of presenting Abrams' view is well intentioned. But it does nothing to alleviate our concerns, particularly when your own beliefs seem to go all gooey just because someone "important" has phoned you up.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 4:43 a.m. CST

    oh, please....

    by reedrothchild

    never EVER trust a man that goes by his initials. This REEKS of cover-up spinjob CYA type stuff. I just wanna be loved, is that so wrong? Jon Peters is the devil, Brett Ratner is the new Joel Schumacher, and JJ Abrams is the new Akiva Goldsman. I'm just saying, yo.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 4:46 a.m. CST

    Nice damage control WB...

    by Elliott Ness

    .. but not quite convincing. First of all, Abrams actually acknowledges the fact that WB was screwing up Superman vs Batman - thus illustrating their sheer incompentence to get a new superhero franchise going. The fact that this is still the same studio that is going to develop his Superman script, doesn't look all too promising. Second, he may have written the first draft in a short time, but does that compensate for the lack of quality in the script? I don't think so, because it is not the writing that is bad, it is the ideas. Independent of any changes to Supermans origin, it just sounded like a very mediocre Saturday morning cartoon. And not a Superman cartoon, mind you. Therefore, the fact that Abrams apparently loves the character and is writing a supposedly better draft is no reason for celebration yet. After all, Peters is still there, and it is remarkable how his name is not mentioned at all in the article above - surely Harry must have discussed his role in this? So my guess is, Abrams is involved in some Hollywood powerplay at the moment, using a hastily drafted script to push SvB out of the way in order to attach himself to a blockbuster project that could make him a major player. Follow the money, as Harry put it earlier. Abrams may not be out to destroy the character, but in order to be convincing, he will need more then just words. That second draft better be really good, or we won't be seeing Superman for a long time.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 4:53 a.m. CST

    Oh, and BTW Harry...

    by Elliott Ness

    ... what's with removing the original stories - did WB threaten you or something? It's AICN's single most important topic this year, and you're replacing it with some Warner media spin?? I don't get it, and if I were Moriarty, I wouldn't be all that pleased about this lack of support.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 4:55 a.m. CST


    by Nobbi

    i really find it great, that you guys still have your own opinion.. and it's mine, too.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 4:58 a.m. CST

    The fact of the matter is that Moriarty doesn't sell out

    by Vindibudd

    He speaks for many people with his criticism. I don't care if Abrams is being sincere. Judas was sincere when he handed Christ over to be crucified. Superman= Christ, Abrams= Judas, Warner Bros.= Pharisees. Do the math.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 5:03 a.m. CST

    Wait a minute....

    by Kenevil

    Didn't I read just yesterday Harry's story about how much he hated this script and how we should all avoid this movie at all costs? Now that he's had a phone call from JJ, isn't it funny that the link to that story has disappeared? I'm not saying anyone's been 'bought', or that Harry will suck up to anyone with a vague, quasi-celebrity status or anything like that, just stating facts, that's all.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 5:05 a.m. CST

    I think the sequel should be called Superman 2: The Quest For Pi

    by Chaffro

    "The first time round we found shit, brother."

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 5:08 a.m. CST

    Superman should blow "superfarts" out of his ass for two hours..

    by another bastard

    That would be more entertaining than this film looks to be... You could have Jimmy nearby to get a "super" whif, plus have Luxor get his hair blown off by a might ass-blast!

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 5:08 a.m. CST

    Harry, I usually think you're a kook, but--dammit--nice job

    by Eugene O

    I say: let the guy make the film he wants to make...but they just better take it easy with the "changes". I can take origin revisions, but if so then I want a TRADITIONAL looking Superman (no John Travolta or Keaunu Reeves shit). If they reinvent EVERYTHING, then what's the point? So I say, J.J., take your best shot, because Ratner (based on what he has done so far) is not going to make a GREAT film out of an OKAY script. If his film is going to be GREAT, the script will have to be there.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 5:09 a.m. CST


    by sprocket-bot

    You demand journalistic integrity when people question your stories, but as soon as some Hollywood friend calls you go gaga and cave! Why did you remove the originals? You were the one so driven by rage at this script, yet you write this puff piece acting as though others were responsible for the outcry...Clinton couldn't even pull this spin! Now that JJ has aproched you personally, you cave, and to justify the travesties of this script, try to bring others involved in Superman's history down to this fucking shallow is that?!?!?! The problem with most fanboys is they lack character and integrity...instead of taking a stand against something they know sucks, they drop all standards at the first sign of something flashy! "yeah, they completely trashed Supe's origin, and had no clue who the characters are, but the superhero-kung-fu-battle scenes were AWSOME!!!"

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 5:12 a.m. CST


    by Qwerty Uiop

    I still think you all should take bags of poop to the signing. Just in case.... Don't forget to run after you throw them. Do it for Superman. Win one for the Supes.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 5:28 a.m. CST

    Please help me decipher the following excerpt:

    by Dildo Baggins

    "...He's a bit shocked at the reaction, but not severly when he reads Moriarty's depiction of his script. On the page, he felt the Jimmy Olsen gay comment was a joke, not necessarily being something that meant Jimmy Olsen was gay, but just that he was so pretty that he was probably gay..." I recognize that the above words are indeed English, with the exception of "severly" on grounds of spelling, but I cannot for the life of me understand what is being said. Can someone help me out here? By the way, I also thought it was really stupid that the "Jimmy/gay issue" was listed as the number one complaint on that petition. I don't really see why that's such a big deal when compared to all the other just plain awful sounding elements of the script Moriarty reviewed. Frankly, I was expecting Abrams to defend his work with something reasonable, such as that it was written by committee as so many franchise films are. So I was kind of stunned to see that his big defense is simply that he "wrote it quickly." If I had to pen a new version of The Wizard of Oz in a few weeks, I think I could do it without saying to myself, "Hm, I think I'll keep the rudimental idea of a girl in a magical land but this time Dorothy will be a crack ho and the gang will be joined on their adventure by pop star Usher." I'm frankly kinda baffled that Abrams made such absurd decisions and then defended them so weakly while admitting he had autonomy. One last note, didn't it seem like his script had approximately ten thousand characters with hyphenated names? I mean Jor-El and Kal-El yes, but it seemed as though there was a virtual army consisting of Ty-Zor, Vee-To, Hee-Haw, etc. PS: I agree with the other posters who say the original links should remain up.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 5:44 a.m. CST

    Raetner just plain blows

    by Private Ryan

    Just saw Red Dragon at a screening the other oh man, I have never seen a more pedestrian shot film. Wow. The lighting was good, but that is because he was working with a good DP, Dante Spinotti. But, whole lot of way close up shots with the background out of focus. Lots of close up or medium shots that were just framed poorly. Hannibal standing in his cell with this big ugly line next to his face...ugh. And the performances...only Ralph Fiennes stood out in this movie, but that has nothing to do with Ratner's direction, which was all over the place. The epitomy of mediocre, now he is making Superman. Crap.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 6:01 a.m. CST

    On the removal of links...

    by zacdilone

    I can understand where Harry is coming from on this one, but I think it points out one of the fatal flaws of this site: the tendency towards rash and impulsive behavior. Harry jumping on the "crush JJ" bandwagon came straight from the was pure emotional reaction. Now he's had a chance to hear the other side, and realize that it's too early in the "Superman Redux" saga to jump to conclusions as strong as those first formed. Movies are organic, and to react to a first draft script as though it was a finished product is not logical. I think Harry realizes that now. So call him a sellout, but I respect his right to reach a more open-minded state regarding this subject. Perhaps in the future this will cause him and others to wait, think, and research before throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 6:16 a.m. CST

    Well, it certainly is a bit more encouraging but there's sti

    by Math1303

    Well, the two biggest flaws seem to have been fixed... or as it? Is Lex back as a ruthless business man or have he came up with another ridiculous idea? Is the whole death thing out or just the funeral? Even if they do fix those 2 things, will it be enough? There are still quite a lot of stupid ideas in there. It's not just a couple of big errors that made it bad but the accumulation of small ones. I guess I could eventually learn to accept the Krypton not exploding part but they'll need a damn good reason for doing so... it has to pay off somehow. I can live with a few changes here and there but it needs to pay off somehow and right now, I'm not convinced it will.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 6:23 a.m. CST

    Ok.. Harry.. you've actually mad eme feel better about this

    by DoggyDaddi

    Now im taking your "conversation" and relationship with J.J. with a grain of salt, as you have a nsaty habit of tooting your own horn an AWFUL lot.. but I can live with that. Whats important is that aparently we ALL are a little guilty of panicing, since we've been burned SO many times by Warner its not even funny. I can only say im open minded at this point.. and even hopefull in reguards to this project now.. and have you to thank for that.. Thanks.. -------------- On a side note.. I read recently folks knocking Margo Kidder as Lois Lane, how shes ugly .. unattractive.. whatever. I was never a fan of her.. her voice was grating and though i didnt think she was ugly.. I never really got a good enough look at her to see her. That all changed when I came across a playboy in my Dads closet with HER layout in it. I have to admit.. I was impressed. Ok.. not good enough.. I was enamored. She was beautiful, sensual.. and TOTALLY desireable.. no matter how she changes.. her ups or downs.. I will always remember the beauty of those photos.. and will always find her attractive because of them. It was in a word.. stunning.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 6:39 a.m. CST

    If there's one thing that's driven me nuts most about th

    by TheAbstruseOne

    it's people coming away with some impression of homophobia, either from me or from the fans in general. MSNBC's website had a brief article about the petition, but all they mentioned was about Jimmy Olsen being gay. Granted, I did make that the first point on the petition, but if I had the chance to do it over again (or even modify the god damn thing, which won't let me do), I'd add a sentence after part one that said, "Yeah, I know. This isn't a big deal. But just wait for the rest of it..." Then again, I also would have waited for Moriarty's report on the script rather than going on 3rd hand information from another source. The worst thing this could do is have people thinking we don't want a Superman movie. That's NOT true. We just want a GOOD Superman movie. And we want Lex Luthor left alone, either as the mad scientist as the older folks remember him or, as a child of the 80s, as the multibillionaire CEO that I remember him as -- the mad scientist who made good as it were. -- The Abstruse One Darryl Mott Jr.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 6:45 a.m. CST

    So JJ thinks Mori has an axe to grind eh?

    by Conan_the_Humble

    Guess what, so does every person who visited this story, with the exception of that tosser John Murdoch. The ideas stated in the 1st draft were pathetic, if JJ sticks with most of them, they should change the title to Anotherman or something because it sure as hell ain't Superman. JJ sticking to the ideas behind Superman eh? I don't own any comics and raely read any, but I don't remember a thriving Martial Arts community in Smallville (you know the whole Matrix fighting bit...) The ideas expressed as stated by others seemed designed to bring parts of other successful movies in order to boost the potential of this movie. Try an original idea WB, create a GOOD movie. You'll have the hit you're looking for. Don't re-imagine Suoerman, it doesn't need it. Just create a kick arse movie, with what is already established. Cheers.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 6:45 a.m. CST

    Turkish Superman is more fun than the original Donner film.

    by Declan_Swartz

    If you are a geek then you should have at least Turkish Star Wars and 3 Dev Adam(Spider-Man vs. Captain America and Santo) Turkeywood Turkish Superheroes Turkish Superhero Posters

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 7:14 a.m. CST

    All that we want is a good movie

    by Ace of Steel

    I think that it is really a positive thing that Mr. Abrams had this conversation with Harry were he could express our worries to the source. If this results in a good movie that is respectful of its comic origins then I say more power to Harry and the fans. Nobody wants another Batman & Robin disaster and Warner Bros. needs to see that all sucessful adaptations of comic books to film had one element in common, respect of its source. That there will be changes, it is inevitable, but I am willing to give them one last chance. Si please WB, don't mess this up.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 7:19 a.m. CST

    Sorry Guys!

    by The-Doc

    The links are still there, they've just slipped too far down the page. Go to the story where Harry tells you how to go talk to Abrahams and theres a link to Morri's original story there. By the way JJ sounds like you've still got plenty of work to do, from the sounds of it this script needs more like 4 years than four weeks to put right.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 7:32 a.m. CST

    Vicious TalkBackers

    by jasher78

    The talkbalkers on this site are the most idiotic people I've ever run across! You think because Harry talks to the AUTHOR of the script and widens his view, that he has "Sold Out"??? He didn't even change his mind!! READ the damn article!! He SAID he is still against it and needs to wait and see. Geez. He's a PERSON, not some geek god. People, well intelligent, humane people are open to having opinions change. Sometimes, when you get more information and you actually listen to both sides of an arguement, you can recognize an error in your ways. And sometimes not. But to automatically assume Harry or Mori or anyone here has "Sold Out" because they change their opinion... That is just stupid. I for one am terribly happy Harry posted this discussion, because now my vehement hatred of that script has been quelled and I am willing to sit back and wait... get another opinion other than just Mori's. Anyways.. Thank's Harry & Mori & JJ. I love the site and appreciate the very candid opinions and articles, they ARE why I am here. Good show.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 7:38 a.m. CST

    petition link

    by snowyowl

    Here's the link to Abstruse's petition again:

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 7:48 a.m. CST

    Far from happy...

    by Desk

    I'm sorry to say, but JJ Abrams just doesn't seem to "get it." I mean, Abrams seems surprised at the fan reaction to some of the ideas he has planned? What did he expect? When all this started kicking off I observed that the 1978 film made significant changes to the Superman mythology. However, Abrams' new script rewrites it completely. If Abrams came up with these ideas in the first place I don't trust him to make changes for the better. Krypton looks like it won't be destroyed, with Jor El still talking his son back to life. Don't get me wrong, Abrams is a good writer and I love Alias - he just doesn't seem to have a grasp on this project. But anyway, it's obvious that Warner Brothers have made their minds up and will be pressing ahead regardless, it looks like Smallville may still be doomed despite setting new ratings records for the WB, and I fear this latest news report may have taken the momentum out of the promising wave of protest that was building among fans.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 8 a.m. CST

    "The gigantic funeral sequence... Gone - PACING CONCERNS"??

    by granhalcon

    So it wasn

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 8:12 a.m. CST

    'So, basically.. JJ Abrams talked Harry out of being 'de

    by Lordhoban

    As Russel said, in Almost Famous.. 'Just make us look cool, man.' I think that's the most fundamental thing said about this whole mess... We're afriad of two facts.. that, Moriarty has quoted JJ Abram's vision of Superman warmly and accuratly.. or that, Harry might actually give it a chance regardless of the initial bad reaction.. Now, I haven't seen the script, neither have most of us.. all we have to go on is Moriarty's impressions.. obviously, some bad, very bad ideas were expressed from the script.. and who knows, maybe Abrams listened, maybe he'll 'fix' his vision to include some more traditional elements.. I mean, there are a million different ways, more, than one can achieve and interpret the way a film plays out.. I don't like the ideas expressed, because they don't seem to fit Superman.. but I'll wait and see what happens.. and hope for the best.. because I'm not some top exec at WB, but I for one thing, believe in being true to the fans.. when you shit on them, you betray that trust, then you don't deserve the property you've got your hands on, whether you bought that property, or you created it.. Anyway, there's my rant.. take it any way you want.. :P ...

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 8:23 a.m. CST


    by el che'

    ...some people are so quick to judge. Fact is, had JJ contacted YOU to discuss his intentions with the script, you may be the one defending his choices. It's easy to crucify someone as a cold, heartless profiteer when the information received is third hand. After speaking with, and relating to a person, it's a bit harder to do so. No beef here Harry.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 8:37 a.m. CST


    by whomod

    Seriously, I wan't this story to ruin careers. And I don't mean the careers of the guys who leaked the story either. I want all the boneheads, market researchers, and commitees who approve cr@p like this script and movies like ALL of the Batman movies, especially the last one, to be summarily dismissed for being so completely condenscending to the companies cash cows and being so out of touch with the public at large that they would so completely miss the signals from X-Man and Spider-Man (not to mention the dismal box office of Batman & Robin) and actually think Jon Peters and this JJ guy, 2 guys who show nothing but contempt and superiority to the character, are their guys to bring them a blockbuster Superman film. Didn't they study and learn anything from the Spider-Man, X-Men, Blade, Batman Animated, Superman Animated (especially) or Smallville???? Or are the "big boys" of feature films too frickin arrogant to see anything but "childrens fare" that can be "improved" to appeal to all sorts of demographic, gender, and age bracket pie charts on their spreadsheets? Hellooo????? is someone at DC Comics letting the suits at Warner know our disdain, the publics disdain and the internet communitys disdain for every bonehead idea brought forth by these idiots?? Or is DC as per usual trying to remain as low-profile as they can as Warner reams a treasured and well known slice of Americana in the arse? Because seriously, you get to a point after reading lame movie proposal after lame movie proposal, miscasting after miscasting, "re-imagining" what ain't broke, seeing turkey after turkey being made where you finally say ENOUGH!!!!!!! SOMEONE AT WARNER BROS. SERIOUSLY NEEDS A CLUE AND APPARENTLY EVERYONE THERE, APPARENTLY LIVING IN THIS CULTURE OF FEAR AND TIMIDITY IS TOO BUSY "C.O.Y.A" TO STATE THE OBVIOUS: NO ONE THERE KNOWS JACK SHEET ABOUT MAKING COMIC BOOK MOVIES!

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 8:38 a.m. CST

    Ok, one more time...

    by Wydok

    Superman's powers do NOT come from the suit! If you read Mori's review, it talks about baby Superman exibitting powers sans suit. There is something special about the suit in JJ's script, but it doesn't give Superman his powers. That's all I have to say in response to talkbacks. I don't really have an opinion on the article. I'm glad some elements are going away. Krypton blowing up isn't that important to me, but Kryptonian Luthor, suit-in-a-can, Jor-el talking Kal-el back to life, and Kung Fu Superman sure the hell are important to me. Let's hope those will be all gone. Oh, and I think Jimmy SHOULD be gay! :-P Or maybe Perry.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 8:59 a.m. CST

    Jennifer Love hewlett?? An idea only Warner could love.

    by whomod

    And of Course Freddie Prinze Jr. or Josh Hartnett as Superman. there, we've captured the teen demographic. How about Chris Tucker as Jimmy olsen? Done! Bingo! the Urban demographic is taken care of. Now cast Sir Anthony Hopkins as Jor-El to give the movie some Academay Award winning weight as well as appeal to older movie patrons. WOW! Wotta concept!!! More More!!!! Ok.. hows about Michael Bay and Jerry Bruckheimer producing?? Yes, they can 'blow up the Daily Planet building in a tribute to 9/11 as i'm sure they must've thought that day that they could do better than that! Oh cast Timm Curry and any other british guy around as the Kryptonian villians and you're set! Oh speaking of sets, see if Lucas is willing to do CGI. We need some cute dinousar type creatures to wander about on Krypton. MAN!!!!! I think i'm brilliant. Brilliant enough for Warner at least!

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 9:10 a.m. CST

    Ewww. Wipe the brown from your nose, Harry.

    by Ludwig Curious

    You are a sellout. And screw it, I'm still going to hire certain... "special people" to... "deal" with this Abrams fellow. I'm sure we can... "work" out something. * evil laughter *

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 9:40 a.m. CST

    The People have Spoken

    by Grand Digital

    This whole thing is an interesting thing. I think it's cool how the public now definitely have a voice that gets heard by the studios...from the stories I've been reading it seems like Warner's is having a hissy about this...things may well change on the Superman project because of it. Cast your puny mind forward to the future...Studios relying on this kind of 'pre-screening' reaction to gauge how well their movie will do, altering the movie during its evolution to suit our whims...after all, it makes sense to sell 'em what they want...but then wait...what's this....oh goodness....Star Wars Episode 7, 'Balance Of The Fall Of The Jedi''s full of bounty hunters...Luke Skywalker is back as a 'kick-ass cyborg' and he's fighting against 3 different Darth Maul variations...yes, people, this could well happen...all because of our, the public's, ill-conceived and misguided concept of what is cool. Our small brains. So this power is a double edged do we judge when to input and when to standby?? I guess it depends on which director is attatched. Hulk sounds weird but I trust Ang Lee, Superman sounds weird but I'm not so confident in JJ McDougal. How do you like them plums ! Apples ?

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 9:48 a.m. CST

    The Batman films..have i missed something?

    by MrLimey

    Batman & Robin made folks embarrassed to walk into comic stores?? Jesus Harry get a fucking grip.Saying that B&R and even Forever are worse than the first two films is like saying Dogshit is worse than catshit.The whole franchise was fucked the moment Burton shout "action" yet Schumacher is left to carry the can simply because he made the last shit movie in a series of equally shit movies.At least "Forever" had a half decent Batman thanks to Kilmer, unlike Keaton and Clooney's take on the character.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 9:57 a.m. CST

    I still have doubts....

    by the G-man

    It was predicted that WB would quickly disavow the idea of Jimmy being gay but keep the bulk of this terrible screenplay intact. Along with excising the idea of Lex being Kryptonian I think that's what's happening here. WB is making two changes and thinking it placated the "fanboys." The bigger problem is that Abrams still doesn't seem to get it. He think Superman being an orphan is the main detail and it doesn't matter how you get to that. The problem is, however, under Abrams script Superman ISN'T an orphan. In fact, he has TWO sets of parents. Then, we have the idea that he is somehow setting out not to plagaize the Mario Puzo scripts. The problem with this is twofold: First, Mario Puzo's scripts were based on the classic points of Superman's history--the explosion of Krypton, the death of Pa Kent, the arrival in Metropolis, etc. If you set out to purposefully avoid those elements you are not, in fact, avoiding a retread of Puzo. You are avoiding telling Superman's origin. Second, a careful reading of Abrams' script reveals that he is, in fact, plagarizing many of Puzo's original ideas, including the arrival of Kryptonian Supervillains on Earth (Call General Zod "Zor" or whatever doesn't make him any less a ripoff of Puzo's Zod), the sacrifice of Jor El for his son (which originally occurred in Puzo's script), etc. All of which raises the question: if Abrams really "gets" Superman, why was all this stuff in the original script? Is Abrams telling us he purposefully wrote a bad script the first time out? Because, otherwise, I have to assume that a writer's first draft is his first--gut--impression of Superman and according to this draft, Abrams does not have a gut instinct for the character.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 10:08 a.m. CST

    "Clooney's take on the character"?

    by Otter

    Sorry, but aside from the sophmoric script, Clooney was the best Batman AND Bruce Wayne. Harry, J.J. diddled you, and it felt good. He and Warner are gonna do exactly whatever they feel like doing to Superman, JUST so they can get those "artistic contribution" commissions. R.I.P. Kal-El.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 10:08 a.m. CST


    by Myskin


  • Sept. 28, 2002, 10:15 a.m. CST


    by Myskin


  • Sept. 28, 2002, 10:18 a.m. CST


    by biskisan

    I told moriarty last night here in new york, i am telling all of you now. He would be perfect. I really want JJ to make a good script as well (for fucks sake),

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 10:24 a.m. CST

    This doesn't change a thing.

    by Batutta

    Even if it's a first draft, the judgement shown in writing that draft is so poor, how can you possibly trust what he'll do later. I mean, other than Alias (and I'll admit that's a big other), his credits include Regarding Henry, Forever Young and Armageddon. Does not bode well. Harry's been totally played by WB's publicity department.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 10:30 a.m. CST

    BEHOLD! Furious AICN Backpedaling! BEHOLD! Harry and Drew Try to

    by You Are Banned

    Will Drew McWeeney ever be hired to write another screenplay? Will WB ever give AICN "access" again? Will the fanboys ever move out of their mothers' basements and get girlfriends? Wait and see, friends, wait and see!

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 10:30 a.m. CST

    I have no problem with a writer tweaking the Superman legend

    by NFLRefugee

    In fact I think it's necessary to keep it fresh and to keep people interested. Just don't go to far off. The description of this movie sounded like shit, because I am instantly turned off by movies that rely to heavily on flashbacks. It takes a real skilled writer and director to pull that off. Is Abrams and Ratner up for that? As Friedken said to Blatty during the making of The Exorcist, "Just tell a straight story from begining to end with no craperoo." Good advice. In all fairness to Abrams, the script review was filtered through a middle-man (Mori) si I can't judge for myself if it's good or bad. It just sounded bad. It's obviously not a finished product and like all films at the first draft level, for better of worst, it will be much different than what we will see at the multiplex. I havent given up faith in a good Superman film.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 10:36 a.m. CST

    What worries me...

    by bjmc1975 that someone had to tell him to take the Kryptonian Luthor out. I'm worried that he'd ever put it there in the first place and would continue to write the script. This whole thing feels like someone decided to film a "tangent" book. It reeks of trying to be "kewl". What's odd is that they have some very good material there that hasn't been used yet. I feel like they don't need to do an origin story - it's been done well, and there's no need to change it. And if he doesn't want to revisit the old franchise, why is he taking such a large part of Superman II's plot devices? Why not use Brainiac or someone else the audience has actually heard of? Maybe a Superman vs. Darkseid movie? And why not dump the script entirely and hire Paul Dini?

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 10:42 a.m. CST

    Some Issues

    by EnderAKH

    My problem is that JJ Abrams said he wants to tell HIS Superman story, and I think that's the crux of the problem. I believe that we, as fans, want to see the Superman story that we've grown to know and love over the years, but told with the best possible acting, FX, and biggest budget. The reason Spider-Man, X-Men, etc got it all right is because they hit all the right historical notes, changing as little as possible. That means we want to see Krypton blow up and Kal-El's parents send him to Earth to save him. We want to see Lex Luthor as either an evil genius, or an evil corporate head, not the head of the CIA. We want to see Clark raised by Ma and Pa Kent, meet Lana Lang, and grow up in Smallville. We don't want to see invading Krptonians. We don't want to see Jor-El talk Superman out of being dead. We don't want to see Clark meet Lois at a frat party. Give us the story we're familiar with, that we all know, and we will go see this movie in droves. Everyone KNEW Spider-Man's story, but we went, because we wanted to see it on the big screen pulled off in the biggest and best way possible. That's all we ask for SuperMan.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 10:44 a.m. CST


    by Beaumont'sGhost

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 10:49 a.m. CST


    by krobinson


  • Sept. 28, 2002, 10:55 a.m. CST

    Yes, there have been bad Super stories-- So?

    by Oknight

    Harry, sure they made Clark a TV reporter and one time he did "the Krypton Crawl" and Red K gave him a giant red ants head and in the late '70s we learned the immortal legend of the "Sword of Superman" which I mentioned in my first talkback to Mori's review. That's why Byrne started completely over in the mid '80s to dump the 30 years of utter crap that had caked onto the character. So why is the existence of bad Superman ideas a justification for piling more back on? Look at the approach (and I mean fundementally the APPROACH-- and it was the same approach) taken by Byrne, taken by Dini and co., taken by the folks who did X-men and Spider-man. Sure you're going to take what works, change it enough to fit a film and dump what doesn't. Spider-man didn't re-introduce the Spider-mobile from '74 or have him grow extra arms, athough both are in the continuity. And SURE Liz and Gwen Stacey were merged into Mary Jane-- You can't even adapt a NOVEL to a film without revision, much less 70 years of comics history. But why pull crap out of your ass to add to the story? X-men didn't re-tell the story from X-men #5 (or whatever)telling the story of Magneto's Brotherhood of Evil Mutants, but it kept SOLIDLY to the essentials of that story. My criticism of this project doesn't come from the details (bad though they were) but from the APPROACH-- and Abrams is utterly undissuaded. I never paid to see Batman and Robin, I watched 20 minutes of a video copy from the library and had to resist the urge to break the cassette-- if Abrams continues with the APPROACH he is using here, Warner will not recieve my money on this either.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 10:56 a.m. CST

    What the People want...

    by Grimjack99

    ...and that's, ultimately, what the WB is going to give us. Not what we, the fans, desire, but what the hundreds of millions of 100 i.q. point average joes are looking for. If that's a wire-fu Superman, then that's the news. Mind you, a wire-fu D'artagnan didn't exactly float the peoples' boat, so maybe they'll keep that in mind. Personally, I hope they realize that it's keeping the characters true to the ones in the comics that will be the saving grace of the film, and not the minutiae that grips the minds of us geeks. A Superman that has no qualms about killing, in my mind, is a far greater sin than a non-exploding Krypton. That's what ruined the Batman films for me, the seemingly endless line of dead bad guys. Superman shouldn't, however in my opinion, be made out to be a hero by destiny. He isn't some sort of prophesied saviour, but simply a man, albeit a solar-charged one, who made the decision to do good with what he can do. By making him some "chosen one," it takes away from his character. Okay, enough rant. They could do a lot worse than to follow the cues being set up in Smallville...

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 10:58 a.m. CST

    Whether you choose believe Harry and JJ or not

    by IAmLegolas

    It's still being made by Warner Bros. and it still has Ratner attached to it. Anyway, does any of this really matter? How many times does a script, good or bad, being reviewed before the movie is made determine how it's really going to be onscreen? And not to pit franchises against each other, but The Amazing Spider-Man (aka Spider-Man 2) will kick this movie to the curb. You can quote me on that. Damn, does that movie's cast of characters in front and behind the scenes look great. And with the money that movie made, I bet they'll have total freedom to make something even better than the first!

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 10:58 a.m. CST

    Not the writing ... the ideas that are horrid

    by Only1thatMatters

    Yes, there were many different version of the "Origin of Superman" storyline, and fans accept that, but there are some basic changes in this script that show that either (1) the author does not know the characters at all, or (2) he simply wants to prove how "creative" he can be by changing the core of a character that has been around forever. Most notable, obviously, are a Superman suit that can "fly" and has some sort of inherent power, and (2) the Luthor is a Kryptonian thing (OK, maybe he took it out in a subsequent version... but doesn't the fact that he ever even considered it in the first place say a whole lot!!) (3) The F'ing planet explodes... it's the primary reason why Superman feels so strongly about protecting his "adopted" home and people. Suggestion - if you truly want to be creative, why are you simply re-creating a story which everyone knows already? Take the Kevin Smith approach. The whole world knows the Superman character... so start with a fresh, advanced storyline. Are we really demanding too much? All we ask is that you respect your audience, write a great script, and keep the core of the character intact. Fiddle if you want, but don't destroy!

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 11 a.m. CST

    Rant about this whole mess...

    by JckNapier

    The thing that people seem to forget about this site is that it is not and never was a straight journalism site. It is shadowed by and laced with the opinions of the those who write. And, as there has never been any deception about that, more power to Harry, Moriorty, etc. As to why Harry may or may not have the petition link anymore, why would he? If you were running a personal site, would you have a link to a petition that you disagreed with? Yes, he apparently changed his mind, but that's good. Being honest enough to admit: "maybe I was wrong" is something that rarely happens these days. So guess what, those that still want to sign that petiton can still find it in dozens of other places (even in this very talkback). Joy! Freedom lives! The situation is simple. Moriarty wrote honestly about a script that he read. Then, upon recieving information from the writer, Harry decided that there may be a glimmer of hope. Is he right? God, I hope so. I was not angry upon reading the script review, I was sad. I was sad not just because it seemed filled with bad, merchandising-related ideas, but because it came from the pen of a writer who I greatly admire. I loved Joyride and love Alias. I was overjoyed when I heard that he had allegedly written a great script. And now? Now, I am less sad. I understand that Mr. Abrahams quickly wrote a script to replace one that he felt was wrong about Superman (yes, there is potential irony there). Whether what he says was true, at least it is a beacon of hope. So, thank you JJ Abrahams for offering a semblance of an explanation. Alas, even if he fails with Superman, I will still watch Alias and I will still recommend Joyride. As for the online community, I too was annoyed to see Conan O'Brian mention the Superman script last night, only to make a joke about Jimmy Olsen being gay, implying that that was the only piece of concern. For years, there has been a conception that hatred of Batman and Robin has been based in homophobia, thanks to various people (many who wrote on these forums) who preferred to criticize the potentially gay elements of the last two Batman films, ro to criticize Shumacher using gay-slurs, rather than discuss the real storytelling and acting qualms. If there is a mainstream perception that the fans are simply sex-less homophobes who are pissed cause "Jimmy's a fag", then our voices will become meaningless. So, if you must protest after today, I implore you to not even mention the Jimmy Olsen "problem" If that even is a problem, it is certianly the least of them. So, in closing, I implore all to relax, stop complaining about Harry "selling out" because he gave us an alternate viewpoint. And let's wait to see how the movie actually turns out. Scott Mendelson

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 11:06 a.m. CST

    It doesn't matter how much of an impassioned Superman fan J.

    by TheYoungLion

    There are certain things you just can't change. If you're making a film of the Jesus story, you can't have Joseph and Mary being invited into the inn and put up in the best room. If you're make a Batman story, you can't have the Waynes live and watch Bruce grow up into a fine young man. And if you're making a Superman story, you can't have Krypton not explode just as Kal-El escapes. That's all there is to it. And I don't care if that script IS just a first draft written at a frantic pace. If that's where Abrams's mind was when he wrote it, then he's all wrong for the job.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 11:08 a.m. CST

    why waste time

    by punjeb

    Is there anyone out there who doesn't know the origin of Superman, or have at least a passing idea of who Lois Lane, Jimmy Olson, Luthor, the Daily Planet, Krypton, et al are? So why waste time on the fucking origin!?! Spidey...yes; but Supes? Its American mythology, national folklore and common pop-culture knowledge. These characters don't need to be introduced/re-introduced yet again! As for this moive, I'm taking a "wait-and-see" attitude. Remember about a year ago how pissed everyone was that Spidey's web-shooters were to be organic. Who's to say these proposals might work out too? Just don't waste the story time with another rehash of the origin

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 11:12 a.m. CST JJ is a geek...and has enough passion for it ...but

    by drjones

    i think the bigger problem will be all those warner folks working on this projekt...i just see the $$$$ sign in their eyes:(

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 11:13 a.m. CST


    by indyhu

    I think the most importanat fact missed in Harry's story is the fate of Smallville. If JJ wrties the story without including the current Smallville story as part of cannon, then Smallville will be killed as a series by Warner. I feel Samllville should be saved based on the merits of the Luthor storyline alone. Lex Luthor's story arc to his inevitable downfall is a very well concieved arc, much better than , say, Vaders has been so far. Don't let them kill a great series just because they THINK they have a blockbuster on their hands.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 11:21 a.m. CST

    Shakin my head man....

    by NoOpinion

    I like you Harry, and I love the site and I think you get a lot more crap than you deserve. But I really don't agree with the stuff you wrote there about how any true adaption would have Krypto and Superman and Luthor friends as kids so in that sense the Donner movie fucked up as an adaption. Dude you're talking about stories from a different time. They had a certain charm about them yes, but some of that stuff just looks stupid now, same with Batman and his early books. It sounds far too much like back peddling and making excuses for work that you'd previously derided. John Byrne re wrote the origin, because what went before was a mess with a lot of stupid shit going on, but the fundamental concept stayed the same. Same with the Donner movie, it made the changes necessary to tell the story in that medium at that time. Hey man I think people threatening to kill the guys wife etc is fucked up, and I'm sure he's a real nice man when you speak to him, but your piece came across a little too much like a complete turnaround because you were confronted. I'm sure the next draft will be better, from the sound of the first it can't be any worse.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 11:36 a.m. CST

    J.J Abrams - If youre still reading these...and a message as to

    by CrackerJak

    J.J - There are people here who fancy themselves writers, directors, actors, myself included. Lets face it, we all have our own take on characters and stories. For a lot of us, we have a definite idea of what we want to see in a Superman, Lord of the Rings, spider-Man, whatever the hell you want movie. There must be something you like, I dont know what. Maybe its Tom Clancy novels, maybe its Greek myth, whatever. But in those cases you too would have a definite idea of what should hit the screen and what should not. If I wrote a script based on a Tom Clancy novel and made Russia land on the moon before the US, youd think I was an ingrate. Obviously the anonymity of the Internet has allowed a lot of people to say things they wouldnt say in real life, such as killing your wife, etc. But dont listen to those guys. Listen to the people giving your their thoughts wishes and fears on something that means a lot to them. I dont think you realized what you were working on when you started, the scope of all this. But now you do. You called Harry? Fine. Heres who you should call: Call John Byrne. Call Nicholas Cage or Samuel L. Jackson, they can tell you how passionate comics fans are. Call Alex Ross. Call Paul Dini and call Bruce Timm. Especially those last two. If you dont know who all the non Hollywood guys listed above are or didnt until recently, then Im sorry, this project is fucked. And realize that so far youre well on track to creating another Joel Schumacher franchise killing vessel in the eyes of practically all of us. I know this isnt up to you, but Brett Ratner aint the guy who should be behind the wheel of this thing either. Mention the guys name alongside the guys working on most Marvel films, and you'll get laughed at. Ang Lee, Sam Raimi, Brian Singer are all light years ahead of this hack. So, bare in mind, maybe youre buddies or pals or whatever, but this cat is gonna make any non comic continuity in your script stand out even worse than it would on paper. Be dilligent, stick with what has worked for SIXTY FUCKING YEARS. Advice, in any case, from an anonymous Internet smart. TALKBACKERS: You wanna hit these guys so that Warner Brothers has to re- think? We can, WE have the power right now. Stop watching Alias. Do NOT, DO NOT go see Red Dragon. If these both tank and we state publicly on message boards its because of the Superman film, shit will get changed in a hurry. Thats all. Think about it. Thats going to send a bigger message that any statement about who you plan on killing or whose ass youre going to kick. BOYCOTT ANYTHING THEYRE INVOLVED IN.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 11:57 a.m. CST


    by suedehead

    Harry must you be such a starfucker. You know that script is shit, you know that everyone at Warner Bros. is freaking out because the fans know it is shit. Why didn't you have the balls to J.J. Abrams that it was shit? I don't understand why anyone would want to stray from the source material when making a comic book movie. The comics made the characters famous because of the great story that was being told, but these assholes feel like they need to change it to translate it to the big screen. That is the most ridiculous shit I have ever heard. Both are visual mediums sure you have to fit a fair amount of back history is to a small amount of time, but it can certainly be done (Spider-Man, X-Men anyone). So Abrams, Warner Bros. and whoever else, stop fucking with history and instead make a translation from printed page to big screen. If you want to make a trilogy there are plenty of years of comics to choose from and I can think of a great 3 movie story arc that would cover the entire life of Superman. In fact I wouldn't tell his origin at all, it's not like the world doesn't already know who Supes is why not just start out in present time, current continuity with Superman already saving the world? Okay I'll stop ranting now.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 12:06 p.m. CST

    Admit it, Abrams, you/Peters/McG/Ratner got caught with your pan

    by KingKrypton

    You idiots got nailed, and now you're backpedaling. You morons actually thought you could mess with Superman and get away with it. It backfired. So now you're clipping the "gay Jimmy" and "Kryptonian Lex" in a feeble attempt to make the fans think you've fixed everything. Nice try, but it ain't gonna work. The whole script is fundamentally flawed and debased. The whole thing violates Superman's history. Abrams, you claim that you don't want to rehash the Donner film. But the destruction of Krypton is NOT limited to Donner's film. It's been in EVERY incarnation of Superman. What you're doing reeks of being Jon Peters' brainless toady, doing every stupid thing he asks you to (ditto for Brett Ratner). In trying to avoid the BASIC CANON that Donner's film adhered to, you're skinning Superman alive and desecrating him. As far as I'm concerned, you, McG (who helped write this thing), Peters (a long-time cancer on this film), and Ratner have forfeit any and all right to work on Superman, and should be ditched effective immediately. Your spin-doctoring isn't fooling anyone.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 12:19 p.m. CST

    Upon reconsidering

    by Village Idiot

    I think the most powerful point defending the re-imagination of Superman was deftly explained by Harry: There are already somewhat different versions of the story, whoever writes a Superman story, especially from scratch, has a certain amount of latitude in the choices they make. A CERTAIN amount of latitude. Although every previous version has taken some liberties, including the comics, they

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 12:22 p.m. CST

    I am a Superman Fan

    by Superworm

    The review that Moriarty wrote scared the crap out of me, so much so that I now intend to put all my knowledge of the mythology of Superman to the test and write my own script, how I would see my favorite super-hero on the big screen in a big way! As a fan I do not have to care about budgets, I just have to write what I would feel is right, and MAYBE, just MAYBE give those Execs at Warner Brothers a clue or two. I am the last son of Wormton I am Superworm

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 12:23 p.m. CST

    Making an original Superman movie...

    by owemewan_yaboabi

    ... cannot be that hard. First off we don't need yet another retelling of his origin, I mean Donner, Lois & Clark, the animated series and Smallville? By now everyone and their dog should know Superman's beginning. Next why does he need some kind of super suit, is't he super enough without it. Personally I like the idea of just having the "S" shield in the rocket. I have nothing against making changes to an established character as long as they do not betray the character. Spiderman's organic webshooters was great because to me it made much more sense, and also reminded me of Wolverine's claws, but just changing a characters sexuality for no good reason! c'mon i am not being homophobic just honest. what else? oh the martial arts. Superman has superpowers why on earth would he need to know kung-fu. All the training he needs to know is how to manipulate his own extensive abilities to win the day. Finally all J.J. needs to do to write a great script is to read some great stories like World's Finest, Kingdom Come or a Man For All Seasons. Please, just don't fuck this up.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 12:26 p.m. CST

    Actually i like the idea of Martial arts, but take it a differen

    by Superworm

    Clark has the ability to fly around the world, why not allow him to explore the incredible and vast differences in the human culture and be able to find himself that way, allow him to find a inner peace that helps him keep his cool, with all that power. I am the last son of Wormton I am Superworm

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 12:29 p.m. CST

    Krypton not exploding is like....

    by CptNapalm

    Krypton not exploding is like Batman's parents not being murdered... they just moved to southern France. Krypton not exploding is like the ring of the Greeen Lantern coming in specially marked boxes of Cracker Jacks. Krypton not exploding is like Ben Parker running off with underaged Mary Jane Watson. Krypton not exploding is like... fundamentally wrong.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 12:31 p.m. CST

    Why Krypton Exploiding Is Important

    by R_Nathan

    In the classic version, the planet is doomed; there's no way to stop the explosing. Loving parents rocket their child away because it is the only possible way to save their son. They die. In the new version, a couple is threateded by the government, so they rocket their child to another planet to be brought up by foster parents. In the first version, you have absolute nobility. In the second version, you have weakness. I'm not saying it's always wrong for parents to send children away. I certainly understand why parents in London sent their children to the countryside to live during the Blitz. And I agree that better for people who feel they aren't able to do a good job of raising their kids to put the kids up for adoption than to do a bad job of raising them. But still, people who are not able to raise their own children are not people you look up to as ideals. Yeah, it has to be done some times, and I'm sympathetic to people who do it - but I don't admire them. If Jor-El sends his own son away to be raised by others, and if he does it for any reason less than the damn planet is exploding, then he's not going to be my ideal. And that changes the whole basis for "Superman." Rather than being the child of a couple of heros who loved him, he's the father of someone who wimped out.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 12:36 p.m. CST


    by genro

    I DO NOT get this horseshit. The first minute Harry is recognized by the Powers That Be, he flips like a stoolie?! A few points............ 1) Siegel & Shuster had Krypton explode. So did Donner, Smallville, Byrne, The Animated Series and EVERY FUCKING INVENTION OF THE STORY IN ANOTHER MEDIUM! To change this is the same as if Koepp decided Peter Parker was a mutant. IT IS CANON FOR THE CHARACTER'S MYTHOLOGY THAT CANNOT BE TOUCHED.............. 2) Just because Harry gives Abrams his stamp of Geek Approval doesn't mean shit. Harry places that mark on anyone that is willing to recognize his existence. Go back and read all the Red Dragon coverage and how Harry tries to get Ratner over as "hitting one out of the park", when EVERYONE ELSE knew otherwise! Why? Harry has talked to Ratty. Everyone took Robert Rodriguez's lead and realized the easiest way to subdue AICN is to throw it a bone. I hate to say that cause I think the site has merit, but enough is enough.............. 3) I don't buy Abrams wrote this nightmare to "off-set Supes v Bats". That makes it sound like he wrote it spec - AND THAT IS LAUGHABLE!!!................................ 4)Peters has had NOTHING BUT SHIT attached to his name since the first Batman flick. Look at the list - Bonfire of The Vanities, Batman Returns, This Boys Life, With Honors, Money Train, My Fellow Americans, Rosewood, Wild Wild West, and Ali!! This isn't including the abortive Sandman flick and whatever other nightmares he's tried to bestow on us................................. 5) Here's what I see - Peters hasn't been able to put a good fuckin project together for OVER A DECADE. He saw that Lorenzo was going to take the ca$h cow known as Batman and run with it, along with Superman. Somehow/someway Peters hooks up with Abrams, and tells him he needs a script ASAP. Abrams hammers out a big fuckin dump in under a month with ideas for the sequel. Peters goes in, sells a "trilogy" and Horn buys it cause Supes v. Bats is a one-shot. Abram's nightmare script leaks via Lorenzo's peeps. WB wants damage control. Peters won't do it cause he's got a glass dick to suck, so he dumps it on Abrams. So why does Abrams do it? Because he'll get shit canned if he doesn't and then branded as "the guy who tried to destroy the Superman franchise". Abrams calls Harry and sweet talks him via the School of Michael Bay. Harry buys it cause he's got no love at WB. Now, Abrams goes back and re-writes a few things - Lex mainly................ So who still gets fucked in all of this?............................. SMALLVILLE. AND WHY DOESN'T HARRY CARE? SEARCH AICN FOR THE PROPOSED 'BRUCE WAYNE' TV SHOW AND YOU'LL FIND THE ANSWER.................... One last thing. HARRY - INSTEAD OF KISSING ABRAMS ASS AND READING HIS SCRIPT, WHY DON'T YOU READ A.K. WALKER'S SUPES V BATS? MAYBE BECAUSE ANYONE WHO HAS EVER LOOKED AT A SCRIPT KNOWS WALKER IS TWICE THE WRITER ABRAMS WILL EVER BE.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 12:53 p.m. CST

    Alan "I Made Pluto Nash" Horn was not the one to give JJ that "L

    by Bari Umenema

    Harry is easily impressed by any professional who will talk to him at all, let alone for two hours. But your voices were heard loud and clear. Any changes being made have been put in motion due to the clamor right here on these Talkback boards. Give yourselves a pat on the back. Now we get to see Harry and Moriarty try to re-ingratiate themselves with all concerned so they get invited to the set for further reports. It's a two way street indeed, access is traded for publicity and everybody benefits. Should be a fun two years until the movie flies or flops.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 12:56 p.m. CST

    harry, could you just once not shuffle everytime someone acknowl

    by yeah i'm a jerk!

    i say this guy is out to ruin superman, and will probably wipe his ass with the american flag when he's done. please, tell abrahms to fuck off! i'd rather see goyer or tollin and robins do a take on this movie.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 1 p.m. CST

    So there have been a whole lot of sucky Superman origins before?

    by No Law 4000

    I have this idea for a new film about Jesus: It starts out with the virgin Mary... Wait! Why not make her a crackwhore, fucking anything that moves? So when she gives birth to Jesus (a gitl by the way) she doesnt know who's the father! So she blames God! No... She blames J.J. Abraham! Boy, does this piss of Josef, the black, crackshooting, pimp... The vendetta ends when... ...Judas gets cruciefied and Jesus gets her man! Did I make any changes you say? Oh, no! I haven't changed WHO Jesus is... Yeah, right...

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 1:03 p.m. CST

    Transcript of the Harry/JJ Conversation

    by Wino-Forever

    JJ: Harry? This is JJ Abrams. Harry: I take it all back! <end>

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 1:04 p.m. CST

    The Mind Boggles??

    by ac_01

    Firstly, Mr Abrahms, this is not YOUR Superman to fuck around with. Anyone who&#39;s been on EARTH for any amount of time knows the story of how superman came to be, so any alterations will be blatantly obvious, especially the ones you are suggesting. It just feels that you have a blatant disregard for over 60 years of pure americana. Secondly, what is all this shit about THE PROPHECY. That isn&#39;t superman.... his destiny wasn&#39;t a foregone conclusion. He made his destiny. He&#39;s the one who decided to protect his adopted planet.Why don&#39;t you take a look at the reasons why Superman is still around today..... Its because of people like John Byrne, its because of Paul Dini, its because of Bruce Timm, its because of Jeph Loeb.... its because anyone that has decided to take up the mantle of telling a Superman story has kept the basics the same while still delivering an updated version. The fact that the only excuse you gave for this "bastardising" of Superman is "i wrote it quickly" just futher shows the fans that you are the wrong man for the job. Don&#39;t get me wrong, you are a terrific writer despite your Bruckheimer/Bay connections. Just stop listening to wb execs, namely Jon "Who the hell is Kal-El" Peters. You are better than this. Deliver what the fans want. Deliver what the fans deserve. You will probably disregard every statement in this talkback by simply dissmissing them as whinnings of juvenile fanboys.... but EVERYONE knows Superman. Therefore EVERYONE is a fanboy. Some people i know couldnt care less about superman, but after reading mori&#39;s review said: "That isn&#39;t Superman"...... So I urge you once again, Mr Abrahms...... deliver what the fans want. One a side note - Harry, your changes of views does seem a bit of a 180degree turn. Especially when for most of that chat it seemed as if you were defending his actions. What i want to know is: Why didn&#39;t you ask him the hard questions? Why did you just allow him to give some feeble excuse? Why didnt you explain to him what Krypton exploding means to the entire mythology? I don&#39;t criticise you for your change in opinion. I criticise you for not airing your views.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 1:17 p.m. CST

    Superman script...

    by nuprin

    This is all very disturbing stuff. I love superman (was never a comic book fan) but I am a fanatic of movies and a filmmaker myself. I just hope all of this heatedness fuels creativity instead of hindering it. I don

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 1:24 p.m. CST

    Damn this is the biggest Harry smackdown thread I&#39;ve ever se

    by IAmLegolas

    ... ever!

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 1:34 p.m. CST

    (the Supermobile? the Superjet? the Supergun?)

    by Bari Umenema

    ebonic_plague you are a very funny fellow! And a very smart guy. Excellent post you made about Krypton being much more valuable for merchandise sales if it&#39;s kept intact. Well spoken.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 1:36 p.m. CST


    by Sir Perior


  • Sept. 28, 2002, 1:43 p.m. CST

    JJ Abrams sounds like a really nicy guy...

    by JohnnyTremaine

    ...and I&#39;m sure he&#39;s a talented writer. I&#39;m sorry he got flamed on these boards and I really want him to hit this screenplay out of the park. However, as long as Jon Peters and Brett Ratner are still involved with SUPERMAN, it will give me the shivers. Confession: I&#39;ve been following the news lately, and I feel a little bit childish arguing about SUPERMAN when we&#39;re about to go to war with Iraq and the stock market seems to be tanking. Then again, maybe that&#39;s why we need a great SUPERMAN flick, to entertain us and temporarily take us away from more serious problems at hand, like a breath of fresh air.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 1:46 p.m. CST

    Abrams doing Spiderman sequel

    by Only1thatMatters

    Did you hear the news? Abrams is slotted to do the Spiderman sequel. Word is, he feels that the origin of Spidey wasn&#39;t told correctly. In his version, Peter Parker is bit by a radioactive turtle, and can walk reeeaaalll slow! But he wrote that draft quickly. In the re-write, he&#39;s bit by a squirrel, and can store an immense amount of nuts in his mouth. Give us a break!

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 1:46 p.m. CST

    typo: "nice" not "nicy". Sorry.

    by JohnnyTremaine

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 1:49 p.m. CST

    Looks Like Harry Finally Got That Handjob

    by Son Of Batboy

    First draft, second draft, 10th draft, doesn&#39;t matter. As long as this guy&#39;s writing, this thing will blow harder than his idea of Jimmy Olsen. I mean, do you really expect anything good from the creator of FELICITY? The dude writes soap operas. This politically correct fucker will trash these characters. You can expect a total fucking WUSS of a Superman like that Smallville pansy and you&#39;ll have the incredibly cliched martial arts chick with brass balls for Lois Lane. Christ, I&#39;ll bet she ends up being more of a man than Supes. These people are so caught up in conforming to some "empowerment" agenda that they&#39;ll twist and turn these characters until they&#39;re crapped out into some jerkoff college professor&#39;s wetdream textbook. Warner Brothers, WAKE UP!!! It doesn&#39;t have to be a copy of the comic book, just stay true to the characters. We don&#39;t need some hip "reimagining" of SUPERMAN.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 1:52 p.m. CST

    A perspective on screenwriting

    by Lobanhaki

    Perhaps we&#39;ll see a better screenplay yet. But the important thing here is that he understands that any originality he puts into play must function within the accepted canon of the Superman myth. Everything else is negotiable. It all depends, then, on how much unexpected wealth of feeling he can work in.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 1:58 p.m. CST

    "By all means, sign your petitions and voice your opinions. It i

    by ILoveEwksAndJJar

    I get the feeling Harry is alienating us from himself.He has said before that he is one of us. Apparently not anymore. Are we all on our own now, with different opinions, will he become just a mediator? I don&#39;t know, I&#39;m getting a strange vibe from this article. Why must Harry always kiss up to those with power who give him acknowledgement?

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 2:04 p.m. CST

    Um...ManOwaR...we need to talk.

    by CowboyWayne

    Your comment on the accuaracy of the Dini & Timm handle of Superman was a In comics, Superman never, NEVER needed to breathe. He can go under water, into outer space, through solid earth and never have to worry about running out of oxygen. It is one of the many benefits of Earth&#39;s yellow sun. Yee-haw.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 2:04 p.m. CST

    Why do they even have to re-tell the origin at all??

    by Kauzi Sezso

    Aren&#39;t 99.9% of people familiar with the basic facts of the origin of the classic superheroes? It&#39;s not like people are going to walk into a movie titled "Superman", look at the red-and-blue tights and ask the person next to them, "Who the hell is that guy? Why does he look so much like the Clark character from earlier in the movie?"!!! Re-telling the origin and focusing on casting is just another way to get out of dseveloping a decent story. It&#39;s what killed the Batman flicks, and it&#39;s what will kill the Spider-Man movies if they&#39;re not careful. Stories -- that&#39;s what you need. If you don&#39;t have a good story to tell, you have NO BUSINESS making another Superman movie! And if you *do* have a good story to tell, then you know damn well you don&#39;t have to bore us with another stupid "re-introduction" of the characters. It&#39;s Superman, for cry eye! Trust us -- we&#39;ll figure out who&#39;s who as the film rolls. If we can&#39;t, then the filmakers haven&#39;t done their jobs!

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 2:05 p.m. CST


    by Only1thatMatters

    Why can&#39;t originality be along the lines of Nicholas Cage&#39;s perspective (paraphrase: "I wanna play Superman a little darker... he&#39;s haunted by an obsession to save people and inability to save everyone.") Why does it always have to be something like "I think his suit should fly?" The answer: Simpleton hack screenwriters who just don&#39;t get it. By the way, Mr. Abrams... when&#39;s the Superman / Felicity crossover gonna occur? The sequel?

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 2:05 p.m. CST

    if Jon Peters is still attached.........

    by wadew

    .......the movie&#39;s going to blow. I don&#39;t care about Abrams&#39; excuses or Harry&#39;s "awakening". Peters just doesn&#39;t "get" Superman .

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 2:07 p.m. CST

    Harry Knowles: PRANK MONKEY to the stars.

    by General Sarcasm

    Harry Knowles, you have no integrity, you have no spine. I despise you, and all people like you. I find it amazing that you created and have maintainted this web site and yet you are the most talent-less piece of shit here. Every other writer you have is better than you, period. Not to mention the fact they have 100 times the integrity you do. I&#39;d say anything and do anything for a couple million, but I sure as hell wouldn&#39;t promote a piece of shit film/script I&#39;ve already publicly bashed just because the fucking writer calls me personally. Face it Harry, you ARE JJ Abrams PRANK MONKEY!!!!!!!

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 2:13 p.m. CST

    IF this ever gets made....

    by Shaz_bot80

    ...And I&#39;m sure it WON&#39;T. There have been so many false starts at WB that I&#39;m officially giving up. I would love to see a new Superman movie, but does it have to be an origin story? In as many years as Superman has been around, we have had Superman&#39;s origin coming out of our ears. Why not have a nice trillogy that re-introduces the previous Superman movies? With ILM and such, there is no end to what can be done. Mongul, Brainiac, Darksied, Metallo, Bizarro- hell, I&#39;ll even watch one with Conduit as the main villian. (From the Death of Clark Kent. False advertising and a really poor story.) The big changes are not an issue to me. I know that somewhere someone was going to say, "NO we do it this way, the right way!" But I seriously doubt that anything will ever be done about this movie. WB, just let it go for a while, OK?

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 2:16 p.m. CST

    The most close-minded reaction to revisionist storytelling since

    by Frank Einstein

    All the narrow-minded geeks crying "Blasphemy! Everyone knows Krypton exploded! J.J. Abrams should die!" sound just like the conservative Catholics who condemned "Last Temptation of Christ" before even seeing it for daring to (gasp!) tell a different version of the story than we&#39;ve already seen a thousand times before. So is this the "real" Superman origin? Guess what? NONE of them are real, NONE of it ever happened, Krypton NEVER exploded, because it&#39;s fucking fiction, people. As the great comics writer Alan Moore wrote as a preface to "Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow?", possibly the greatest Superman story ever written: "This is an IMAGINARY STORY... Aren&#39;t they all?"

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 2:21 p.m. CST

    The last temptation of Christ...

    by General Sarcasm

    IS NOT AN IMAGINARY STORY... at least not to catholics, so you&#39;re whole analogy is down the toilet, pal. What if somebody wanted to "re-imagine" the hollocaust???? Would you be defending them too?

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 2:27 p.m. CST


    by Sir Perior

    Superboy&#39;s i got it.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 2:28 p.m. CST

    Hey, Frank Einstein, you just stepped in it.

    by JohnnyTremaine

    You&#39;re honestly comparing a world-wide religion and the contents of the New Testament to a comic book superhero? &#39;Conservative Catholics&#39; not taking to a whacked out version of the Christ story? I think you need some ketchup with that foot that&#39;s in your mouth.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 2:29 p.m. CST

    Honestly, there&#39;s a big difference

    by JonQuixote

    Between changing things like "Clark was a tv anchor," or Luthor was once a scientist, but is now a businessman, or giving Jor-El a white suit...and not blowing up the planet Krypton. There seems to be this annoying perception that everybody here is a vicious fanboy who launches into a rabid frenzy at the slightest shift of minutia. It&#39;s not a question of minutia or insignificant details, but changes to the core character. All the different incarnations of Superman don&#39;t fuck with the core of who he is. All the different incarnations of Luthor don&#39;t fuck with the core dynamic between him and his arch-enemy. By even considering these changes, it&#39;s obvious that Abrams has no understanding or appreciation for the core character, and cannot distinguish between minutia and fundamentals. If WB is stupid enough to persist in letting Abrams write this movie, they better get someone with vision and appreciation to reign him in.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 2:38 p.m. CST

    I agree with Moriarty 9 out of 10 times

    by ComandrTaco

    And you can&#39;t polish a turd.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 2:40 p.m. CST

    I read the script...

    by Rarecreater

    ..and have been defending some of it all week to friends who have been asking me about it. All agreed, Lex flying is dumb as hell, along with pretty much the second half of the script, particularllly in that it suffers from the too many bad guys complex that the later Batman movies do. But there was something I loved in that draft that no one talks about (but that is because so few people have read it). One: the origin material with the Kents (at one moment three year old Clark flies through the ceiling and Jonathan dryly says, "well that&#39;s new"and well a GREAT scene between the Kents where they discuss little Clark&#39;s new hearing and seeing ablities). In fact, the one thing I have been defending in this script is the concept that our hero is CLARK KENT acting as Superman, and not the other way around. Clark has been so afraid of using his powers that he literally has shut them off his entire life. Once he tries to use to (to save Lois of course), he&#39;s uncertain of what he can do, and it adds a wonderful vulnerablity to a character for all extensive purposes, is invulnerable. It was the first time I have truly related to character. I have been telling people that I wish they would just copy and paste those fourty pages dealing with the Kents and his early time at the Daily Bugle to any other draft they do, because reading them, I was truly engaged. As for Krypton not blowing up, I am always of the attitude that story wise you can do a lot more with it not blown up than blown up, because in a film you have a little time to explain things and Phantom Zones take quite a bit of precious screen time to explain well. Hell, you can always blow her up later. The issue for me is that in changing the mythology nothing uniquely interesting happened with it and that&#39;s what I demand from such radical changes. Because the Lex Luthor I read in the script could have been any bad guy, the only difference is that he happened to be named "Lex Luthor." I hope that they just give the movie one bad guy and stay with it, to center it more dramatically. And the security clearance that is given to Lois is hysterical (she talks with Generals and they heed her word like a little boy in a Gamera Movie). But in the end, I know how scripts can change from draft to draft,so I say lets give JJ a chance. In fact, it is the other people I&#39;m worried about (Peters, Ratner, the WB squad). If you are reading this Mr. Abrahms, here&#39;s one person who liked some of your script and will have faith in you developing the next drafts. Just remember, you are much more talented than then man directing this movie.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 2:41 p.m. CST

    I Don&#39;t Get Why Someone Would Want To Change The History In

    by ILoveEwksAndJJar

    I mean, if they love a character, shouldnt it be because they love the character that already exists and has been developed, as well as their history. My favorite dude is Batman, and I wouldn&#39;t change a thing about him. If Abrams really loved Superman, he wouldn&#39;t have any reason to change him more to his liking. MAKE UP YOUR OWN STUPID CHARACTER INSTEAD OF FIXING ONE YOU "LOVE". It all comes down to making the dinero. I mean he either loves the character and decides to make cvhanges to reek in that extra money; or he decides to make his own fantisy character based on other&#39;s crweation which ISN"T SUPERMAN!!!!!!!!!!!!! thank you. seek wisdom.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 2:44 p.m. CST

    Harry does a U-turn on the Superman Hershey highway

    by Ernie_is_evil

    Congrats Harry on becoming the catcher not the pitcher. I hope Warner Bros pay you well for becoming their new mouthpeice.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 2:49 p.m. CST

    Changed My Screename (Used To Be earendilmariner2)

    by ILoveEwksAndJJar

    Because I&#39;m fucking tired of people capping on Jar Jar. seek wisdom.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 2:52 p.m. CST

    You Guys Are Hysterical (Spider-Man)

    by YND

    I gotta say, you guys are hysterical. There are so many comments made along the lines of "didn&#39;t WB pay attention to Spider-Man? Don&#39;t they see how good it can be if you RESPECT THE CHARACTER?" To everyone whose memory can&#39;t stretch back so far, I&#39;ve got two words: Organic Webshooters. Remember how those two words had nearly the EXACT SAME EFFECT on Spidey fans as the words "Kryptonian Luthor"? And in the end, it didn&#39;t indicate a disrespect of the character, it was just a new piece of a new story. Give the guy a chance or risk being on this board three years from now saying, "They&#39;re gonna KILL the Fantastic Four! They don&#39;t respect the characters at all! Why doesn&#39;t anybody pay attention to the success of Superman?" (Oh, I forgot, Brett Ratner&#39;s onboard to direct. I guess that severely minimizes the chance for success. Seriously, who the hell decided this guy was the savior of today&#39;s Hollywood? Red Dragon? Now this? Man, I can&#39;t stand this guy... Watch his cocky, irritating extras on the Rush Hour dvd and see if they don&#39;t make you think this guy&#39;s just a no-talent little whore who thinks he&#39;s Spielberg.)

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 2:54 p.m. CST

    Harry Sells Out....Yet Again

    by Mozer

    Well Harry, thanks for selling us out again. You are so easily;s a joke. Can we please get someone with balls to run this site???

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 2:55 p.m. CST

    give us Superman

    by ac_01

    Rarecreater, I want to believe you. I want JJ Abrahms to hit the nail on the head. There were bits of the script review I liked: Clark standing on the mountain top and listening to all the cries for help. I read mori&#39;s review and thought, WOW! But the fact still remains you cannot change the mythos. If this film is goin to succeed, (and i pray it does), everything needs to be PERFECT. I can&#39;t be there or there abouts. There needs to be no doubts in the mind of everyone that the person on screen is the Superman we all know and love. A word of advice to you Mr Abrahms (like you haven&#39;t had enough people giving you advice lately)... try reading your Superman script to your son or to any Superman fan. I guarantee the first words out of their mouths would be "That&#39;s not Superman!"... By changing the mythos you change the central core dynamics of the characters. Ok, so Lex Luthor is not a kryptonian anymore, but a CIA agent???? The whole point of Lex Luthor is that is that he is a misguided/evil Corporate head..... a bit like your employers (AOL/TIME WARNER)... he buys people like he buys shares on the stock market..... everyone except Superman.... who stands for everything Luthor isn&#39;t. Now I just can&#39;t picture a CIA agent having that same compelling character design.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 2:58 p.m. CST

    First Off, I Wasn&#39;t One Of The Geeks Bitching About The Orga

    by ILoveEwksAndJJar

    But that is incomparable to the whole Luthor/Kryptonian thing. This is a character change, not a super power change. And this is a BIG character. Really big. If you change his character to a surviving Kryptonian, you not only alter a good portion of the Superman story itself, but also Batman, and Green Arrow, and whatever other superheroe to have dealings with him.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 3:07 p.m. CST

    Fuck Luthor

    by ILoveEwksAndJJar

    let him be just a background character who causes mischief. If you WB guys REALLY want a blockbuster film that will please fans as well. BRING OUT DARKSEID.More action, violence, explosions,uh...more action, and... you could change Darkseid as much as you wnat and fans wouldn&#39;t really care. I mean, Darkseid is just evil and powerful, how can you fuck that up? seek wisdom.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 3:09 p.m. CST


    by Rarecreater

    I don&#39;t mean to say the script ist GREAT, only some parts are . But it is not the seventh sign as Moriarty said. For a man whom I truly respect, that was a very unfocused, clouded by anger review. And because of it, people thing the script is utter shit, which it is not. My main point is don&#39;t attack Abrahms, he&#39;s one of the more talented writers out there and the mythology he&#39;s been creating in ALIAS is one of my favorites for a TV series in a few years. If he&#39;s gonna try some stuff out, fine, let him play with it. I mean writing and rewriting doesn&#39;t cost too much. I think what makes it difficult is that the WB talked big about the latest draft as if it was the greatest thing since the swatch watch, and that sets the script up for a major downfall. I mean, a lot of executives haven&#39;t even seen SUPERMAN THE MOVIE, I&#39;m not shitting you. Honestly, the moment Ratner is involved, any hope I had for the project left.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 3:09 p.m. CST

    Huh, Talkbacks Haven&#39;t Even Reached Half Page Yet

    by ILoveEwksAndJJar

    seek wisdom

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 3:13 p.m. CST

    Re: Smallville

    by Huntress Hoshi

    I don&#39;t think that the show will suffer if the current issue or storyline more importantly aren&#39;t taking into account. I think that the film will, Smallvile&#39;s second season opener got like 8.4 million viewers whopping Buffy&#39;s season 7 to the dirt. I was also gonna mention about Harry&#39;s swearing but then I came to see that it&#39;s standard allowness for this site to swear when kids and the like come here to visit too.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 3:19 p.m. CST

    Yeah, That&#39;d Be Pretty Cool

    by ILoveEwksAndJJar

    And any kid that would come here and not get bored reading these articles must already swear regurlarly anyway.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 3:26 p.m. CST

    Do a Star Trek w/Smallville

    by TriMister

    I think WB should be patient and wait for the Smallville show to run its course for the next 2 - 3 years and do a Star Trek and build your film franchise around a solid, well-proven product. I was lukewarm to dismissive of the series at first, but after catching a few shows, I like it so far. A nice slow smolder to a great big fire on the big screen.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 3:31 p.m. CST

    Harry, I know thats its always important to remain both optimist

    by Modern_Achilles

    I doesn&#39;t matter that JJ has promessed to improve the screenplay, its a piece of shit, and no matter how hard you try, you simply cannot make a diamond out of a turd! Someone who was REALLY talented and who ACTUALLY cared for the source material would never have conjured up such an atrocity. Fuck you, Harry, you pathetic, gullible bitch!

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 3:31 p.m. CST

    Harry, I know thats its always important to remain both optimist

    by Modern_Achilles

    I doesn&#39;t matter that JJ has promessed to improve the screenplay, its a piece of shit, and no matter how hard you try, you simply cannot make a diamond out of a turd! Someone who was REALLY talented and who ACTUALLY cared for the source material would never have conjured up such an atrocity. Fuck you, Harry, you pathetic, gullible bitch!

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 3:32 p.m. CST


    by ForbesCrazyGlare

    Fuck Warner Brothers and this Abrams dick.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 3:50 p.m. CST

    I only have one question...

    by Falcon-1

    If Abrams is such a Superman geek and is knowledgable in all-things Superman and has no intent on doing something that would cause the fans to have any outrage, then why did he make those changes in the first place? I&#39;m sorry but I don&#39;t buy it. The man obviously wanted to make those changes otherwise he wouldn&#39;t have put them in his story. Did he think: "Oh, I know, I can make all these changes just to fill up pages in an otherwise weak script and then fix them later in the rewrite!" I don&#39;t think so. I&#39;m not convinced by this "interview" at all. I think Warners execs who have greenlighted this project have actually gotten what they were wanting all along: The Death of Superman! Because, trust me, this story, more than the whole freaking Doomsday script and a hundred rewrites by Kevin Smith will accomplish this. Superman has been a cash cow for Warners for a long time now. The character is an American Icon, for Christ&#39;s sake! Sure, there&#39;s been lots of minor revisions over the last sixty-plus years; but they never had the lasting impact that the changes Abrams is suggesting. At least when Puzo wrote his script, he consulted with some of DC&#39;s Superman writers first and got their take on the character. I&#39;m thinking Abrams consulted one person: Abrams himself.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 3:51 p.m. CST

    Harry nailed it when he said....

    by direktor

    "SUPERMAN is obviously important and we all want to see a good movie." I&#39;m sorry, but there&#39;s just no defending that turd of a 1st draft, JJ. sorry dude. I&#39;m sure he just panicked and the thought of being assaulted at the book signing sent a knee jerk reaction and he called Harry to feed him what HE and WE wanted to hear. Maybe I&#39;m wrong. I hope I am. We&#39;ll see...

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 3:56 p.m. CST

    I just hope...

    by joshuaonenine

    Krypton explodes!!!!

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 4:02 p.m. CST

    Yeah, Pretty Funny

    by ILoveEwksAndJJar

    But instead of "movies he&#39;s been wrong about", how about # of times he&#39;s kissed up to people. seek wisdom.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 4:04 p.m. CST

    My post was moved to the top!

    by ILoveEwksAndJJar

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 4:04 p.m. CST

    Fuck It

    by ILoveEwksAndJJar

    THIRD!!!!!!!!!!!! seek wisdom

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 4:09 p.m. CST

    Is NO ONE asking the question "WHY"??? Let me get this straight

    by Neil MacAuley

    Why why why why? This gets at my biggest problem with Harry&#39;s (and to a lesser extent, Moriarty&#39;s) approach on so many projects: they foresake logic, necesity, and quality story for the COOL FACTOR. The IDEA of another set of people making a new version of Superman sounds COOL to them, so they back it. But a) Donner already made a great film, and most of you here seem to worship it, and B) that&#39;s $150 MILLION BUCKS in studio money that could be poured into building a NEW trilogy of comic book/fantasy/s.f. films either based on a classic character NOT portrayed on film yet, or a new property. You know, a, um, NEW AND UNIQUE PROPERTY? Remember those? I just don&#39;t get it, the "cool factor" thing. I never will. And I&#39;m not saying I don&#39;t like JJ Abrams or don&#39;t think he&#39;s talented. In fact, it&#39;s downright scary how much I loved his show "Felicity," I&#39;m serious. It got me through the post 9/11 Winter, I mean it; the final six episodes were some of the most daring (and COOL, if you really want to talk cool, considering the time travel to an alternate world storyline in a straight drama that had never used any kind of fantastic element like that) TV I&#39;ve seen. So thanks JJ, for Felicity and Alias, you rock. And for your film work so far. And I would take this job if I were you, also, I&#39;m not blaming you. But the fact remains: this film does NOT need to be made. And although I hated the concept of a Batman vs. Superman film, it makes more sense than a new Superman origin film, in that it&#39;s a fresh concept. We haven&#39;t seen it before, and it&#39;s a chance to make Batman right again. But there&#39;s no need to "fix" Superman, all the films were essentially quality genre pics, and the first is a classic. Oh, and p.s. Harry&#39;s belief in the cataclysmic efect of "Batman and Robin" is ridiculous, how it almost *destroyed* the comic book industry? Gimme a break. It was a bad movie. I hated it, walked out and didn&#39;t remember it again. I&#39;ve still got two great Batman films to watch on DVD (the Burton films), that&#39;s all that matters. Ok, I&#39;ve said enough. Oh, Hey JJ -- when will they release Felicity on DVD? Please get the ball rolling with Imagine TV or the WB, I missed the first season and the fans would love it, you should have seen the talkbacks on the WB site when the show ended. They were demanding it. Coolness.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 4:15 p.m. CST

    The smell of betrayal

    by Sheamus

    It&#39;s one thing to change your mind, but to do so on the back of a week of pant-wetting where you urged or supported Talkbackers to sign petitions, attend Abrams book-signing and "give him a piece of your mind!", boycott RED DRAGON, etc etc, just reeks of absolute cowardice and a total inability to do the right thing. I hope Mori feels betrayed. It&#39;s outrageous. You can&#39;t have two Web Sites running on the same URL Harry - one that is "kicking Hollywood&#39;s butt!" (book quote) and one that is severely kissing it everytime it acknowledges your existence.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 4:15 p.m. CST

    This bears repeating:

    by Noriko Takaya

    The JJ Abrams at Barnes and Noble thing? People--if you meet the man, and I cannot stress this enough, BE ON YOUR MANNERS. I&#39;m serious here! If you actually manage to get this man&#39;s ear, even for a minute, chances are you have a once in a lifetime shot at having a real effect on things. Be nice, polite, well-reasoned in your arguments. Trust me, this is a lot more persuasive then screeching and &#39;cussing and getting dragged away by security. It be a clich

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 4:18 p.m. CST

    Do It For The Kiddies

    by ILoveEwksAndJJar

    Think about the kiddies. They don&#39;t wanna watch no Donner version, they&#39;d just as well rather watch Spiderman again than a film made before they were born. The new generation needs a new Superman. And by new Superman I mean old Superman in a new age. I mean all they&#39;ve got right now is Justice League, on cable, bout twice a week, gone is the Superman animated wisdom.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 4:20 p.m. CST

    Krypton&#39;s destruction is not a small detail!

    by Darth Siskel III

    Superman is constantly saving the world because he can never save Krypton.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 4:21 p.m. CST

    Now My Posts Are On The Bottom Again?

    by ILoveEwksAndJJar

    This is too complicated.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 4:23 p.m. CST

    Retelling the orgin is not necessary.

    by Darth Siskel III

    It was done perfectly in Superman the Movie. Redoing it is a waste of screentime.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 4:25 p.m. CST

    Krypton not gone is like Bats parents alive.

    by Oknight

    You could do a film called Batman with Thomas Wayne sitting around advising Bruce on how to do stuff, but its not Batman-- its not a re-imagining of the character, its a different character. If you do a Superman movie where he&#39;s hanging with Jor-el and Krypton doesn&#39;t blow up til the Death Star shoots it, it aint Superman-- he&#39;s an adopted orphan, a WORLD orphan, its one of the biggest reasons he cares about our world. If your story is how Superman (who is already Superman) loses his home world of Krypton, you are not writing Superman-- its not a cape, its not an emblem, its a character. And sure I know Siegel had him not know his origin for the first few years, but back then he also held a safe over a banker&#39;s head because he wouldn&#39;t approve a loan and said (direct quote) "nice bank you&#39;ve got here, it would be a pity if something happened to it". You can&#39;t do THAT anymore either.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 4:29 p.m. CST

    More interesting stuff can happen in Metropolis

    by KONG33

    than on Krypton. I&#39;d be all for skipping the origin if he wants to and just telling his adventures in Metropolis. With the actual characters we already know and love. The killing fantasies are a joke, I&#39;m sure he&#39;s heard a friend say something like that. We&#39;re trying to one-up each other here.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 4:30 p.m. CST

    Krypton Blows Up. Period.

    by CommanderJesus

    While I&#39;m glad certain crimes against the man in blue are being dropped from the script like Luthor being a Kryptonian (oh Jesus), they were still written by JJ Abrams at one point and were only removed because of notes other people gave him! That scares me. I don&#39;t care how sincere he sounds, that kind of deviation is ridiculous and does not bode well. In addition to that, Harry, I would say that Krypton blowing up is official doctrine way more than what the exterior of the Daily Planet looks like or whether Clark was ever in an orphange or not. Those are comparitively inconsiquential details, whereas Krypton blowing up dramatically affects the psychology of the character as well as the tone of his entire world. So don&#39;t brush it off. That planet has to GO! One other point I&#39;d like to bring up is something that I&#39;ve read online recently which is that apparently if a director or screenwriter or even an actor contributes a major change to an existing character (for example, the Jack Napier/Joker character from the Tim Burton Batman film) then every time THAT incarnation of the character is used in anything, they get paid risiduals. Knowing this, it makes a screenwriter&#39;s willingness to play around with the life of a beloved character like Superman seem a bit more sinister. Do I trust JJ Abrams? Not if he wrote the script that Moriarty discribed--where Jor-El talks Kal out of being dead. Where Krypton is still around and there are lame-o prophecies and a person can&#39;t swing a dead cat without hitting another superman. "I wrote it in 4 weeks" is no excuse. This isn&#39;t high school. I would like to be at that Barnes and Noble signing and tell Abrams that there are ways of breathing new life into an great character without changing his world so friggin&#39; whimsically.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 4:32 p.m. CST

    You&#39;re all pieces of shit!!!

    by Azlam Orlandu

    I think this is the first time I&#39;ve posted since EP2 was released. I used to come to this site because we all shared a passion for films, comics and all related media. But lately it&#39;s just become a "This is going to suck." fest. The movie isn&#39;t even made yet, it hasn&#39;t even started and everyone wants to talk shit. Get a life, go out and make your own "better than that other guy" Superman film, or shut your mouth, nobody cares that your bitter because you waste your lives racing to see who can be "First" in the forums. Ban me if you like I don&#39;t care. A few months ago I banned myself from these forums, I wish I&#39;d kept my promise. I hope you all die in a flaming bus experiment. Last time I wished someone would die it was Tupac, and we all know what happened to him.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 4:40 p.m. CST

    Yo, Alam!

    by ILoveEwksAndJJar

    Fuck Off! If you aint got nothing to contribute, shut up! If you hate us so much, why the fuck do you even bother to read the TB&#39;s? You&#39;re even more pathetic than the people you condemn.Have a nice life. seek wisdom.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 4:48 p.m. CST

    Lets think and calm down.

    by CSH

    Ok everyone...lets breath...ahh..feel better yet? If not let me first say I was like everyone else. Things like , WHAT THE FUCK? WHY IS SUPERMAN DOING MARTIAL ARTS? WHAT DO THEY THINK THIS IS? DRAGON BALL Z? or stuff like ,KRYPTON DIDN&#39;T EXPLODE!? OK, LETS HAVE BATMAN&#39;S ORIGIN BE SOMETHING LIKE HIS PARENTS WHERE SLIGHTLY BEATEN UP INSTEAD OF GETTING KILLED OFF...BUT HE STILL BECOMES BATMAN!...and of course, LUTHOR IS NOT A FUCKING ALIEN!!!!!!....but I digrees. These things do suck, they suck hard, but lets not forget some others items as well. For starts, while Moriarty did HATE with a passion most of the Superman script, lets remember, he loved quite a bit of it too. I mean, he didn&#39;t just thought the stuff he like was just ok, or it was good but...Moriarty LOVED IT. His words where around the lines of, " When he gets Superman;s so perfect it&#39;ll make you woozy." How about the fact that he thinks that J.J. wrote some great actions scenes which I admitt...sound sweet as hell. ( Superman&#39;s fight with TY-ZOR , minus the kung-fu, sounded great, or the big, big, BIG finale with Superman and a ton of fighter jets taking on an army or kryptonians just seemed epic cool!)But I think the most important part about Moriartys review is that he strongly believes that J.J. Abrams has a good Superman script in him. Now, lets hope the following things, A)Brett Ratner is not a total hack and makes the script worse B) that some of those really bad ideas belonged to McG when he was involved C)Brett Ratner is not a total hack and dosen&#39;t make the script worse and D) that Jon Peters is fired...and I mean F-I-R-E-D, this man should never touch this project and that he leaves immediatly, like now.Whatever the case lets remember, they don&#39;t want the film to be bad, and any idea that sounds bad now...we might forgive and forget later ( i.e. spider-mans organic web-shooter, Rouge being a teenager, etc.) So lets calm down and hope. Hope that they get it right, hope that they listen to us, and hope to god that the producers know that Superman isn&#39;t Neo and he dosen&#39;t " know kung-fu". I wish J.J. Abrams luck, and hope we get a great Superman.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 4:50 p.m. CST


    by YourOlympicHero

    Revisionism sucks sometimes, don&#39;t it? Oh, it&#39;s;s damn true.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 4:51 p.m. CST

    Manners? We don&#39;t need no stinkin&#39; manners.

    by Qwerty Uiop

    Bags of poop + J.J.&#39;s book signing = a message that won&#39;t soon be forgotten.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 4:52 p.m. CST

    Paradigms & Petitions

    by SPY-der

    Hi all. I find it interesting that Harry has gone from being an nosey outsider with a loud voice to being practically involved in the development process. Think about it: just a couple days ago we found out about a secret draft of a major motion picture and the screenwriter actually called some big-red-headed-fan-boy in Austin to talk about it. I feel like someone needs to take a step back from the bru-ha-ha and point out what a bizarre change in paradigm this represents. God Bless the Internet. Now, onto other matters. Harry, any chance you&#39;ll bring that link to the petition back up? I know you might think it&#39;s out of date now that you and "JJ" have chatted, but I&#39;m real curious to see what the total petition count gets up to. I&#39;d also like to think that JJ and the WB PTB might keep an eye on it just to see how badly they pissed people off. For posterity, you may want to bring back the original items Moriarty posted, too. Not everyone checks in to AICN on a regular basis and it might help to keep everything in perspective. I don&#39;t care if Moriarity did fixate on a few key pieces, they were pretty big freakin&#39; pieces to screw up. I don&#39;t think we need to stay directly on track with the comics, because adapting something with over 60 years of history doesn&#39;t really lend itself to a direct translation, but we need to at least stick with the basics. Krypton explodes. Kal is the ultimate outsider because he can NEVER go home again. Little things, like that, are really important. I don&#39;t know if JJ is actually reading this, but it&#39;d be nice to see an "update" of the legend rather than a complete re-write. -- SPYder, out.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 4:55 p.m. CST

    Yeah, Pretty Amazing

    by ILoveEwksAndJJar

    Too bad Harry is a kiss-up. seek wisdom

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 4:55 p.m. CST

    Now, Harry, That You&#39;ve Wiped JJ&#39;s Saliva Out of Your Be

    by hipcheck13

    You&#39;re pathetic, Knowles. I noticed you removed YOUR rant about the shitty script, about the "comic hanging on the wall," the entire angry diatribe - yet managed to KEEP Mori&#39;s up. What a fucking shame Mori&#39;s the poster boy for JJ&#39;s angst, while you, the "rebel," the "outsider," suck face with another Hollywood type in order to keep YOUR rep intact. Man, I thought the face-suckers from "Alien" were repulsive - you&#39;ve sucked far more face this time than they EVER did. I&#39;m disappointed in you, Harry.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 4:57 p.m. CST

    I wouldn&#39;t even mind a film about Luthor as Superman

    by Oknight

    Because it would SO OBVIOUSLY not be a "re-imagining" of Superman, no one would try to extend this obviously different character to exclude "SUPERMAN"tm (in fact I think I remember a neat story where Luthor was Superman and Kent a villian)-- I don&#39;t even begrudge Abrams his story (although it has WAY too much of a Hilander 2 feeling for me to be interested)-- I just don&#39;t want his stamp laying shit all over the future adaptations/implementations/stories of Superman. I don&#39;t want Warner to decree "this is our new Superman" and cancel Justice League and Smallville and never make another movie about Superman where he&#39;s the orphan of Krypton.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 4:57 p.m. CST

    Take these films with the seriousness they deserve

    by sauron13

    I&#39;ve wrote in pointing our my own reservations on this project. However, after reading the conversation between Harry and JJ and learnt the fact that the script is still work in progress and was rushed at that I&#39;m willing to give it the benefit of the doubt. I&#39;m not a great fan of Superman, never have been. However, I&#39;ve grown up with the comics and films, to such a degree that to change the story as drastically as was outlined in the review would be dead wrong. I&#39;m not against reinventing story arcs, as Harry noted comics do it all the time, what I don&#39;t agree with is altering a character. This is especially the case will Luther, but as JJ said this will not be in the final version I&#39;m satisfied with that. There were things in the script that sounded very good, the opening with Superman being battered would be fantastic as were the scenes of him growing up and his first appearance as superman. All we want from these films, whether its superman, batman or any other character in this medium, is that its taken seriously. That&#39;s why the Blade films and Spiderman and the Xmen films were so good. Don&#39;t ham it up, keep it real and grounded and we&#39;ll all eat it up.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 4:57 p.m. CST

    Saying BATMAN AND ROBIN ruined comics is Post Hoc reasoning at i

    by Voice O. Reason

    The two instances are just symptoms of the same disease, rather than one causing the other. The comic book industry began imploding on its own several years before BATMAN & ROBIN was released. It was caused by editors making the decision to replace gimmicks with plots. Multiple variants and foil covers replaced solid writing. Cross-overs replaced long term plotting. In the last couple of years, the writing on many comics has gotten better thanks to returning the emphasis of the books to storytelling, rather than marketing. The comic industry has finally realized that their major market is adults, and have (for the most part) began targetting their product accordingly. Plus, Marvel fired editor-in-chief Bob Harris, who was a total idiot.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 5:01 p.m. CST

    Krypton&#39;s War changes the purpose of Superman from a hero to

    by -=Shin=-

    Krypton is such a small foot-note to the idea of Superman. It&#39;s simply a mechanism to explain his powers, and also heightens the sense that Clark really is an Orphan and empowers the idea that humanity is universal - anyone can be human, though he may not be a human-being. That&#39;s the end of Krypton influence on Superman beyond dangerous green rocks. They&#39;re mechanisms. Abrams has some wonderful ideas. They&#39;d make a great Sci-Fi film trilogy. However, Superman is THE icon of Super-Heroes. He&#39;s not Luke or Anakin Skywalker. Superman deserves a Super-Hero film. His name is slang in our culture. Everyone knows Superman. The Krypton Civil War disconnects him from Earth. He&#39;s not given a chance to be THE icon hero. Superman, apple-pie and Mickey Mouse are American Icons ;) Everyone knows them. Smallville has this image of a Norman Rockwell painting to carry that notion further. Superman is about his bonds to his family and their values. He fights because of the values they have given him. He protects the Earth to protect them. IF you ask someone on the street "what does Superman do?" You&#39;ll get an answer that he stops the bank-robbers and fights the bad guys like Luthor. Oh, and he is allergic to green rocks. No one is going to mention he&#39;s the chosen one of Krypton who fights to liberate Krypton from the clutches of Darth Krypto-Scientist. That&#39;s not Superman, that&#39;s a space movie. Superman is human. He&#39;s from Earth. If you&#39;re born in France and then move to the states quickly after, you feel like your from the States. You tell everyone your from the States. He&#39;s not a sci-fi character. It&#39;s a differen genre. My two cents.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 5:15 p.m. CST

    My Feelings

    by ILoveEwksAndJJar

    OK, there are movies that don&#39;t have to stick to the storyline, and have room to be changed, concepts, characters, history. Kinda like X-Men. I mean, that is way far from the regular continuity. But it works. It rules. Mostly due to the element of mutant prejuism. But there are some stories you just don&#39;t mess with. Superman, Batman, Sandman, maybe few more. Reason is that these have become myth (well not Sandman, but he&#39;s just too cool to be messed with), legend, you can&#39;t fuck with established history of characters of this magnitude. nuff said.-- seek wisdom

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 5:18 p.m. CST

    I could conceive why they wouldn&#39;t blow up Krypton, BUT...

    by phasmatrope

    Goddamn, does this script suck. Krypton not blowing up is one of the first of many offenses, it&#39;s one of the fundamental elements of the entire Superman legend. Granted, I&#39;m not the most hardcore fan of Superman, but anyone who knows anything about the guy could tell you that. Although I could conceivably understand WHY they would hesitate on that for sake of future story possibilities--introducing more characters from Krypton later on, etc, showing Kal-El in non-Super mode, the possibility of a big sappy-ass teary reintroduction with his parents (or some shit), etc--there&#39;s other ways to do that. Like, have other escape pods: Jor-El gets separated from his son. Other Kryptonians away from Krypton on space voyages/space stations/lunar mining operations/what-the-fuck-ever survive. Or the same kind of shit they pulled with General Zod in "II." But you gotta have Superman&#39;s planet blow up, I mean c&#39;mon. That&#39;s like not killing off Uncle Ben in "Spiderman" or something...

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 5:22 p.m. CST

    Heck, I&#39;m with Torg!

    by Village Idiot

    Testify brother!

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 5:24 p.m. CST

    Destroying Krypton is NOT JUST A DETAIL!

    by Drath

    I doubt JJ is reading this, but I love Alias and want to give him the benefit of the doubt(although I think he

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 5:29 p.m. CST

    Oh, One More Thing, Mr. "Trust Him-" You Don&#39;t Even Quote Mo

    by hipcheck13

    You say, in that "suck a Hollywood mogul&#39;s sack described as an actual impartial article" above that Moriarty "loves Superman" (your words). Strange, considering I read in Mori&#39;s review of the script: "I

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 5:32 p.m. CST


    by ungiftedamateur

    Remember when harry said the changes were all driven by merchandise? If I was given i cut I would shut up. Still I hope JJ listens to what you lot are saying Harry should have, backbone. Yes, JJ show backbone and stick to your ideas.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 5:48 p.m. CST

    TalkBacks Still Not Half Page Yet

    by ILoveEwksAndJJar

    seek wisdom

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 6:10 p.m. CST

    This Movie Is a Mistake

    by Barron34

    Good intentions are fine, but it&#39;s the results that count. The origin story of Superman has been told on film by Donner with Chris Reeve as the star. Any attempt to cover the same ground will be either a weak imitation of a definitive film, or a very bad alternative telling of the tale. It seems that we are likely to get the second. *****In my opinion, they should not make a Superman movie that deals heavily with the origin of the character. that has been done, done well and definitively, by Donner. They should tell a story about Superman in the midst of his career as a hero, if they want to do something original. *****I thought that the concept for Superman versus Batman was very, very good, and that Wolfgang Peterson is a very good director with a good head on his shoulders. Warners had something there, in my opinion, but yet again they get cold feet and switch horses midstream, to mix metaphors. Being indecisive like that is a sure sign that you do not know what you are doing. Peterson was confident in his ideas, and he knew what he was doing. *****The essence of Superman vs. Batman was contrasting the darkness of Bats with the golden light of Supes. This is a perfect concept for a DC heroes movie that could illustrate the essence of these great characters without covering old ground that has been done and done before (ie, their origins). *****Stupidly, Warners dropped Peterson and his Superman Vs. Batman concept. Cold feet. Indecisiveness. Sure signs of a LACK of a grasp on the situation. Instead, they go with a middling director with little of no depth, and a sincere writer guy who is apprently doing radical surgery on the origins of Supes. Changing a little detail here and there is fine, if you keep the essence of the character. Radically altering the background of the character is NOT changing a detail here and there: it is creative suicide, in my opinion. *****I know it is too late, but Warners should go back to Peterson&#39;s great ideas for Superman versus Batman. Showing the heroes in mid-career, at the height of their powers, facing some terrible foes, would show us something we have NOT seen before, but which is keeping with the essence of these great characters. We have SEEN Supes origin done and done well by Donner and company. Another attempt at the same will be a weak imitation at best or a horrid distortion at worst (and I think we are looking at the second option here).*****I think the execs at Warners panicked when the fans threw a tizzy over the bad casting ideas kicked around for Supes and Bats at the time Peterson was going to do the movie. Casting is a problem that can be solved. The fundamentals of the story and the creative team attached must be solid, and Peterson&#39;s fundamentals were very solid. These current guy&#39;s fundamentals are terminally shaky and completely flawed. This will not be a good movie. Fans such as myself will be pissed at the mishandling of their favorite characters. Donner&#39;s Superman will stand as the definitive film version no matter what. Trying to revise that work can only fail. This was Peterson&#39;s wisdom: don&#39;t try and redo Donner&#39;s work. Instead, focus on a different and later aspect of the character, not the origin. *****Contrasting Supes with Batman is a great idea. Superman&#39;s bold and bright and noble character will become even brighter when contrasted with the driven darkness of Batman, and vice versa. Peterson was the way to go. Once again, Warners has fumbled the ball with their valuable comic book properties. This new movie will not work. Go back and get Peterson to do Superman versus Batman before it is too late.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 6:17 p.m. CST


    by scorzamania

    This is total crap! First you say that the script is shit and that every one should scream bloody murder and then the next day after talking with the author. You change your mind calling for moderation. What kind of horseshit is that. And it gets even better. You also decide to take down the original links and comments by all of us who think that this script is the biggest pile of shit that could possibly have ever been written! You say abrams is going to make some changes to the script. I say you can&#39;t bring the dead back to life. The basic elements of the story are so bad that it wouldn&#39;t matter what changes were made. And what&#39;s all this shit about trying to rationalize changing the origin story. I&#39;m not the biggest comic fan but niether is most of the population. What people remember or think about when they hear the word superman is the Donner Film. Yes some changes were made but they kept true to the basics of the story. And they captured the spirit of superman. This new script is a modern day script. It is filled with suprises and twists and turns and really trys to be flashy. But that&#39;s not what superman is all about. He&#39;s the one who is very humble in what he does, he&#39;s not lost or confused about his purpose in life. He knows what he&#39;s here on earth for. He is here to fight for TRUTH, JUSTICE AND THE AMERICAN WAY! I don&#39;t recall anywhere that superman&#39;s responsibilites were on Krypton. And I really can&#39;t recall anywhere that it is the suit that gives him powers, I&#39;m pretty sure that his powers came from the FUCKING SUN!!!! If you want to know what made superman: the movie so great I&#39;ll tell you. It was a combination of outstanding acting, some imagination, and great writing that held true to the greatest aspects of the man of steel&#39;s ever changing history. No one man can write superman. Because superman is not just a mild mannered character, He the FUCKING MAN OF STEEL!!!!!! Now put the god damn original links back up and let the truth about the story be told by a trustworthy person who won&#39;t be bought out or minipulated so easily.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 6:20 p.m. CST


    by Johnny Smith

    ...are you sure JJ&#39;s last name is Abrams? I mean, for all we know, it could be Hunsecker.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 6:39 p.m. CST

    here we go

    by casmcthorn

    First i&#39;d like to mention the fact that at the superman posting slaughter i did mention the fact that the beloved donner films fuc... er messed with the superman history.I like JJ&#39;s work (not this script but his past that is)But was totally against the bizzaro lex and the jor-el live son cause i say so bit.But the worst part of this all is the harry ass kissing fest.Ok in the past i have read complaints of the aicn fans about harry&#39;s penchant for the butt kiss,but seriously it is a problem. Harry, you could have brought up the many different super histories before the call from the writer. No you decide it is such a crime after you grovel and probably work out some inside scoop info to time relase to make you look cooler.Sell out...GOod job I&#39;m in give me a call if your in town I&#39;d love to meet some of your conections much love. Cas(asskissing sidekick)mcthorn

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 6:40 p.m. CST

    ...Sorry, but the Changes still SUCK!

    by KONG33

    He might be a nice guy, so what? Don&#39;t make a Superman origin story, have something happen in Metropolis.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 6:41 p.m. CST

    "From the people who gave you Batman vs. Scooby Doo..."

    by KONG33

    ...and Baby Looney Tunes (girls! buy the plush toys!)...JJ Abram&#39;s &#39;Kung Fu Superman&#39;! Ah YEAH! I thought BATMAN AND ROBIN was the most expensive _comedy_ ever made, it was and is, surreal. An unconfident and clearly embarrassed George Clooney nasally saying "You&#39;re losing your cool, Freeze!" from behind a stiff batman-suit is the height of greatness in my books, but I&#39;d never pay for it.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 6:41 p.m. CST

    Good news kiddies

    by ThingsThatTimDog

    DarkHorizons is reporting that Harry&#39;s publicity stunt/review has sent WB in to a tale spin. They are not going to produce this piece of shit.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 6:42 p.m. CST

    Just imagine if Schumacher had rang Harry..

    by Ernie_is_evil

    Just imagine if Joel Schumacher had rang Harry back before the B&R and engaged in 2 hours of phone sex like JJ did....things could have been a lot different.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 6:42 p.m. CST

    Come relive BATMAN AND ROBIN with me!

    by KONG33

    Remember when Batgirl boogie-boarded on ice? No? Ah, man, it was X-TREME! I think I may have to rent Batman and Robin just to relive the absurdity. How about when they pumped up Bane&#39;s muscles from the weakest man in the world? When they saw a need to change into ice-suits to sell toys... or when they fought a neon gang... or when Batgirl tapped into the computer&#39;s password to find out a major secret... it all happened. Robin had to use his Bat-skates and use a hockey stick to take out the ice badguys. And someone slid off the tail of a dinosaur in the museum. And a close up on black leather. TRAINWRECK. Alicia was hot, though. "Ice to see you!" "The Iceman cometh", "cool as ice!" Lex Luthor, CIA Agent/UFO-logist here we come!

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 6:51 p.m. CST


    by TomVee

    If Jimmy is going to be gay, then give him AIDS for that realistic touch. By the way, geeks, RETURN FROM THE LIVING DEAD is finally on DVD as this week. It&#39;s been a long time coming. Wal Mart is selling it (and the remake of NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD, which is not recommended) for nine dollars and change.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 6:52 p.m. CST

    Sounds encouraging... but I&#39;m not holding out any hope.

    by Psyclops

    I&#39;m more afraid of what Warner Bros. is going to do to this project than what J.J. Abrams will eventually change in the final draft (I know he&#39;s a talented writer and that he will probably listen to the fans and do right by them). That studio has fucked up way too many times! They are responsible for some of the worst movies in recent memory (Batman & Robin, Battlefield Earth, Get Carter, Scooby Doo, Pluto Nash, Driven, Ballistic: Ecks versus Sever, Wild Wild West). Fuck &#39;em!!!!

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 6:52 p.m. CST

    Another thing about JJ @$$clown

    by KingKrypton

    His excuse for the negative reaction to his script is that "Moriarty has an axe to grind." What a stupid, dripping-with-egomania, fact-devoid statement. He just doesn&#39;t get it, does he? Moriarty cut him MUCH more slack than I would have (giving him props for Superman&#39;s first public appearance, the Andes scene, and the flight with Lois). All of Mori&#39;s and our complaints were with the radical throat-slittings to the mythology and to the hopelessly stupid plot points he dished up. If this is Abrams&#39; idea of "axe-grinding," then he&#39;s every bit the egomaniac that Jon Peters is, and cannot/should not be trusted. He&#39;s not sorry he screwed the script up. He&#39;s just sorry he got caught doing it. Twit.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 6:53 p.m. CST

    "Remember my father said", VERISIMILITUDE!!!!

    by scorzamania

    Its a pitty that he didn&#39;t see from such humble beginnings how WB has really fucked up superman. I&#39;m tired of people trying to think of a flashy new way to reinvent the character. Superman is a timeless icon. You can set him in any time and he works. But when you start fucking around with the fudamentals that make him who he is, namely that he is the last son of KRYPTON, then you have total meltdown. Would The terminator have been great if about halfway through the movie it stopped and said: You know what the hell with this shit I&#39;m going back home to be the chosen one of my people.? There are so many things wrong with this script that a thousand re-writes couldn&#39;t save it. A piece of junk is a piece of junk whether you shine it up real nice or not! I&#39;m with the other guy who said that mario puzo&#39;s script was not that great. It took 5 people to write that script. It was Puzo, David and Leslie Newman, Tom Mank. and Dick Donner. Although Tom and Donner didn&#39;t get credit for writing the script they were the one&#39;s that made it what it is today. Once again, No ONE man can write a superman story that is worthy enough to be made into a movie. The way all of this is going it sounds like another superman III or Batman&Robin. What happened to the WB exectes that said that they didn&#39;t want superman to be campy like the batman series with Adam West was. (By the way I like that show so no offense to anyone who also like the show) J.J. Abrams needs to take his script. Shine it up real nice and stick it straight up his candy ass!

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 7:03 p.m. CST

    It&#39;s Siegel and Schuster&#39;s character

    by raven7

    Guys, I know the whole "true origin" and "reimagined" thing is bouncing around. The stories that took several years of comic book continuity can&#39;t be summed up in 2 to 2 1/2 hours, but Mario Puzo&#39;s script beautifully summed the origin up. Krypton&#39;s doom, while not our reality, was Siegel&#39;s and Shuster&#39;s myth they created for THEIR character. I know DC bought Superman like Manhattan was said to have been bought with a string of beads. I know Warner Bros. bought DC. But folks, the two most venerable comic creators of all time are spinning in their graves right now because of this script. J.J. Abrams is doing no service to the fans in this token gesture. This phone call was just him protecting his job. There&#39;s no other reason. He was sent by WB to gently shove this story down our throats. What is that the kids are saying nowadays..."Don&#39;t belive the hype?" If he really gave a damn what the fans thought, he and all the other profiteers at AOL/Time/Warner would practically create a new website apologizing for such and atrocious first draft and for once...just for once...wanted to listen to the fans. Listen to them and realize that there are a lot of creative ways you can pack continuity into the movie. You can&#39;t pound out a story like this in a few weeks. The spirit of Superman and what he represents should transcend any origin translation. That much is true. But isn&#39;t it like waking up Sunday morning and going to church and seeing Elvis on the crucifix? Isn&#39;t changing the origin for whatever purpose, whether it be to gain a new generation of fans or just cold-hard cash kind of like the designated hitter rule? I&#39;ve tried to be open-minded about this, but...nuh-uh! If they can&#39;t keep the purity of the character based HEAVILY on the framework that Jerry Siegel and Joe Schuster constructed back in 1938, then they should just kill the project and do another romantic comedy. There&#39;s always profit in those and, HEY! no messy cleanup.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 7:13 p.m. CST

    More AICN revisionism.......Harry and the AICN geeks will only b

    by Moriarity Report

    "Batman & Robin made comic fans embarassed to go to comic stores" HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH BWA FUCKIN HAHAHAHA HARRY. No Harry, it couldn&#39;t have been because the people actually writing the actual DC comics were doing such a shitty job, and the art was so shitty. At least you admit that the John Byrne revised Superman mythos suck. Hey Geeks, if it were up to me, I would want a Superman film to follow the actual original Superman continuity from the 30&#39;s and 40&#39;s. The one Alan Moore aped so brilliantly in his SUPREME from Awesome Comics. But we all know that will never happen because the average person would think it too silly and dated. The only way a Superman film is going to be done is if they try to make it...AS REAL AS POSSIBLE. And that means no stupid "powers from the sun" shit. And it is going to mean a slightly streamlined origin. Folks, everything they did on the X-men movie was an improvement over the comics. But they kept the whole spirit of the comics but they combined elements and updated them a bit and made them better. Same with Spider-man. The problem with Spider-man is that it was probally TOO conservative. There were NO surprises with Spider-man. Except maybe with the Goblin, they made that character far more interesting and modern than he ever was in the comics. But that&#39;s one of the things the Geeks complain about.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 7:31 p.m. CST

    Krypton not exploding - meh, interesting change, could work. Pr

    by Tall_Boy

    Those are the major changes which cause too much rocking the boat. Keep Krypton not exploding & Kryptonians all over the place, that could be cool. Ditch the rest of those & then we&#39;ll talk. (though making another ORIGIN story is kinda pointless. But I can see JJ Abrams&#39; point: the classic origin has been told, if they&#39;re gonna do it again, try playing with it a bit)

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 7:32 p.m. CST

    "Moriarty had an axe to grind"...

    by KONG33

    Sure, about the quality of the script. I doubt he&#39;s JEALOUS of JJ Abrams place in society. And the comment about harming his wife was an exaggeration.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 7:51 p.m. CST

    Fat Harry, your credibility is in shreds


    For fuck&#39;s sake Harry, at least have the courage of your convictions. I read your first post on the subject a few days ago, and that still holds true AFTER your conversation with Abrams. There&#39;s no need to remake the Donner film, and the only reason to tweak the origin is to make a fat profit from &#39;intellectual&#39; contributions. You should be backing your friend Moriarty on this one instead of kissing corporate ass.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 7:52 p.m. CST

    Three conditions of making a good Superman movie

    by FD Resurrected

    1. Boot Jon Peters from the project. When he talked about how he wept when he got a phone call from Alan that Superman production is a go, he swore he heard angels&#39; wings flapping. Bullshit - he have the pair of saucer eyes with dollar signs ringing KA-CHING. Money is all that matters to Jon the Slick Dickwad and the Wb execs. 2. Boot Brett Ratner from the project. I&#39;ve never seen a single Ratner movie but the trailers - Rush Hour 1 & 2, Family Man and Red Dragon - never interested me in the least. Ratner&#39;s just another highly paid movie director serving Hollywood studios with generic fare. Find a new director with the REAL ambition and vision of bringing Superman to the silver screen with care and respect for the Superman legend. 3. Keep the WB execs&#39; control-freak hand off Superman project once the good, non-hackneyed script is turned in. Give the screenwriters and director creative freedom (no ridiculous and logic-defying ideas) like Sony did for Spiderman filmmakers and received a box office smash hit as the result. Keep the project under the microscope, the finished cut will be the stink-bomb like Batman and Robin and the hordes of fans and moviegoers are bound to get angry and riot in theaters Seattle &#39;99 stlye.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 7:59 p.m. CST

    While I&#39;m at it...


    Warners should just make a Green Lantern film instead of messing about with remakes and relaunches. Go for the second stringers, because stuff like Batman and Superman has too much baggage with the fans. BUT, I reckon if they do go with Supes, i have some suggestions. 1) Lex Luthor for President! For once, let art mirror reality. 2) If they do &#39;kill&#39; Supes, why not leave it as a cliffhanger for episode one? Then they can bring him back to life with Red Kryptonite, that whack and unpredicable sheeznit, in episode 2. 3) Fuck Keanu, give Todd Welling a shot at the title!

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 8:01 p.m. CST

    Marvel really isn&#39;t kicking ass....

    by BatVomit

    ...Just because Marvel is making movies that don&#39;t suck quite as much as Batman & Robin doesn&#39;t mean that they are doing justice to their characters on film. I enjoyed Blade. The X-Men film was better than mediocre but was far from perfect. I HATED Spider-Man and Blade2. While not quite as bad as Batman and Robin, both those movies sucked major ass. Spider-Man was an abomination of a movie and there is no excuse for the Green Goblin&#39;s costume. Fuck Sam Raimi. Fuck him and damn him to hell. Blade2 was just a fucking stupid cookie cutter action flick complete with pro-wrestling moves. There has not been a super hero movie yet that has topped Superman.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 8:12 p.m. CST

    Remember Moriarty&#39;s article and Harry&#39;s take? Here it is

    by YourMom Harry, you have lost amy respect. I thought you were better than this.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 8:38 p.m. CST

    Neil MacAuley - I totally agree with you

    by The Hitman

    Why oh why are they even bothering with this??? Why the hell are they making another Superman origin film? We already have one and I think people would agree that it is the best in the series and probably the best comic book film to date. Why remake it? Haven&#39;t we learned anything from the pointless remakes that they have made in recent years? the Superman origin has been told and it was done in such a way that fanboys can even accept it, despite some elements that might not be done exactly like it was in the comic. but, the tone of it and the epic looking style is something that can never be remade or recaptured. Nor could they ever make a film as good or as well shot. So why fuck with it? Why not make a Batman/Superman team up or a Batman vs. Superman movie? It&#39;s far more original than going back and remaking something that doesn&#39;t need to be done. You want to remake something Warner Brothers?? Why don&#39;t you hire Tim Burton back and have him make his own versions of Batman 3 and 4??? Those are what need to be redone!! Leave the Spuerman origin alone, it has been done.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 9:01 p.m. CST

    It&#39;s Snowing A Blizzard In Alias-Land

    by Sam Bones

    That was a real purty piece of flap-doogle ol&#39; Abrams spread over the phone. Why you can practically see the snowflakes floating out of the receiver as the words crystalized in the chill of a million pissed off Superman fans. So he really "loves" Superman and wants to do it right? Hell, if that were true he&#39;d have NEVER written that first script! Try as he might to cover up his tracks with SNOW, Abrams still wrote that gawd-awful insult to the Superman character and the whole mythology and it&#39;s still the same hot-boy writer and talentless executives that are forging ahead with this project. I don&#39;t care what this son of a bitch says NOW and only NOW because he&#39;s shitting his pants worried about the fan reaction to his "FUCK YOU FANS AND THE CHARACTER OF SUPERMAN" original script. This guy is NOT a fan of the SPIRIT of the Superman mythos. You can tweak the story and characters and upgrade them. Sure, the comics have been doing that for decades. But to be so fucking Hollywood hot-shot ARROGANT to change EVERYTHING of the Superman legend in that first script and think...what? He was being creative? Contemporary? Cool? All that and more? Like Paul Dini and Company have managed to be but can&#39;t get the time of day from Warners concerning their live-action takes on the DC characters? No, my fellow fans and those who know and "get it" about the whole universe of wonderful DC comic book characters, what Abrams and Warner Brothers have proven is that they are...uncaring. This phone call to Harry is the result of rope-a-dope SPIN sent out by a freaked out Warners in DAMAGE-CONTROL MODE. Nobody at Warners should have told this guy to cut the Luthor/Kryptonian angle (if that&#39;s really what happened). Or cut any of the other insipid changes in the script. After the script came in it should have been, "Thank you very much, here&#39;s your dough and don&#39;t let the door hit you in the ass!" GAME OVER, MAN! Bring in someone that knows Superman because this Abrams guy is obviously shooting heroin and watching SUPER RATFINK cartoons to research how to write a totally unfaithful Superman movie. Wait! You don&#39;t believe me that Warners doesn&#39;t have a clue? Well, let&#39;s move on to the brilliant move to hire Bret Ratner as director. Folks, I worked with Richard Donner. Richard Donner was a friend of mine. Bret Ratner is no Richard Donner. Or James Cameron. Or Bryan Singer. And he&#39;s sure no creative as hell, lover of cinema and the original Spider-Man comic books-type filmmaker and DIRECTOR that Sam Raimi is. Yet, Warner is giving this clueless script writer and talent-less rap video director (who in a press release just a couple of days ago, along with the Warners people, praised the Abrams script to Krypton and back) from the tacky side of Miami (the anti-Metropolis) the chance to make Superman "fresh" and fly for the entire world. I can tell you one word for this project. DI-SAS-TER. It&#39;s too late for Abrams to find something poignant and special and uplifting in Superman if he had to throw out everything that was in the first place. Ratner, the millionaire music producer and video maker turned film director with his four assistants (so it says in his IMDb bio) was more effusive about the merchandising and promotional department working on Superman at Warners than he was about giving forth with anything resembling a keen understanding of the power behind the myth of Superman. Bragging he had a copy of ACTION #1 framed on his wall, proving to everyone that he had the deep pockets to buy it means more to him than actually talking about the character in depth. Harry got it right in his first post. Where&#39;s Ratner and Abrams and the Warner Execs talk of all those Superman comic books they read as a kid and what storylines were their favorite and what George Reeves TV episodes were the greatest (SUPERMAN IN EXILE for me) and how wonderful the Fleisher cartoons were and boy, it&#39;s too bad those gorgeous Alex Toth storyboards for the HB Superfriends series couldn&#39;t have been followed faithfully because Toth nailed everyone&#39;s look and characters and, and... But that ain&#39;t happening people. This movie will be like the recent "re-imagining" of PLANET OF THE APES, and go whimpering like a whipped monkey into the darkness with only the fans mourning for its passing ("They spent millions on it and the effects were cool but IF ONLY...). Abrams, Ratner and the Warner execs will count their million dollar salaries and shrug and go make some other piece of Hollywood crap (like SCOOBY DOO) without any thought about the character and the ideals that frame it, concerned only with how the Superman movie&#39;s failure related to their careers.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 9:05 p.m. CST

    How can anyone defend this script? My problem: the origin stor

    by iamsmarterthanu

    Why retell a great story that was already told well to begin with? If I were making this movie, I would sum up the 4 movies in a 15 or 20 minute opening montage, and intertwine new footage staring the new actor playing Superman with the stock footage from the previous films. Hell, it worked for the Evil Dead films. I know that WB wants to retell the origin story so that kids who haven&#39;t seen the original movies will understand where this character is coming from, but you could do that during the begining credits and THEN create a new and interesting story for Superman. Well, that&#39;s my opinion anyway.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 9:06 p.m. CST

    The point everybody&#39;s missing here...

    by Johnny Ahab that WE HAVE THEIR EAR! While you&#39;re all busy crapping all over Harry, look at all the online community has accomplished! It worked! The flaming talkbacks, the petitions, all of you who mailed Mori&#39;s article off to Dick Parsons, Horn, the WB Board -- WE&#39;RE GETTING THE MESSAGE ACROSS TO THEM!!! And they&#39;re scared. Very scared. While it sounds like they&#39;re trying to fix this draft (is the costume-in-a-can gone too?? Supes&#39; dad talking him out of being dead??), the WB has that 2004 screen date they&#39;ve staked a claim on. And it&#39;s only getting closer. In movie production time, that&#39;s not a hell of a lot, and they&#39;ve got a publicized, busted draft. Superman, the next film, is a major cog now to help the AOLTW machine keep going -- or break down. This movie will cost $100-150 alone in production cost, and another $70-100 in prints & advertising. Let&#39;s just say it&#39;s a $200M chip thrown down on the roulette table. And they don&#39;t dare come up short. Careers are ruined, whole studio regimes vaporized by big tentpole movies bombing -- so you can bet everyone&#39;s running scared now. And we&#39;ve all put them on notice. Piss off the fans, at your own risk, Warners, Peters, Abrams, Ratner. And you can bet those same folks will be checking back to this site to read our temperature. If anything, this proves that movie fans have muscle -- if they chose to use it. DON&#39;T go see shit like "TOMB RAIDER" when you know it&#39;s bad! Don&#39;t reward shit! Ditto for "SUPERMAN" if we hear it stinks! And keep the pressure on the suits and decisionmakers who have such casual contempt for audiences! Flame Harry all you wish -- but without this site, we wouldn&#39;t have helped turn the ship. And we&#39;ll do so again! Good work, fanboys. You have been warned, Warners!

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 9:19 p.m. CST

    Another ORIGIN Story?

    by X-3

    I wish there were no deep origin story, they are the most boring and expected of all ideas, the original Superman book told the origin in one page. Just tell an adventure story w/SUPERMAN. People saying Superman being the last son of Krypton is important are right, it is the most important Superman element, it&#39;s the backbone. They want to sell TY-ZOR toys, they don&#39;t think they&#39;ll get to with Luthor. And we&#39;ll see &#39;Battle-Ravaged Superman&#39;. Harry, though you didn&#39;t detract, you definitely have laid down on this subject. I don&#39;t believe in Ratner, or Mr. Peters, and no, not the creator of Felicity. Give Lois Lane a new haircut! That guy who said she&#39;ll probably end up tougher than Superman IS SO RIGHT, I&#39;m sure he&#39;ll stroke that. The fact is, the script shows us he will do a lot of things wrong... maybe he&#39;s good with the smaller details, but the big picture is very important. I liked hearing Harry&#39;s script idea, I&#39;d love Moriarty&#39;s opinion and everyone else&#39;s. How would your Superman script go?

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 9:30 p.m. CST

    Did he really call us homophobic?

    by X-3

    He can&#39;t defend what he wrote in the script, we&#39;re crusading for GLAAD and they didn&#39;t even ask us to! Krypton not exploding IS like Green Lantern&#39;s ring coming in boxes of Cracker Jacks. I&#39;m done.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 9:31 p.m. CST

    Temperance, friends!

    by StarUnlit

    C&#39;mon guys... lets give it a shot. We give Harry a chance everytime we visit this site. We gave Spider-man, Blade, X-men, LOTR a chance, the same way we&#39;re gonna give The Matrix sequels, the new Punisher movie, Daredevil and Narnia movies a fair chance (or at least our 8 bucks), so lets just give the guys behind Superman a chance too. We all want it to rule and desperately need our faith restored but lets err on the side of optimism for a change instead of venting pure vitriol. Personally i hope this film tackles big themes like heroism and the journey of self, but if it doesnt i wont be upset because our heroes and our treatment of them inevitably change over time. Superman is no longer the same building leaping strong man that a young CANADIAN came up with so many years ago, nor is he still the spit-curled crusader that Byrne dusted off. Superman doesnt have to be the same everytime out but he must be venerated. Strangely enough i seem to remember a really early issue of Spawn (maybe number 8?) where the arms and sihouettes of several other companys&#39; heroes make uncredited cameos and Superma is described in an almost holy way as the first and greatest amongst them. I dont remember the exact words... but it was great and it was... cinematic.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 9:50 p.m. CST

    Superman is a Christ-figure.

    by Frank Einstein

    Actually, Superman is indeed a Christ-figure, just ask Mr. Richard Donner. Or better yet, watch Superman: The Movie again. I wouldn

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 9:53 p.m. CST

    No wonder studios go to great lengths to protect their scripts

    by Egbert

    I guess I

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 9:53 p.m. CST

    "ILoveEwksAndJJar" appears more times on this forum than anyone

    by Regicidal_Maniac

    I like ALIAS. I thought there were some good and bad elements in the first draft of Superman, (naturally Krypton will have to explode at some future point, it just has to otherwise there&#39;s no Kryptonite). Luthor is human, Jimmy is an unsuccessful hetero kid. These things will have to be changed, but there was some good stuff there. I like the political war on Krypton it reminds me of the recent "Return to Krypton II" storyline from the comics. I admit that Donner&#39;s Superman was damn near perfect with the notable exception being that excreble love poem segment... ugh. The origin has been done and is available on DVD for all to rewatch so why remake the origin? Well I guess like any longstanding work of fiction or art I guess Superman&#39;s origin is open for interpretation and reinterpretation. Warners wants to bring Superman into the 21st Century and where better to start than at the beginning? This is Superman after all, an imaginary story much like that other enduring work of fiction that is The Bible. Just like the make believe story of Christ there are elements that can change with the times reinterpreted on a weekly basis to fit whatever current agenda or social climate. (This didn&#39;t really start out as an atheistic rant, but even the most Flandersesque TB&#39;er has to see the similarities between the sad-faced, bearded loinclothed one and the red and blue suited cape wearing comic book hero. In 2000 years time people who still need a crutch may even turn to Clark Kent/Kal-El/Superman in times of need, his life is just as well documented). But back on to the point which is that this draft of the script would make a terrible, terrible Superman movie however a later draft may get it right. Abrams is a good writer and I think we should cut him some slack, unless the next draft he turns in is just as bad... then by all means go to town on the man. And to "ILoveEwksAndJJar": no-one is interested in the minutia of yor day.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 9:55 p.m. CST


    by rev_skarekroe

    Somebody please let me know when and if this movie comes out. There&#39;s just a lot of smoke and hot air right now. sk

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 9:57 p.m. CST


    by The Founder

    I&#39;m not kidding, Warners have churned out to many bombs of late. I&#39;m tired of their Turkey movies, and the simple minded Pretzel Logic that goes into making them. My old high school drama club could have put out a decent flick then the shyt we&#39;ve be getting from them. Don&#39;t let up people, and do not let down your guards, especially with Peters still at the helm. I mean they pass on Joel Silver to produce in favor of Peters??? They say M. Knight Shaylaman would want to much control?? WTF?? That&#39;s what he&#39;ll need, or Peters and them Phucks at Warners would chop his script to shreds, and the movie will be so bad that he&#39;ll have to swallow the blame for it, thus having him run out of Hollywood on rails, and he&#39;s a minority, so he won&#39;t get a chance to redeem himself. I just don&#39;t trust the WB, I think we&#39;re still going to get a loud flashy CGI movie with no real story.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 10:19 p.m. CST

    Can&#39;t we just have the animated series people do it?

    by Pulzar711

    They do a damn fine job. [Apologies if someone mentioned this already, but I&#39;m too tired to read through all the "sellout" posts]

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 10:22 p.m. CST

    Harry&#39;s original rant with the petition link is still there,

    by Glitcher

    Harry, at least put the original link back up near the top; burying it near the bottom of the site is not much better than removing it altogether. The petition is now over 8000 and counting, but the signatures slowed down since you buried the link (or was that the point?) I sincerely hope not...

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 10:27 p.m. CST

    Abbrams Says He&#39;s A Fan??? Then He would Know That Both Supe

    by The Founder

    I haven&#39;t read A Supes comic in a few years, but I know that Superman would not die just to save Lois, especially since their are other Kryptonians that are evil, and will kill Millions of innocent people left on Earth to run unchecked, and nor would Lois want him to, because she knows that Superman is far more important to protecting Earth then her life, and she wouldn&#39;t mind dying for that cause not one bit, so NO,Mr Abbrams does not know Superman and apparently Lois Lane as well as he claim, but yet he wants to give us his version of what he thinks Superman should be. I say Krypton has to go, it must, and I agree with someone else on this site, in saying that parents who give up their child isn&#39;t a great respectable sacrafice that I would ever look up to. I&#39;ll give them credit for realizing that giving up their child to have a better life is in the best interest of the child, but to me the parents are still shyt, because they are unwilling to try, and it was them who created that child. Now Jor-el sending his son to another planet because their home planet is about to blow up is an admirable sacrafice that is worthy of respect because that takes courage, especially since he could have built the ship himself and just left, and thought later that he can have more children. I don&#39;t think feel that Abbrams is a bad writer, I like Allias, and I did see an episode of Felicity, and it wasn&#39;t unwatchable, but them type of show just aren&#39;t my cup of tea, so I&#39;m a little biased. I wasn&#39;t aware that he wrote Spiderman, and that turned out fine, it seems that Warners grabbed his @ss because he wrote Spiderman, and just further proves my point that they are just coping the formula of successful blockbusters. The writer of Spiderman, matrix influenced fighting complete with wire-fu, and some silly "chosen one" theme, the Star Wars type theme as well with the Naboo like looking planet, complete with cute creatures that&#39;ll make perfect toys no less. Ty-zor is created just for the sake of creating, especially when their are so many villians that Supes can battle, but of course a Ty-zor created character means profit for the creators like Abbrams or Peters to make more money. I don&#39;t have faith in Abbrams, because he is seeing dollar signs in place of creativity. I mean we have already seen Supes deal with Kryptonian villians, move on to something new. The jury is so far out on this one.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 10:31 p.m. CST


    by Wyatt Poe

    I know JJ. I&#39;ve been lucky enough to work for him on more than 1 of his projects. I&#39;ve known of his feelings and intentions for this movie for quite some time though I have not read the script. In truth, I don&#39;t want to. I have faith in both his ability and enthusiasm for the medium. I maintain that the "Alias" pilot is one of the single best hours ever to air on television. It is in itself a comic book. Whatever he writes, I&#39;ll be first in line to discover it onscreen. You should also know that my every Wednesday afternoon is inclusive of a trip to the comic book store. Both Moriarity&#39;s review and the backlash it caused disturbed me quite a bit. But I am proud and reassured by the manner in Which JJ handled the situation. I have to say that it is entirely true to his character that he would face the subject head on rather than hide from the apparent angry mob. Weather or not this movie ends up being the story I thought it would(or should) be, I have faith that it will be nothing less than what JJ claims. A new vision of a beloved hero from a fan&#39;s point of view. Harry, just when I was losing faith in both you and your site, you printed the story of your conversation with JJ and fairly represented both sides of the story. Congratulations, well done. And while the seemingly endless chatter from this one annonymous reader probably doesn&#39;r appear to add up to much, Have faith. We watch, and we are always here.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 10:49 p.m. CST

    props to "-=Shin=-" for this quoted piece..

    by hJ21 deserves repeating --> ____"Krypton is such a small foot-note to the idea of Superman. It&#39;s simply a mechanism to explain his powers, and also heightens the sense that Clark really is an Orphan and empowers the idea that humanity is universal - anyone can be human, though he may not be a human-being. That&#39;s the end of Krypton influence on Superman beyond dangerous green rocks. They&#39;re mechanisms. Abrams has some wonderful ideas. They&#39;d make a great Sci-Fi film trilogy. However, Superman is THE icon of Super-Heroes. He&#39;s not Luke or Anakin Skywalker. Superman deserves a Super-Hero film. His name is slang in our culture. Everyone knows Superman. The Krypton Civil War disconnects him from Earth. He&#39;s not given a chance to be THE icon hero. Superman, apple-pie and Mickey Mouse are American Icons ;) Everyone knows them. Smallville has this image of a Norman Rockwell painting to carry that notion further. Superman is about his bonds to his family and their values. He fights because of the values they have given him. He protects the Earth to protect them. IF you ask someone on the street "what does Superman do?" You&#39;ll get an answer that he stops the bank-robbers and fights the bad guys like Luthor. Oh, and he is allergic to green rocks. No one is going to mention he&#39;s the chosen one of Krypton who fights to liberate Krypton from the clutches of Darth Krypto-Scientist. That&#39;s not Superman, that&#39;s a space movie. Superman is human. He&#39;s from Earth. If you&#39;re born in France and then move to the states quickly after, you feel like your from the States. You tell everyone your from the States. He&#39;s not a sci-fi character. It&#39;s a differen genre. My two cents."_____ be honest, I&#39;m one of those people who seems to dislike the sci-fi genre more and more lately.. the new Star Wars Episodes seem to scream out "sci-fi" drivel.. where as their older counterparts were really more fantasy/adventure.. likewise Donner&#39;s Superman.. quite frankly I would be perfectly satisfied if the new starwars films would never have been made.. and I don&#39;t think I&#39;m looking forward to a spaceopera/sci-fi Superman movie either..

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 10:54 p.m. CST

    For those comparing this to the "organic webshooters" debate...

    by Speed321

    I was one of the ones against organic webshooters. I felt not only did removing the mechanical webshooters remove one of the key reasons Peter&#39;s always trying to make ends meet(that stuff&#39;s expensive, ya know) but it would remove a scene I wanted to see: Peter running out of web at a crucial moment. But, this wasn&#39;t a big thing to me, just a minor disappointment(and I did get a humorous, if utterly useless, scene with Spidey trying to figure out how to make his web "go"). And that was because I had utter confidence because of what I was hearing about the story and because X-Men was good.But here, we&#39;re not talking about a missing scene...we&#39;re talking about a missing movie. What do I have with Superman? I have a hackneyed Matrix/Christ ripoff where not even the suit stands for anything("Thanks. My mom made it." I love "For All Seasons"...). Where there&#39;s not even an attempt to match up with "Smallville". Where even the basic element of the hero&#39;s motivation to be a hero is changed. The only previous product that I have to go on was what&#39;s widely considered as a very bad movie. This story would be something I might watch if on its own, but it is not something I expect when I see when the word Superman comes up on the big screen. But I wasn&#39;t a big fan of Cameron&#39;s Spider-man either. And like Spider-man, I&#39;ll wait until further revisions before I decide to pass or not to pass on this movie. However, as it stands right now, it is not acceptable.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 11:14 p.m. CST


    by FeydX83

    i think abrams should be taken off this project completely. i would say his intentions are good, but i&#39;m not even sure i could say that. i keep hearing "he wants to tell his superman story." well its not his story to tell. not the basic, pure origin story that everyone is looking to see. i think hes too into himself and too close to the project for him to see that nobody wants to see JJ ABRAMS SUPERMAN, they wanna see SUPERMAN

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 11:30 p.m. CST

    I say let Paul Dini write this. Zemeckis direct

    by WorldNeedsHeroes

    This would be one of the most profitable films ever made. It would be an incredible movie.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 11:45 p.m. CST

    Superman is boring-discuss

    by Fleagle

    Disregarding the obvious thing that a perfectly GREAT Superman film has already been made. Can I just ask "whats the fkng point?". Sorry, I just cant see the global attraction of Superman, he&#39;s just so bloody bland and boring. I know he&#39;s some iconic kind of thing in the States but I just dont get it! I remember one superman comic I read as a kid where he esacaped from some jailcell or something by unscrewing the door with his "superhard thumbnail" WTF!!!! Spidey rocks, Superman&#39;s a boring boy scout. Fk it, I want to see a MR MONSTER film or a that Ghost Rider one, something a bit brave and off beat you know? NO fking chance... Oh yeah, this script backtracking is a pretty pathetic thing to have to be witness to. Balless is one word which sprang to mind. Tight knit little club these film types have in Hollywood land, right?!!?

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 11:47 p.m. CST

    Well, THAT Went Over Well, Didn&#39;t It?

    by BigScoobyDeath

    Christ, the geek community scares the hell out of me sometimes, I have to say. We get worked up about a script, then it turns into an excuse to excoriate the guy who provides the space for everyone to bitch and moan in. We hurl insults, threaten everything from giving up on AICN and/or any Warner Bros. film in the future to taking bags of shit to Abrams at a signing to killing his family. Now, I don&#39;t necessarily agree that Harry handled this perfectly, but Jesus Christ, take a step back and actually read this TB- it&#39;s like people are much happier to be pissed at Harry than they ever were regarding Abrams script. What&#39;s that about? And this may shock you, but I imagine Harry knows he&#39;s overweight, and the shocking originality of just calling someone fat as a great insult ended about the time you got into junior high, for god&#39;s sake. The best thing, though, is that you can&#39;t really call the TalkBacker&#39;s homophobes, because there are quite a few of us whose mission in life, it would seem, is to blather on and on about all the gay sex that Harry is having with ___________ (insert famous person who&#39;s pissing you off this week). There&#39;s so much ass-fucking and cock-sucking in here that gay porn sites are losing business. Oh, well, at least we know that in a week or two, there&#39;ll be somebody else to crucify, and to accuse Harry of blowing. At least we&#39;re consistent. (And, for the record, yes, I think that Harry screwed up, but only in the sense that he posted that first response based purely on his reading Mori&#39;s decimation of the script. He should have waited until he&#39;d read it himself). Flame on and call me a cock-smoker.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 11:51 p.m. CST

    doesn&#39;t it kind of scare you Harry that this "guy who just m

    by amateurscientist

    as I said in another post, change the Luthor name to something else, and all us SuperFans would love the story. (Harry, John Byrne REVAMPED Superman, making smart choices like making Luthor a more public, white collar villain. the kind the country met in the 80&#39;s with the S&L scandals and the kind that are fucking it up for everybody with Enron, etc. those are the super villains that exist, that create problems that are jobs for heroes bigger than even Superman can handle. but I digress...) there are other changes that are to the mythos but that I don&#39;t think people will care about too much. BUT he can&#39;t be dependent on a Spawn-like costume to fly, and Luthor must be human.

  • Sept. 28, 2002, 11:58 p.m. CST

    Hey I love Ewoks and Jar Jar too!!!

    by Azlam Orlandu

    What&#39;s the problem, you seem like the only reasonable person around these parts. Tupac is Superman? That&#39;s fucking bad! I&#39;m so glad I came back to these parts. But I still hate you all.

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 12:14 a.m. CST

    Actually, silly Azlam Orlandu has an interesting idea.

    by Noriko Takaya

    What if we all posted our treatments on what would be a good Superman movie in this forum? It might make a nice read. Or a hilarious one. Oh, and Azlam--you killed Tupac?? Me, Busta and the Flipmode Squad are comin&#39; fo&#39; yo&#39; ass. Watch your back. Toppu o Nerae!

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 12:18 a.m. CST

    The real point is...

    by coop

    Don&#39;t make so many changes to the story all at once. It&#39;s fine if you wanna make some changes, just not so many drastic ones. The whole Krypton thing may fly and even the gay Jimmy Olsen but you just can&#39;t make Luther an alien. You could even do the agent is an alien thing, just don&#39;t make him Lex. If I were making a Superman movie, I would take him back to the original logic of the comic. He&#39;s from another planet, his flesh is extra dense so he can&#39;t be hurt that easily and he is really really strong. But flying and heat vision is right out. Of course if you are gonna make a drastic change like that, you have to keep the rest the same as everyone knows it. In the end J.J., make your one change, (just not Luthor) and you&#39;ll get the majority of the fans to go along with it.

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 12:31 a.m. CST

    Harry , lose the beaver , champ !!!!!


    The cartoons get more and more sick , are you guys feeling ok ? I hope you superman fans don&#39;t go bald over this.... At this point ,I don&#39;t think anyone will give this a chance even if some how they pulled a good movie out of this so why keep worrying about ?

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 12:53 a.m. CST

    You know you all want a Super Kryptonian Luthor with Kung Fu Gri

    by Moriarity Report

    What&#39;s all of the sudden wrong with licensing Harry? If a film has merchandising then it&#39;s creators are automatically sell outs? Every Geek loves buying their action figures. As long as Hasbro isn&#39;t calling the shots then it&#39;s fine.

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 1:36 a.m. CST

    World&#39;s Finest...

    by ronnyron2000

    First of all, thanx 2 Harry 4 clearing the air. Secondly, I&#39;m so glad Tim Burton and Nic Cage won&#39;t be anywhere near this film. Finally, SUPERMAN and BATMAN are 2 sides of the same coin. If WB decides 2 do a BATMAN: YEAR ONE movie, then this film should be SUPERMAN: YEAR ONE exploring SUPES first year with the costume, ignore Superboy, and go straight to the man, after all, there was no Batboy. If the new film were 2 be called SUPERMAN - THE MAN of STEEL, then the other movie would have 2 be BATMAN - THE DARK KNIGHT, this would then unify the franchises and set them up for a future SUPERMAN/BATMAN - WORLD&#39;S FINEST MOVIE. That&#39;s my 2 cents for now, Ronny, Gold Coast, AUSTRALIA. Keep geeking!

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 1:42 a.m. CST

    I agree with those who say we should keep the pressure on WB

    by KingKrypton

    If we ease off, WB going to think this is just a one-time thing and that they can do it again and get away with it. Right now we&#39;ve got them running scared, realizing that they set off a major bomb and we ain&#39;t happy about it. WB&#39;s re-evaluating its attempts to screw with the character right now. If we suddenly cool down, they&#39;re going to blow it off as minor scare and screw up again. And next time it&#39;ll be even worse, and we might not be able to stop it. If we want this movie to turn out right, we have to pile on the pressure NOW and KEEP PILING IT ON. Sure, we should be tactful and level-headed (RE: no death or maiming threats), but we should keep WB in a position where they can&#39;t think they can screw us over on a lark. Keep pushing for a good Superman movie, and maybe, just maybe, WB will have no choice but to give us what we want. Oh, and Coop, I normally respect you a great deal, but your idea that Superman&#39;s flying should be scrapped is morbidly off. That&#39;s the character&#39;s signature power, the one that EVERYONE identifies him by. Getting rid of it would be suicidal. Peters and Tim Burton both tried to get rid of Superman&#39;s ability to fly, and they got ROASTED for it. As much as Peters hates Superman&#39;s flying, he had to eventually give in and leave the flying alone. Of course, that&#39;s not stopping him from screwing with everything else, but it does prove one thing: Superman&#39;s flying CANNOT be undone.

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 2:02 a.m. CST

    Memo to Mr. Abrams: Please Listen to the Fans!

    by Supergirl

    As you can tell from my ID I really love the Superman movies. I have read the breakdown of the very quickly scribed script as well. I naturally was outraged. I&#39;m still not too cushy about a "reworking" of the Superman movie franchise too. As far as a planet full of evil Krptonians, I think that three Super Villains were quite enough for Supes to handle in Superman 2 but a planet full of them? That&#39;s going into the realm of overkill here. It&#39;s like using the analogy of using a flamethrower to wipe out one singular fly in the window. Too many Kryptonian villains are just too much on the credibility scale. Plus one villain can suffice to lay the hurt on the Blue Boy. For instance Nuclear Man (Who should have been given a better introduction. Oy the continuity and logic errors! Plus that stupid weakness of his! He could have be great.) who nearly killed Supes is a good example if not the kind one would perhaps think of since Superman 4 wasn&#39;t really the greatest anyway. I think you might want to take a logical look at why more than three evil Kryptononians are dangerous. It doesn&#39;t matter how many Kryptonite bullets you have you will run out eventually and there will just be more evil super villains from Krypton to take their place like a swarm of Orcs. For the sake of logic and continuity DESTROY KRYTPON! And yes kill off Jor-El and Lara! That tragic sense of isolation is what makes Superman a tragically noble hero. The fact that he&#39;s the last of a dying or dead race is a very potent angst issue. If you&#39;ve watched the Donner movie on the DVD you can catch that subtlety in Kal-El&#39;s isolation as he&#39;s talking to the holographic image of Jor-El after his first night as hero in Metropolis. You should not have to hammer it into people&#39;s heads Supes is different and not of this world. We get it already. And most importantly if DC characters are to be revived you must look at prime examples of Superhero movies done right. Said prime examples IMHO are Superman(1978) and Spider-man. You see they took the time to build the mythos. They let people digest who these people were and why they do what they do. They don&#39;t leap and bound all over the chronological scale of events like an equestrian jumper on the jumping range. To get people who are non fans to understand who these people are without confusing them you need to start from the beginning and ease your way into the action. I know what you may be thinking though. Teens today have the attention span of a gnat on Mountain Dew. But you see, the reason why they can&#39;t sit still like Tourette cases in a movie theater is because movies have been dumbed down rather than make you think. Alot of movies have less character development, more action and plotholes you could pilot the Titanic through. Sadly teens with their idiotic sense of what&#39;s cool cause these crapfests to make money they do not deserve *cough* Scooby Doo *cough* while more worthy projects go down the crapper. But if you really think about it the teen market is only there for a quick buck or two. The real numbers are in the adult market who have invariably watched the Donner Superman film and will unmercifully compare any new Superman movies to that film. If you think about it the Donner film had the best talent that they could find at the time. In order for a new Superman film to succeed the composer will have to be extremely exceptional. John Williams is not a no name one hit wonder by no means. He&#39;s composed more famous scores than any one movie composer. And it&#39;ll be hard to find people who could replace the likes of Christopher Reeve (He was a natural for the Superman role. Just check out the test footage. He was Clark Kent/Superman.), Marlon Brando, or Gene Hackman. But that I guess is a Warner Brothers issue. I guess I just want to let you know what you&#39;re getting into when you ponder rewrities on this script. I think what we really need are more movies that rely more on storytelling with the action revolving around the storytelling rather than the action dictating the story. The jury&#39;s still out as to whether I will shell the money (Or have a friend shell the money out heh heh...) to see a reworking of Superman. To be frank I might not see this movie. Just the technical achievements and mythic qualities of the original Superman are too ingrained in my head. Anything less than an epic on the Donner scale will leave me disappointed. When adapting beloved characters one always walks the fine line of pleasing the fans and those who are unknowledgeable in the mythos of the characters on the screen.

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 2:18 a.m. CST

    Disappointed more than anything...

    by ToyMachine

    I didn&#39;t totally hate the script...there were some interesting visuals described, mostly that of Superman going to the mountain top and listening for people in distress. There are some fundamentally wrong items in the script that forced such a violent reaction from fans. That has been covered, we know this. What bothers me is that Harry seems to have folded quicker than the guards on the Maginot Line. I get more and more disappointed with this site everyday. Basically I just pop in to see if Chaffro has posted something that will make me laugh, or to see if we can work Hudson into more scenes in our favorite films. Hudson after reading Harry&#39;s latest turnaround: "Game over man."

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 2:19 a.m. CST

    Harry kills his site

    by RoobyRoo

    If it weren&#39;t for Mori, I would be completely done with this site. I&#39;m one or two straws away from breaking the camel&#39;s back with regards to Ain&#39;t it Cool. Maybe the payola from Warner Brothers can buy Harry some integrity.

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 2:36 a.m. CST

    Diane Lane as Lois...

    by stlfilmwire

    And NOT just because they share the same name. Diane has the same appeal as the young Margot Kidder did... a sexy alcoholic look. A rough woman. NO I am NOT saying Diane looks like a drunk. She just looks like a Lois character. A woman with history. If they can&#39;t get her, they can try either Courtney Cox or Lara Flynn Boyle (just have them two eat before they shoot) Cast an unknown theatre actor as Superman. Since he has little film exposure, they&#39;d be able to afford to sign him to a big multi-picture deal. Have Guy Pearce play Lex Luthor. Have Christopher Reeve replace Marlon Brando. Have Sean William Scott play a SERIOUS Jimmy Olson.

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 2:50 a.m. CST


    by Hue Jorgen

    Hey wasn&#39;t this story, about a young alien sent to earth to "hide" until ready to go home and beat the bad guys, done twice already? Prince Planet and The Powers of Matthew Star??? Hello?? It was bad enough when J.M.S ripped of Starblazers with his "Crusade" show. Shit they even used a version of the wave motion gun. Although I liked crusade. Maybe this superman will have pendant around his neck that has to be energized via remote from krypton. Hehehe Also where the hell does the kryptonite come from it the planet doesn&#39;t explode? I would love to see this project in the hand of Dini and co. They kicked ass in the animated series.

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 2:54 a.m. CST

    Why Make an Origin Story?

    by CRM114

    Why, with all the great stories that can be told with these characters, are the makers constantly wanting to do origin stories? It makes no sense to me. Everyone knows how Superman became Superman and Spider-Man became Spider-Man.

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 3:05 a.m. CST

    you&#39;re damn right Plan 9 is mislabelled!

    by a goonie

    i love Ed. and of course, i love Plan 9. the acting and effects work may be terrible, but there&#39;s a heart to the film (and a message that is a sort of homage to The Day The Earth Stood Still) that is far more interesting and sweet than anything a REAL piece of shit like 3000 Miles To Graceland has to offer.

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 3:06 a.m. CST

    I don&#39;t want to see another &#39;origin&#39; story

    by MrPeanut

    It&#39;s been done, and done definitively. Why fucking bother - everyone KNOWS who superman is, so quit wasting time re-telling the story, and get on with something new. You don&#39;t have to scrap everything just to do a fresh take on the character..

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 3:08 a.m. CST

    Me Have Idea

    by BizzaroGeek

    Me Sad about new movie script. Me never heard of sex with girls. Me Waste life on bullshit. It Distract me from life&#39;s give you ideas about script like Me would make it. Me mention that krypton must blow up to make kryponite even though it mentioned hundred times already. Me hate harry. me and number one geek.

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 3:17 a.m. CST

    All That Need Be Said Is The Following Quote From The WB Press R

    by SuckMyAss

    "We couldn&#39;t be more pleased to entrust the next chapter in the Superman mythology to Brett Ratner, a dynamic director whose skillful blend of action, comedy and drama has captured the imaginations of audiences worldwide"------What in THEE fuck?

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 3:28 a.m. CST


    by Regicidal_Maniac CAST KANE HODDER AS JASON!!!

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 3:38 a.m. CST

    NO - BALLS!!!

    by antmanx68

    "Hey folks, Harry here... piss me off to no end... Organizing these petitions are good, but organizing mass protest days across from WARNER BROS is better. Working with Comic Shop Owners and having them cease ordering SUPERMAN COMICS till they set this right. Cancel your subscriptions. Tune out of SMALLVILLE. Just drop all interest in SUPERMAN other than petitions, letter writing and physical protests. SUPERMAN isn&#39;t the property of Warner Brothers nor did they create him. Superman is in our comic collections, decorating our rooms and talked about by us. ... ..." And only 2 days later you have your tongue so far up WB&#39;s ass it is disgusting, Harry...... you always describe yourself as a MAN who likes movies..... to be a MAN you have to have somethings called BALLS..... and apparently you have NONE. By the way that whole thing about what you would do with your own superman movie..... is..... well..... really dumb...... you are not very creative or brave or respectable.

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 3:45 a.m. CST

    You have to hold some basic principles.. put Supes up against Br

    by TheMatarife

    Krypton MUST explode. Then put Supes up against one of his biggest enemies, either Brainiac or Luthor, have it be awesome, then the fans will love you. This whole Prophecy thing is BS, same with the kryptonian villians. No one gives a rats ass about a kryptonian dictator, we need a villan people know about, and geeks like. JJ can write, we just need him writing the RIGHT THING!

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 3:47 a.m. CST

    Harry, remember this quote???

    by OingoBoingo

    "Folks, these changes and the sheer arrogance of this thing just piss me off to no end. I mean there are screenwriters out there that know this material like the back of their hands, and you give it to some "hot" fucking TV show writer to fucking reimagine? " How about: "If you run a film website, just cease covering SUPERMAN after you organize your readership to protest. An absence of press the scariest thing. Just turn your backs on the property. Don&#39;t cover the casting stories. Until they get back to telling the story of SUPERMAN - they don&#39;t exist. Until we hear this draft is radically changed, don&#39;t give them the time of day."

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 4:10 a.m. CST

    RATNER is what you need to fear !!

    by apostleX

    Ratner is the true thing to fear. This guy is on the world&#39;s greatest lucky streak which has allowed some idiots at Warner to even consider him for something as classy as Superman. Why not talk to a James Cameron, a Paul Verhoven or a David Fincher??? Why not shoot for an A-LIST director instead of a C rate Director who makes someone as moronic as Micheal Bay look like freakin Orson Welles. RATNER is the problem. No matter how good or bad the script is , it will become MEDIOCRE in his hands. What a mistake. Id be happier if Suck Ass Paul WS "Idiot" Anderson directed it more than Ratner.

  • Not just in this case, but in a lot of Talk Backs on practically any subject here, the anti-gay comments can be very disturbing. Both in number and in content. Let&#39;s face the truth here, Harry. If these same comments were made about blacks or Jews or other minorities, you would be deleting them or all hell would be breaking loose. But because it is just derogatory comments about homosexuals, hey, there ain&#39;t nothing wrong with that, is there? There can be a lot of homophobia on this site, and I blame you for that, Harry. You&#39;re the one who lets it be and stay posted.

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 4:19 a.m. CST

    After this WB will get no more of my $ for anything!

    by zandor vorkov

    Nice try at covering your ass J. J. but all of this has now made me decide to stop collecting DC comics as well. WB can eat me! I will no longer give them a dime of my cash. Be it for music, DVD&#39;s DC comics or for films at the multiplex. I&#39;m also cancelling my subscription to EW. As soon as I get set up with a new internet provider AOL is gone too. See, Superman really can destroy an empire.

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 4:40 a.m. CST


    by discocle

    The real issue is Abrams&#39; (and Warner&#39;s films division&#39;s) abject disrespect for Siegel and Shuster and the basic truths they created about the character. Whatever changes have been made, in any previous formats, have been respectful of the original creators&#39; work and vision. This "first draft" is not! We&#39;re dealing with mythology, as well known as George Washington&#39;s chopping down of the cherry tree (probably better known, worldwide). Write a script about George chopping down a banana tree, and you&#39;ll get the same reaction. The fan&#39;s reactions aren&#39;t so much about fear and ignorance, as it is passion. We love Superman, and don&#39;t want Siegel and Shuster&#39;s basic truths changed. All we want is a good Superman story. What keeps this "first draft" from being a good Superman story, is that it isn&#39;t a Superman story, period! Change the names and call it "The Adventures of Supersuit". Then we might buy it! At the risk of making my point moot, I wish, just once, a gay (or even "slightly effeminate") man wasn&#39;t portrayed as just a prettyboy, but a 6&#39;5", 300 lbs (or even 4&#39;2", 72 lbs) mf, who beat the hell out of any and every body (including the editor of a great metropolitan newspaper) who made cracks about him being gay! Now, that I&#39;d pay to watch over and over again! "So, what you got to say now, Mr. White? You just got your ass kicked by a ******!" Sigh.... Maybe in the 22nd Century!

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 4:54 a.m. CST

    The Fanboys have won. Relax everyone.

    by Spacesheik

    I trust Moriarty, the best writer on this forum and the main reason why I visit here. If Moriarty stated that he was angered and disturbed at the draft of SUPERMAN by JJ Abrams, I believe his intentions were sincere. Kung Fu fighting, Naboo-style planet with tanks in civil-war mode, Lex Luthor as an alien AND head of the CIA, a Krypton that does not explode - I can forgive one "revisionist" idea but not all. WB should stick to the original Superman lore and not try to sell toys (Even PHANTOM MENACE merchandise was a flop). Use the new millenium&#39;s technology to show us improved flying scenes, Supe&#39;s flying faster than a speeding bullet, etc etc, not by fucking up the character. I frankly believe fanboys have won this round. We made the difference. We turned our displeasure over this potential crapfest of a flick into a publicity phenomenom. We have won. And because of that, the movie will be a better film. But Moriarty is the true hero here. And we owe him our thanks.

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 5:02 a.m. CST

    Sins are only sins for those who chose to believe in such things

    by ToyMachine

    In your world, Dolphin, I would imagine that it is a sin, but I have news for you...the wide world is not enveloped in your world, and for that I would say that many are thankful.

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 5:02 a.m. CST

    No, homosexuality is a naturally occuring part of life...

    by zenda

    ...not just with humans, but with other members of the animal world as well. As for that bible quote, it is inaccurate as the concept of "homosexuality" - or sexuality in general, were not things understood when the bible was written. It is probably the result of a mistranslation from the original text. There are plenty of books and articles on this subject. I&#39;m sure they can be easily found by anyone interested. Until then, we are here, your fellow human beings. There is no reason to attack us because of the way we were born.

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 5:12 a.m. CST

    Hey WB Not Call Up FOX And Singer and tell them the X-Men needs

    by The Founder

    it should be a cool good looking actor that can walk, and if you don&#39;t use that then concept then he should just stay in the Cerebro unit for the whole of the movie, and let the young pretty actors take up the spotlight. Yeah this would be Warners take on the Xmen if they had gotten a hold of it. The WB teenheart throb cast would be the xmen. Warners is a blackhole of creativity. I STILL STAND BY MY CHOICE NOT TO TRUST WARNERS, IKNOW THEY ARE GOING TO MESS IT UP.

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 5:14 a.m. CST


    by Andy Diggle

    JJ, here&#39;s how you make it work: Kypton explodes sure, but one city (was it called Argo City?) survives, saved from the explosion by a force-field, and is cast adrift in space. That way, you still have a &#39;Kypton&#39; (or a piece of it, anyhow) to go back to in the sequels. Problem solved.

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 6:26 a.m. CST

    Amazing Larry

    by ToyMachine

    Well put. I tiptoed, you wielded a war hammer. I liked your approach best...

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 6:54 a.m. CST


    by the antichrysler

    :: insert pseudo-witty remark about Harry&#39;s weight here :: PS - keep "God" out of it. Sheesh.

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 6:58 a.m. CST

    forgot to mention

    by the antichrysler

    Amazing Larry holds the trophy for &#39;most intelligible entry&#39; on this thread. I love it.

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 7:21 a.m. CST

    Agreed, though I have to say that any thread that Chaffro adds t

    by ToyMachine

    is always a good time. Stuff like this makes working midnight to 8 in the morning easier...though my coworkers give me strange looks when I start cracking up over what I am reading on the PC.

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 8:04 a.m. CST

    "...The Lord says: 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 (NIV): "Do you not know

    by Eugene O

    Correction: "The Lord" didn&#39;t "say" that. The Bible says it. And there is a huge difference. The Bible was written by MANY different people over a series of years, and those writings were collected (along with many other selected writings--- some of which were rejected) and selectively placed together in a single book while other writings were left out. And also, "Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God..." is a TRANSLATION from the original language. So, the fact is that what the Lord "says" is actually several times removed from the original source. Fuck it...I&#39;m too sleepy. G&#39;night all.....

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 8:47 a.m. CST

    How to do The Daily Planet characters

    by BJC0410

    Mr Abrams please feel free to use this idea if you peruse the talk back here. First off read my previous post in Moriarty&#39;s review(it details the way to do the plot) and talk to some actual comic book writers and stick to the SOURCE. Jimmy Olsen would be great played by seth green(Buffy). Jimmy would be the gen X photographer he would start the movie with a very just doing my job attitude, dissaffected and uncaring about the car crashes shootings and celebrity trash photo&#39;s he takes. Perry White the boss publishes the paper but is increasingly becoming bored with it. Lois Lane would be played by Lauren Graham (Gilmore girls) or the woman who plays lilah Morgan on Angel She would be primarily focused on politics and celebrity fluff. Enter Superman/ Clark Kent played by Bruce Campbell, Jerry o&#39;connell or eric Bana. When superman enters the scene he elevates and inspires lois and jimmy. Jimmy&#39;s photos take on meaning. Lois becomes passionate about helping the public and exposing corruption. Perry regains the fire in his belly for the newspaper business. As clark Superman is able to trail political corruption in mertopolis to one billionare Lex Luthor. Superman INspires, He the metaphor for what&#39;s great in all of us... it&#39;s so simple. You May want to have Joss whedon take a crack at your script. And always Remember K.I.S.S. Keep It Simple Stupid

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 9:16 a.m. CST


    by twitaman

    You know, Smallville is turning out to be a really interesting television show and a great addition to the Superman legend. I know early on that the creators of the show expressed an interest to do the series for 4 or 5 seasons then do a theatrical film -- and it is at that point that you would finally see Clark Kent wearing his super duds. I think Tom Welling is a good actor and Michael Rosenbaum&#39;s Lex Luthor is really intriguing. I say LET THE SMALLVILL CREW DO A SUPERMAN MOVIE AND SHELVE THIS OTHER NONSENSE!

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 10:23 a.m. CST


    by Spamgelus

    I agree. This show is really going in the right direction for everyone involved. Tom Welling is really great as a young Supes, and Michael Rosenbaum is EXCELLENT as young Lex. So, give it a few years and let this cast have a go at a movie, I say. Or even a new show called "Metropolis" after they all graduate, then a movie. Basically, ANY Superman movie that comes out now is a knee-jerk reaction to the success of Spider-Man, and therefore is coming from a perspective of quick cash for Warner Bros., and that&#39;s the wrong place to start (no matter how good the intentions of the writer are) as far as integrity is concerned. But, hey- I&#39;m just a know-nothing consumer, so I&#39;ll see you all this time next year at the premier of $uperman: The Quest For A Piece Of The Comic Book Cash Cow.

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 10:53 a.m. CST

    Let Superman Go.... Make THE AUTHORITY!!!

    by ParanoidPornstar

    I can&#39;t get enough of those guys.... Apollo is Superman, but one for THIS century... It&#39;d be aweosme...

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 10:58 a.m. CST

    Dammin, Krypton MUST explode....but take note, jj, here&#39;s ho

    by Saucy Jack

    ...make it so that Krypton explodes, just like God and Siegel & Schuster intended. But make Ty-Zor (or whatever his name was...didn&#39;t have the stomach to go back and reread the script review to make sure)and his fellow soldiers survivors of a lost Kryptonian colony! A few years before Kal-El put on the suit, they sent an expedition to Krypon to re-establish ties to the homeworld, only to discover a big void. But they track Kal-El&#39;s pod to earth, where they discover the unique powers of our yellow sun. So they decide to invade--after all, why wouldn&#39;t they want to live on a planet that gives them this kind of power? They launch an invasion force, coordinated by the artifical intelligence that has been running their lost colony--Braniac. You get everything you wanted--super powered Kryptonians fighting across the world (hell, you can even throw in a few Kung-Fu moves if you must) while the fans get what we want--Krypton explodes, Luthor isn&#39;t Kryptonian, that whole gay Prophecy crap is out the window...this is is the script that could work.

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 12:55 p.m. CST

    "There&#39;s no difference between a tacky Jew from Miami and a

    by Nurse No

    It all boils down to taste. A directors taste - good or bad - always comes through in his work.

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 1 p.m. CST

    god also says

    by casmcthorn

    you shouldn&#39;t judge, your as guilty of sin as anyone else dolphinboy

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 1:18 p.m. CST

    in regards to homosexuality and christianity..

    by hJ21 the gospels, Jesus always went out of his way to teach and associate himself with the prostitutes and other social outcasts.. where the priests of the time took a hardlined and self-righteous stance towards those types of people... how is that any different than what&#39;s happening now with views on homosexuality? whether or not you agree or disagree personally with homosexuality, it&#39;s illogical to assume that it&#39;s such a horrible sin that if Jesus were come back today, that he&#39;d be any less understanding concerning it.. and should that not be what the christian faith is about? - doing what jesus would do?

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 2 p.m. CST

    oh man

    by hank quinlan

    I leave for 3 days and this happens. I agree. Those 3 got caught and now Abrams is on spin control. I don&#39;t give a shit how nice a guy he is. And I love when these dudes pretend they are geeks too. Like Ratner and his mythic comic on the wall. You ain&#39;t a real geek. Real geeks would never change anything. You&#39;re a corporate tool. And Harry. Harry. Harry. I didn&#39;t expect you to be foaming at the mouth but I did expect you to stand up for us the way we would have if we were there. Is this the same guy who 3 years ago at the Limey screening commiserated with me over Dougray Scott&#39;s casting in the X-men? That guy wouldn&#39;t put up with this. Yeah, you are right. Gunn surprised you. But we didn&#39;t know what he did. Here we do. Letting Abram&#39;s tell his story of Superman is bullshit. That&#39;s like saying it&#39;s okay for Pyun to put his stamp on Captain America or Schumacher to give his version of Batman. It is not okay. From a fan standpoint or even a WB financial standpoint. A pal of mine is writing a treatment of certain comic character ( a fairly major one) for another company. I&#39;ll let you guess which. Anyhow, that guy has more passion and care for that material than anyone. He fought to keep the material pure AND to make it work as a screenplay. He didn&#39;t roll over to the exec (who is smart and passionate and didnt want THAT big of changes) and the only way my pal put his stamp on it was by trying to fit the story into a 3 act structure and make it a great movie. Abrams ain&#39;t THAT good of a writer. Alias is no Sopranos or Six Feet Under. Give the movie to John Ridley. He LOVES comics. Or David Chase. And by the way, all that shit in the Superman movie that didn&#39;t stick to the comic is ALWAYS the stuff I cringe at. I never thought it was ALL good. YOu know what is good? THE ORIGIN stuff. Can you guess why? I will NEVER pay to see this filth. And let me tell WB assholes will win the battle and lose the war. This is gonna be worse then Batman and Robin. I can hear the train jumping the tracks already. OH yeah...and FUCK BRETT RATNER AND JOHN PETERS!

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 2:13 p.m. CST

    Why hasn&#39;t this point been discussed?

    by Pifpog

    Like Mr. Knowles, I&#39;m an old school Superman fan... the Superpets, the signal watch, the time he worked at WGBS tv station, the Superman robots. I never was given any fake kryptonite as a kid, but I had the Mego figure and wore a cape around the house a lot. Unlike Harry (can I call you that?), I&#39;m not sure if that gives me any particular critical standing, but let&#39;s just say that my thoughts should have at least equal or nearly equal weight. This script troubles me on a number of levels. I&#39;m ok with playing with the origin of a character -- I don&#39;t watch it regularly, but I think what they&#39;ve done on Smallville is fun. They&#39;ve tweeked some of the history (Lex is once again growing up in Smallville, although now not a school chum of Clark&#39;s), added some new mythos (kryptonite gives you powers, Clark&#39;s arrival causes a disaster), but basically the core story is recognizable. The draft script, though, represents not so much a tinkering as a revisionist history. Krypton survives. His parents no longer died while saving his life, but instead are jailed and tortured. A race of krytonians flying around the galaxy looking for Kal-El (and somehow, in a great big universe, finding him). The whole

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 3:22 p.m. CST

    Why Brett Ratner is hated in Hollywood...

    by Kenshiro_Kane

    NOTE TO BRETT RATNER: You are a rice king rat fuck. Everyone in Hollywood hates your ass. Your intolerable body odor is quickly surpassing your shitty films in terms of triggering gag reflexes in those forced to bear witness to both. Most importantly, the staff (and many of the customers) of Asanebo restaurant in Studio City CA (plug) wish you would disappear. The waitresses think you are repulsive (so you can quit sexually harassing them), the customers think you are a loud, obnoxious, graceless pig (and they are correct) and your sycophantic entourage of losers are almost as clueless as you are. Please do everyone a favor and kill yourself. But take a shower first. Even LA coroners have a sense of smell.

  • There is a reason man invented shame.

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 3:31 p.m. CST

    Can we please leave the bible-beating at home?

    by Speed321

    The point isn&#39;t that he&#39;s gay, it&#39;s that he&#39;s gay for no reason. I would be offended if he suddenly became black. Instead of making an original character to fill their PC quota, they just took an already existing one and made him "fit". This "God says/Man says" debate is only going to give the people behind this movie ammo to fire at the people who don&#39;t like what&#39;s happening to it.(Case in point: read the article above)

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 3:34 p.m. CST

    I think the sequel should be called &#39;Superman 2: The Case of

    by Half Price Pears

    "You dipstick Rodders... this case is full of bleedin&#39; Kryptonite! That means that Dirty Barry&#39;s got the one full of them Polish DVD&#39;s... you Palonka"

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 3:37 p.m. CST

    kenshiro kane

    by hank quinlan

    Dude that is fucking awesome.

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 4:36 p.m. CST

    Let&#39;s Sink Harry!

    by tylernol

    You know guys, I&#39;ve said it before and I&#39;ll say it again, WE have the power to put Harry out of business. The only reason he enjoys his psuedo-celebrity status is because we come here every day. His site receives over a million hits a day (so he claims) and this is why he receives phone calls from Holly wood players. I know it would be difficult, but there is an easy sloution. Just stop coming here. I don&#39;t mean stop posting; no, stop hitting the AICN link from your toolbar. If the site goes down to a couple thousand hits a day, he will be out of business and just another fat-assed internet wannabe. We could do it, guys. Dark Horizons is a far superior movie site, and there are hundreds more on the net. Of course this will never happen because Harry is King Of The Geeks and ya&#39;ll can&#39;t live without this site, but it could happen. He could be put out of business. Think about it, a boycott of AICN. Moriarty would then start his own site and we would be rid of Harry Knowles. We have made him who he is, and we could also send him back. What do ya&#39;ll think?

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 6 p.m. CST

    Superman I & II are shit, and so is this...

    by bleutuna

    Superman I sucked. Superman II sucked. All of the Superman films have just been trash, and this new one is absolutely no different. How anyone could look at the first two Superman films and say they were *good* is beyond me. Silly, ridiculous crap. Superman flying around the world to turn back time? Otis? Lex Luthor and Miss Tessmacher? Ridiculous, moronic, 2-dimensional "comic-book" characters in the completely negative sense of the word. Reeves is the *only* decent thing in that film. Reeves was a great Superman, there&#39;s no denying that. Eveything else in those shit-can films could and should have been left on the floor. Superman giving back his powers? In some crystal chamber? Zod? The non-talking, grunting Kryptonian? HAR-HAR-HAR-HAR-FUCKING-HAR! What makes me just as mad as this Abrams piece of shit script is you folks ga-gaing over the Donner shit. Just as bad as this one. I&#39;m a comic fan. Have always been. I real Superman, even when the comics sucking like ass. Donner and Puzo didn&#39;t turn out a masterpiece. Sorry to burst your bubbles. Anyway, onto Harry and Abrams: Harry, I&#39;ve seen your ass in the Drafthouse North a number of times, how would you like it if I came up to you and told you exactly what I think of your mamby-pamby, wishy-washy, incoherent, stream of conciousness review style? You change your mind within minutes, you can&#39;t keep your mind on the point you&#39;re trying to make, and your narrative capability reminds me of my 16-year old brother trying to explain to me how to rope a cow. It&#39;s all bullshit, both in quality and in content. Abrams sucked up to your fat, stinky ass, and you just took the bait. Took that motherfucker hook line and sinker, didn&#39;t you Harry? "OH! A WRITER CALLED ME ON THE PHONE! OH MY!" Dude, if ABRAMS thinks that Krypton blowing up is only a "minor detail" then you KNOW he&#39;s the wrong man for this project. Period. Any Superman fan can tell you that. Krypton being gone is as important to Superman as Bruce Wayne&#39;s parents being dead. Should we just have Wayne&#39;s parents wounded in the next Batman film? That&#39;s a good idea, huh? Completely eradicate any and all motivation for these characters to serve and protect. Ugh. Sheople, all of you bastiches.

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 6:03 p.m. CST

    Oh, and SAUCY JACK...

    by bleutuna

    It&#39;s, "Eat your cake and have it too" not "Have your cake and eat it too". Dumbass. If you HAVE your cake, why the fuck can&#39;t you eat it? Is someone going to stop you? Are they going to snatch it from your hand? Why the fuck am I not allowed to eat a cake that I have? But, if I EAT my cake, I can&#39;t necessarily have it can I? No, numbnuts, it&#39;s gone. Goodbye, cake in my stomach. EAT YOUR CAKE AND HAVE IT TOO, get it? Got it? Good. Now go suck Abrams dick and watch some more fucking Alias. HBO has a better lineup than ABCs shitfest comic-book wannabe bullshit.

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 6:31 p.m. CST

    bible thumpers, Harry bashers, and very scary fanboys, oh my!

    by darthhaole

    Dolphinboy, if you want to have a Christian ministry, for God&#39;s sake do it somewhere where you aren&#39;t just gonna piss everyone off. I swear, the worst enemy of Christ is the misguided Christian. Do you actually think you are gonna sway someone by quoting Bible texts at a fanboy site in the middle of a Superman discussion?! I was a missionary for 4 years and even I was offended by your posts. You dishonor your cause. Ok, moving on... I personally love this site and find it ridiculous that people are so hateful about Harry&#39;s opinions. He&#39;s not perfect (Tell them Dolphin, he&#39;s not Jesus). The reason I like listening to Harry is because I believe he says what he really feels. So what if it&#39;s exactly the opposite of what he said 5 minutes ago. I get gas and my opinion changes. I don&#39;t agree with him a lot of the time, but so what. I come here to hear different points of view. Isn&#39;t it possible that Abrams made his case enough to Harry that he really did change his mind and decide to give him a chance? And by the way, I think it&#39;s freaking cool that Abrams would care enough about what a few geeks think of his script that he&#39;d actually call Harry to discuss it. Makes me feel like he really does care. I wish he&#39;d call Moriarty too and hear a report back from him. Finally, heh I thought many of the changes sucked too, but some of you people scare me. Even if he decided to make Superman gay and hook him up with Lex in a pink condo, that&#39;s no reason to threaten his life. Mother, some of you people need to get out more often. Peace.

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 6:40 p.m. CST

    Founder, Superman would save anybody in danger, even if it meant

    by Clark Clay

    Exuse me, but Superman would die to save ANYBODY, Lois included. All life is precious to him.

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 6:52 p.m. CST

    Neil MacAuley...

    by C4-BO(MB)

    About "Felicity" on DVD: It&#39;s already been announced that the first season will be released November 5th on six discs. Just thought you might care to know::::::::::Also, "Alias" starts its seconds season tonight, Sunday, September 29th (in case people didn&#39;t know that from all the advertisements).

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 6:55 p.m. CST

    Why LEX??

    by harvey7297

    Does Lex Luthor have to be the villian in EVERY retelling of the Superman myth? -Superman 1, II, IV -Lois and Clark -Smallville What about Braniac and Doomsday? Screw the origin (if people don&#39;t know it by now, they must be living in a cave where there are no theaters)...and hit the ground running! Why is it such a complex task to bring a quality Superman film to the multiplex?

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 7:01 p.m. CST

    by Jon Zuckerman

    I still dont like what Im hearing. Part of the uniqueness of the character is that he&#39;s the sole survivor of a doomed planet.One of my favorite lines in Superman The Movie is from Jor-El about always keeping in his heart the pride of his unique heritage. Its like saying Bruce Waynes parents didnt die. Superman has powers on and around Earth, he wouldnt on Krypton. And how is there Kryptonite if the planet didnt explode? I dont mind little liberties like the Crystal Krypton and such, but those things didnt compromise the character and his history.

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 7:20 p.m. CST

    This is a waste of time!

    by SteveRefa

    Why bother writing a new script, They should make the next Superman movie and sequel to Smallville. The Smallville writers must be doing something right if they are writing Spiderman 2! If they do make a new Superman movie keep in mind these main points that are the same in every version of Superman, may it film, tv, cartoon or comic. 1, Krypton explodes! Superman is alone in the universe, Through the Kents he learns to do the right thing, to use his powers for good. 2, Luthor is human, a genius with no powers just a great evil mind. 3, Jimmy Olsen is not gay, Jimmy is the young innocent friend of Clark Kent. Jimmy is the one that readers identify with. We would all like to have Superman&#39;s powers, but we are more like Jimmy Olsen, ordinary guys excited by our hero Superman. Please do not forget this.

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 7:42 p.m. CST


    by Hoof Hearted

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 7:56 p.m. CST


    by Hoof Hearted

    "Now, this is the question you must answer: "If the Bible is not inspired from God, then why does it have so many fulfilled prophecies?" How is that possible if the Bible were not from God? Only God knows the future, has power over it, and can look into it to tell us exactly what will happen. In the Bible we have the finger prints of God: fulfilled prophecy!" Umm, how about the Bible was translated and recopied, as their were no printing presses, an innumerable amount of times throughout history. How about at first it was only oral tradition around the campfire and not even written down, how about how it passed through different languages until finally getting to Latin, where the only people that could read it were the Clergy and the Nobility (the people in power) How about that the church fought against the King James Bible because they could no longer freely interpret the "word of God" as they needed, if anyone could read it. Religion is a social control, its easy to say ancient texts contained prophecies that were later fulfilled when you are the one writing it all down and controlling the source information. The Bible is just a generational game of Telephone, changed and colored by the biases and prejeduices of men. The Bible you have now is not the Bible that was originally written. Open your eyes Christian. Faith and Belief and Forgiveness are all fine and good, but the social-political organization of the Church has an agenda, and its reflected in the text they have changed through out the years and now hold aloft. Why would they do this? A fear of an otherworldly punishment keeps the population in line. Wisdom? True wisdom would be to find the fundamental truths within the bible and decide the rest for yourself. Otherwise, keep your god to yourself, this is a movie site. No one else cares about your brain washed, narrow minded views. The truth of God is subjective, you keep yours, let us decide on our own.

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 7:58 p.m. CST

    To me, Superman is about ...

    by NicholasWolfwood

    an alien named Clark Kent raised in a good family who taught him right from wrong and to not use his powers for selfish needs and does it for Truth and Justice (tm). He was raised human and when he dons the cape he is still Clark Kent, with Superman as his disguise, not the other way around. For those talkbackers threatening Abrams&#39; life and family I doubt you&#39;ll never know what Superman is about anyway. I&#39;ve been a follower of Byrne&#39;s retelling of the origin&#39;s of Supes. I was kinda peeved with some of the liberties taken in Lois and Clark, but the show had heart because they show how close he is with his family. And Smallville did the same by mixing pre-crisis stuff like Clark and Lex meeting when they were young. But it has heart too because they show how important Clark&#39;s family is, and that Clark Kent is the real person, not Superman like it was in the movies, though I still love watching Supes 1 and 2. I&#39;m certain Abrams will do a good job in that respect. And I&#39;ll be just as happy if Lois and Clark hook up together, not Lois and Superman! Otherwise then I&#39;ll be pissed! I&#39;ll also be mad if he uses his letter &#39;S&#39; Saran wrap on his enemies!

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 8:53 p.m. CST

    My Opinion.

    by RedFive

    They should jusy stick there thumbs in there asses,admit superman 3 and 4 were worthless and go from there.They shouldnt be doing ANOTHER origin story,they should just make it like the justice league with just superman and braniac or luthor or doomsday etc..we all know superman we dont need to be retold whw he is.Things should just be the way they are and tell a good story.

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 9:04 p.m. CST

    I&#39;ve only read a few paragraphs, already I see Harry shamles

    by TheGinger Twit

    Sure there may be differences, but that doesn&#39;t make up for the monstrocity that was this new superman story.

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 9:10 p.m. CST

    Why does a new Superman film even need an origin story?!?!?

    by urbnlegnd1

    OK, I&#39;ve never really been a huge fan of any origin film minus the original Superman movie and have always found that many times its much more intriguing to let a character&#39;s past come out as the films/stories progress over time. Hell I pretty much hated Spiderman which I&#39;m well aware makes me a minority but that mainly came from the fact that I couldn&#39;t agree with much of the casting, nor with the fact that they utilized campy tactics in both the acting and action to tell a story that could have come off as much more real and intriguing. But not to go off on a tangent any further, the point is this. We all know Superman&#39;s origin. Of all the superhero&#39;s in existance he&#39;s probably the most well known by his past and the fact that he&#39;s been adapted to film and television more than any other icon/hero should tell JJ or anyone else who does anything with Superman in the film industry that we can MOVE ON!!! Why not utilize our great technology and our extensive knowledge of old supes to say, "Hey, now we could go so far as to make a Superman movie where he ends up having to face apocolypse in another dimension without it looking like utter crap!" Or "Lets make a Superman film where he is at a slightly later stage in life, Lois and friends are aging, the world is becoming more difficult to defend and Luthor is on a psychopathic path to ultimate world domination". The point is, if you want to be so damn innovative and fresh, then show us a side of Superman or ANY comic book adaptation that we have not already seen. Do you really think that fans need to see yet another rehashing of a classic tale? Well of course I could be wrong on this but NO they don&#39;t. Superman should be done in a way that awes us the way we were when watching the Matrix but touches us right in our hearts as it tells the story of a small town alien boy all grown up in a struggle to use his super powers to maintain a skewed sense of truth and honor. By any means, if we&#39;re going to be waiting for a revision of a terrible script as our first big screen return from supes since the god awful "Quest for Peace" then there&#39;s probably a good chance that they might as well go ahead and stamp a "V" behind the title cause it&#39;ll suck as bad as a fifth sequel.

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 9:16 p.m. CST

    If you&#39;re going to reinvent superman, do it this way...

    by TheGinger Twit

    Have him as a real bad punk kid. And have him do some really nasty stuff. Then have Luther as a really good human who is trying to track this guy down and kill him. Only when Clark goes to the fortress of solitude and is taught how to be good, does Luthur keep up his goal, becoming evil... and well I don&#39;t know, I&#39;ve given up on superman. I think 1 and 2 should re-edited and re-released as 1 film.

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 9:24 p.m. CST

    Y&#39;know, just because you keep true to the original story of

    by TheGinger Twit

    In fact, the entire screenplay could be re-shot with changes to the things like What Krypton looks like, how the planet explodes, and then what Clark is like before he becomes superman, and then even what he has to do to save the world... I think saving the world from it&#39;s own leaders is the best plot for todays world.

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 9:34 p.m. CST

    The problem isn&#39;t that fact that he had the idea of making L

    by Movietool

    If after having the idea of making Luthor a Kryptonian you don&#39;t immediately say to yourself "shit, is THAT a lousy idea," then you should NOT BE WRITING A SUPERMAN MOVIE. I don&#39;t care what draft you&#39;re working on. If that idea MADE IT ON PAPER then you don&#39;t understand Superman. "Brains vs. Brawn" and Luthor&#39;s innate hate that someone he considers intellectually inferior should be given such god-like power is ABSOLUTELY CENTRAL to their conflict. IT&#39;S WHAT MAKES THEM ENEMIES. Kal-el being the last son of Krypton is ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL to his character. If you don&#39;t understand that - then you shouldn&#39;t be involved with this movie. Let&#39;s face it, Warner Brothers is lost with this franchise. DC comics should sue them for the way the WB has turned their characters into jokes. It&#39;s WORSE than when Marvel made The Punisher and Captain America. At least no one SAW those movies.

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 9:54 p.m. CST


    by superhero

    How could you possibly think that a film with Krypton not blowing up could be a Superman film?????? THAT&#39;S THE ESSENTIAL PART OF THE MYTHOS THAT MAKES HIM WHO HE IS!!!!!!! Hellooooo...Orphan from the doomed planet Krypton? Alone in the universe? Last son of Krypton? What the hell are you talking about? IT&#39;S ESSENTIAL FOR GOD&#39;S SAKE! How could you think in any way, shape or form that this is a good idea? What they&#39;ve done is essentially make some lame asses sci-fi script and tacked on the name "Superman" on it. This is an embarrassment and talking all that stuff about loving Superman and saying it&#39;s OK that Krypton doesn&#39;t blow up makes you look even more of a sell-out than anything else you&#39;ve evr done on this site. How could you not see that? SUPERMAN IS AN ORPHAN! It&#39;s what makes his character! It&#39;s what makes his psyche so humble! He knows that the only reason that he is alive is because of his parents&#39; sacrifice! How could you not see that? The reason Spider-Man worked is because they got the basics right! Sure they changed stuff but he still got bit by a Spider (genetically altered or radioactive doesn&#39;t matter), becomes egocentric and drunk with power, and learns that his power isn&#39;t to be abused because of the death of his uncle (or father figure). THOSE ARE THE BASICS! Now you say that to take the explosion of Krypotn and just remove it is OK? NONSENSE! Superman is special! Yes, there may have been other Kryptonians but they didn&#39;t survive because of their parent&#39;s selflessness or nobility. Not to mention that the whole eighties re-vamp DID MAKE SUPERMAN THE ONLY SURVIVING KRYPTONIAN which is actually considered a good thing by most fans and creators! Equate it to someone surviving the Holocaust. think about how that experience has changed them. How blessed, how lucky they feel. How every day is seen as a blessing and a gift. NOW IMAGINE IF YOU WERE THE ONLY PERSON WHO SURVIVED THE EXTINCTION OF NOT JUST A RACE OF PEOPLE OR A RELIGIOUS GROUP BUT A WHOLE PLANET OF BEINGS!!!! I would think that besides feeling alone in the world you would also realise that your whole life must have been a gift and that you would spend EVERY day trying to make good for the blessing that he been bestowed upon you. THIS IS AN ESSENTIAL ELEMENT OF THE SUPERMAN CANON! How could you and Abrams just dismiss that part of Superman&#39;s character so easily? It&#39;s not just because he was raised right by the Kents that "does the right thing". It&#39;s because he has been shown that he is alive only because HIS REAL FATHER DID THE RIGHT THING! The fact that you you don&#39;t see that shows me that it doesn&#39;t matter that you own all the movies, vhs tapes, DVDs, and comic books. You (and the clowns at Warner Bros.) still don&#39;t GET Superman or what it is that makes him so special in a world full of people in tights kicking the hell out of each other. Sorry Harry, I love your site but sometimes you are SO boneheaded it&#39;s incredible.

  • Sept. 29, 2002, 10:06 p.m. CST

    take out the destiny, prophecy shit...

    by DarkWingDragon

    the best, let me rephrase that, the only reason that superman was sent to earth is because krypton explodes. The destiny, prophecy bullshit should i put it... a fucked up idea

  • Sept. 30, 2002, 12:33 a.m. CST

    megga dittos superhero


    Thanks, I was just about to post about the importance of Krypton exploding to the Superman legend. I couldn&#39;t have said it any better myself. DITTO

  • Sept. 30, 2002, 12:41 a.m. CST

    This soap opera is much more entertaining than a new Superman mo

    by JackLint

    I laughed out loud when I heard about WB reactions to Moriarity&#39;s review on Dark Horizons.

  • Sept. 30, 2002, 12:49 a.m. CST

    How to do "Superman" right...


    ...For God&#39;s sake... Just take the recent animated series, and turn it into a live-action film! Right off the bat, it sets up everything in a way that&#39;s true to classic ideas, yet brings something new to the table. A major villain from Kryton? Ya got Brainiac, Jor-El&#39;s megalomaniacal super-computer/A.I. in a powerful android body. You want the best of all Lexes? The show&#39;s Lex is a well-maintained early middle-aged man, who is a multi-billionaire that not only basically runs Metropolis, but an accomplished and brilliant scientist in his own right! You want well-defined, interesting supporting characters? Lois and Jimmy were NEVER better. You want well-done Kryptonian millitant villains? Jax-Ur and Malla were great stand-ins for Zod and Ursa. You want the biggest, baddest cosmic baddie ever? It gets no better than Darkseid himself!! If WB has so much trouble creating a new film concept for Supes that works, please, for the love of humanity, JUST ADAPT THE ANIMATED SERIES!!!:)

  • Sept. 30, 2002, 12:51 a.m. CST

    If Krypton doesn&#39;t explode, then how the fuck is there Krypt

    by fladnaG

    Does anybody know? I sure as hell can&#39;t figure it out.

  • Sept. 30, 2002, 8:58 a.m. CST

    i like the idea of superman & jimmy gettin&#39; it on

    by paperboy

  • Sept. 30, 2002, 9:28 a.m. CST

    Krypton needs to explode before Superman gets to earth !!!

    by paulyd30

    Krypton needs to explode before Superman gets to earth !!! This is an essential elemet which makes superman who hs is. Like peter parker being bitten by the radioactive spider you must have it!! Holy crap can&#39;t we get anything right ???!!

  • Sept. 30, 2002, 9:53 a.m. CST


    by JMR_8

    You know what? I&#39;m a pretty strange guy. I&#39;m a Superman fan. I can take certain changes in the character, others I am not too fond of. I am a BIG fan of John Byrne&#39;s revamped history of Superman. So much so, that in the recent RETURN TO KRYPTON II storyline, when that history was threatened, I was a bit upset. My feelings on the "Pre-Crisis" Superman are this: It was a great springboard for the new stuff. Look at it as a whole. It was (at best) a convoluted mess that eventually created a character with outrageous villains, because they were the only ones good enough to beat him. How do you stop a guy who shugs off a nuclear blast and can juggle planets? Plus, if a man can move so fast as to break the time barrier, why can&#39;t he be everywhere at once? These are just some of the smaller examples of why Superman, circa 1985, was in a bad way. Aside from making Superman weaker (a welcome change) Byrne emphasized the fact that Superman is, in essence, a living solar battery (thank goodness we no longer had to deal with "red sun guns.") Also, if he couldn&#39;t store the energy, how could he really travel the universe? Past that, Byrne erased the one question that always plagued me. When did Superman decide to tell the world that he even had a secret identity? The glasses-as-a-disguise bit works much better when you consider that no one is trying to find him. Finally, there was the all-important change of realizing that Superman was not disguised as Clark Kent, but that Clark Kent was disguised as Superman. Clark did not have to be a bumbling boob, he just had to be an ordinary guy, because that&#39;s who he really was and had always been. It was also these stories (which sometimes included the no-longer-dead Ma and Pa Kent) which truly set the new stories above the stories of old. With little exception I also like Smallville. DESPITE THE FACT that Metropolis now appears to be in Kansas, right next to Smallville. This is probably THE BIGGEST sticking point with me. I have come to accept the fact that Lex and Clark were friends as teens. To me this could lay the groundwork for the most realistic representation of their adult relationship and why Superman really wants to get Luthor. Maybe it is also about a sense of betrayal. What&#39;s the point of all of this? Simple. What the honchos at Warners and what any writer REALLY needs to do is pay the respect which is due to the character. This was something the Richard Donner did, and Richard Lester did not. VERSIMILITUDE was key. Why? Not because the audience wants to see the dark, nitty gritty world. It&#39;s because the fantasy and allure of characters like Superman is to wonder what if they existed in OUR WORLD. Not some imaginary world with multi-colored characters walking around. Superman in the real world is what the audience wants. In a way, I think that is what makes the Businessman Lex Luthor so appealing. As a Mad Genius, Supervillain, there wasn&#39;t much to the character. Is losing one&#39;s hair really a reason to want to kill someone? No. A thirst and a quest for power are much heartier. I once took an acting class and was taught the term "Por Las Buenas." It&#39;s the sense that when you play a character you must realize that no one BELIEVES that they are bad. They are doing something to achieve some good, even if it is only for them. Any villain who says "I am Evil!! Evil will be supreme" is unrealistic or insane. And what&#39;s more frightening? A person who hurts and kills because he is insane, or one who does so despite his "sanity?" The people at Warners need to make a good movie. Donner got it right because he knew this (although I&#39;m still not OVERLY thrilled with Gene Hackman&#39;s Luthor because he fits the older mold -- No offense to Hackman who did a marvelous job.) Keep Superman who he is. The Last Son of Krypton, who is raised by Human parents with Human values, who merely strives to do the best he can.

  • Sept. 30, 2002, 11:04 a.m. CST

    Y&#39;know what? Fuck it. I am NOT going to read every TB in thi

    by Juggernaut125

    I try to. Don&#39;t know why, but I usually try to gauge everyone&#39;s opinion, but god damn it I can&#39;t do it anymore. Harry? Y&#39;know why there was such a HUGE knee-jerk reaction to JJ&#39;s first script? Why the article and it&#39;s corresponding talkbacks overshadowed almost EVERY OTHER ARTICLE? Because I live in Toronto, and BurlIvesLeftNut lives in some other city and ToyMachine in another and there&#39;s no way in hell JJ Abrams is gonna call us up and explain in detail what his &#39;vision&#39; of Superman is. So we come to your site and read Mori&#39;s article about a first draft from a some-what &#39;respected&#39; writer about a character that many of us feel VERY passionate about. Fuck, how many TBs were posted in that first article anyway? That&#39;s how passionate we are about him! What I&#39;m saying is, I didn&#39;t like Abrams&#39; first draft. At all. If there&#39;s going to be a new first Superman movie of a series, and I can understand the reasons for it. Then I feel it better serves the public interest to use the Superman that the public is most familiar. Today&#39;s Superman. Not the original. Not the 60&#39;s Supes. The Post-Crisis Superman who came from a doomed planet, raised in Kansas by Jonathon and Martha and who works in Metropolis as a reporter for the Daily Planet. Metropolis is almost completely owned by Lex Luthor who may be President or may run for the Presidency. But Krypton is GONE. It was gone moments after Kal-El left. Fucking rant. Sorry everyone. Basically we all know that Superman has a rich history of comicbook, cartoon, television and film stories to draw from. There are printed characters and villains that many would like to see brought to the screen. But the review of the script that Mori gave us appeared as more an amalgam (sp?) of The Matrix and Star Wars: Ep. 1 and Spiderman and Felicity. And among all of those other pop-culture artifacts, where&#39;s the room for Superman?

  • Sept. 30, 2002, 12:33 p.m. CST

    Let me guess, if Joel Schumacher calls, Harry will change his st

    by Blue Devil

    I understand being nice to someone, but like you said Harry, Schumacher didn&#39;t set out to make the worst comic film in history. What concerns me is that fact that Abrams felt that proceeding with the premise that Krypton doesn&#39;t explode, Luthor is Kryptonian, and that Superman would rather flirt with Lois than save lives is okay. Anyone who thinks those approaches are okay is automatically suspect in my book.

  • Sept. 30, 2002, 2:08 p.m. CST

    Some thoughts...

    by honestabe30

    My first thought on all this is, why NOT retell the Superman origin? I mean, yes the Donner film was a great movie. But it has now been, what, almost 25 years since that movie came out? Christopher Reeve will not be Superman, Margot Kidder will not be Lois, and so on. There will be new people in these roles and therefore, perhaps the story should be told in the context of new actors in the roles, new specials effects, etc. If they are trying to establish the franschise again, it may be easier for people to accept new actors in the roles if they are first portrayed in a version of the story we know. If they just come along with a new guy as Superman and tell some story taking place well after his origin, how do we get on-board as accepting that THIS IS SUPERMAN. I think part of the reason the Donner film told the origin was to establish that Christopher Reeve was Superman. Forget George Reeves everybody, Christopher Reeve IS Superman. If they want to establish some other actor as THE Superman for the 2000&#39;s, the easiest way to do it would be to tell the modernized version of the familiar story. Then once we are on-board accepting this guy as Superman, this actress as Lois, this other actor as Jimmy, etc. they are free and clear to tell any stories they want. People seem to think this should be Superman 5, a sequel to the 1987 film Superman IV. Okay, reality check that film is 15 years old. The star is crippled, Margot Kidder has aged, I mean even the comics stories don&#39;t center around a Superman and Lois that are middle aged. I just don&#39;t see the validity of picking up where we left off. There were points to that series that were getting a bit silly. I accepted that Supes wiped out Lois&#39; memory of his identity in S2 with a kiss. Then in S4, he reveals it again because he "needs to talk" and just kisses the secret right out of her again. Alright, it&#39;s gettin&#39; silly. Heck I LOVED the first two movies but is Jor-El "talking Kal-El out of being dead" any less plausible a plot twist than Superman turning back time by spinning the world backwards to keep Lois from dying? When he restarted time, where was the crack that swallowed Lois? what about all the people he saved while Lois was dying? Did they die in the new timeline? I&#39;m not trying to knock the movie, I&#39;m just saying we accepted some unusual twists in that series, why not now? Heck think about S2, when he was told "if you enter this chamber and become human, there is no going back. It is a permenant change." Yeah, until he really needs his powers back. Then he finds the green crystal that "built" the fortress and somehow the next time we see him he has powers again! um, okay! Again, I LOVED Superman 2. One of my all time favorite movies as a kid. But when you look at the sometimes absurd plot twists, can you really judge everything Abrams has done in his draft? Now, I do agree that the original draft of the script was too much. Too out there, too much change, etc. And a lot of people are saying that the points introduced in the script prove that JJ has the wrong idea about this story because he could even think about making those changes. Well, if he WAS really trying to knock out a fast script and get the studio&#39;s attention maybe he was just trying to prove to the studio that he was willing to look at things from a fresh perspective and was willing to change things. I&#39;m sure the studio&#39;s mentality is "how do we revitalize a very old franchise?" Then they get this script from Abrams that offers a fresh, modern telling of the character and they see the potential for how this story can be told. Then it is up to Abrams to revise the script to keep the fresh elements while trimming the more outrageous changes to the mythos. None of us are in his head, but isn&#39;t this a possibility of how this occured? Now that the Super-Lex and Ru-Jimmy (or Boy Jimmy) issues have been dealt with, people are jumping all over the "yeah but Krypton doesn&#39;t blow up!" thing. How do we know? JJ&#39;s coy response to whether that happens or not leads me to think that maybe he still has it blowing up, but he tells the story differently. Maybe we go along with Superman on this journey to discover his roots, only to have it revealed in the end that Krypton did explode. I hypothesized this idea before in a talk back. JJ has this trilogy idea, perhaps one of the plot points is that the first film has his origins on Earth, but he is unaware of the details of his heritage. After trying to determine who he is, he gets this piece of the puzzle---Krypton, the planet of his origin. So he sets out to find it and find out why he was sent away. And in the end he discovers that the planet blew up; his father saved him from death. Maybe the parts of the movie where it flashes to Krypton are going to turn out to be backstory. I just watched an Alias episode last night and the way it was constructed was you&#39;d see a bit of story, then Sydney was in the therapist&#39;s office telling this story because it was in the past. JJ seems to enjoy messing with timeline and continuity a bit in order to slowly reveal twists and turns in the story. Maybe he intends to do that in the Superman movies. Maybe if we have some faith, by the end of an entertaining and fresh story arc, we&#39;ll still have our Superman, the orphan from the exploded planet Krypton, who lives on Earth as a protector and defender and fights evil, including the very human Lex Luthor. As for Harry&#39;s "backpedaling", it takes a greater person to admit they might be wrong when they hear the other side of the story than to be be stubbornly adhered to the opinion that "I&#39;m right and no one can say a thing against me". So JJ is a famous screenwriter. He is still a human being and should be accorded the same respect as anyone who posts on talkback. Are people actually suggesting that Harry be a closeminded, opinionated jerk? One of those my way or the highway types? God if he is or becomes that I hope he doesn&#39;t have kids and never does. The people who teach their kids that kind of closeminded thinking shouldn&#39;t be parents. I respect Harry for being open-minded and listening to both sides of the issue. And notice, he didn&#39;t say he was sold on the movie. He simply said that he will wait and see. He may have dropped his condemning stance, but neither did he say "JJ rocks! Everyone must go see this movie." And finally, a lot of people are saying "Why not have Superman fight Darkseid, Brainiac, etc.?" Okay, where does he go at the end of the script draft we&#39;ve seen? Space. Where do Darkseid and Brainiac originate? Space. How do we know they don&#39;t figure into the 3 film story arc? Maybe the story he is telling begins with his earthly origins and has Superman very earth-based and then has his world expand a bit with his discovery that he is from this planet out there. Maybe by leaving Earth, he opens himself to encountering these otherworldly villians for the first time. And in the end, upon discovering that his homeworld and heritage are gone, he develops a fierce determination to become the protector and defender of his adopted world, Earth. Question: how do you take someone who was raised as a humble farmboy in rural America and cause him to decide that he has the lofty calling to be the Champion of Earth? Maybe this story arc provides that answer. When I watch Smallville, I see a Clark who is a long way from being this larger than life hero who fights for truth, justice and the American way. And good for Gough and Millar. That should be how he is now...a good kid in a small town with some rather unusual abilities. But it would take an extraordinary journey and story to develop this person into SUPERMAN! Think about it...suspend reality for a moment. Say you, a real flesh and blood person, woke up one morning with incredible strength, unbreakable skin, the ability to fly, the ability to see through walls, etc. Would your first instinct be "well, I guess I&#39;ll get a cape and boots and become a superhero"? I would think after the "holy crap" effect wore off there would be lots of questions. I would think it would take a lot just to convince someone to put on a costume and put themselves out there. Clark is not raised with a "how cool am I" ego. He is raised to be a humble person who hides his abilities from others. To go from that to wearing a flashy costume and going by the name Superman and getting all that attention would have to take a lot of impactful events on someone. Okay, very long rant. To anyone who took time to read this, thank you.

  • Sept. 30, 2002, 2:21 p.m. CST


    by Katana Octopus

    Okay. I know you have your vision. Hell, I have seen some versions of Superman&#39;s origin myself. But none of them have such a radical change like the one you are proposing. It&#39;s SUPERMAN who we&#39;re talking about. The greatest fictional character in history. The #1 superhero. The non plus ultra.THE MAN. Krypton doesn&#39;t explode??? That&#39;s why Superman is sent to earth, in the first place. A prophecy?? What prophecy? Superman was conceived in The Seventh Age of Krypton. The Silver Age of Krpyton had been a long, long time ago. Thousands of years ago. Kal-El was conceived in a cold, feelingless planet. There was not a single Krpytonian who believed in such things. There was only science. Krypton became one of the most advanced civilizations in the galaxy. Lex Luthor, a KRYPTONIAN??? Could you tell me why??? I know that this won&#39;t be anymore. But a CIA AGENT??? Again, why??? Luthor is a multimilionaire bussiness man. One of the richest men in the world. someone who will not stop to get what he wants. Evil incarnate. And what makes him interesting is that he&#39;s HUMAN. A human being who SUPERMAN can&#39;t stop. Superman. A man who is practically A GOD. A man who can move entire planets, melt rocks with his heat vision. A man who could take over the entire planet by himself. A man who has been compared with a GOD. See my point? Ty-Zor??? Another Krpytonian. Superman is called "The LAST Son Of Krypton" for a reason. That&#39;s a very improtant part of the character. He&#39;s the last survivor of an ENTIRE alien race. the only one left in the UNIVERSE. An alien that made Earth his home. And I heard that he gets his powers from a suit. As someone said, he&#39;s NOT Iron Man. he&#39;s SUPERman. The most powerful being on the entire planet, and one of the most powerful beings in universe. He doesn&#39;t need a suit. He needs a yellow sun, which is the one the Earth has. The yellow sun, as you know, is what gives Superman his powers. I like your story, but as an ELSEWORLDS story. Not a story to REINTRODUCE Superman, OUR SUPERMAN, to the people. I want to trust you. I really do. But hell, Superman is Superman. I want a movie that makes people think "Bat who?" or "X-what?"or better yet: "SUPERMAN KICKS EVERY OTHER SUPERHERO&#39;S A$$", a movie that lets people know that Superman is the strongest, greatest, coolest superhero. The ABSOLUTE KING OF SUPERHEROES. I hope you read this.

  • Sept. 30, 2002, 5:56 p.m. CST

    WB should bring on Paul Dini as story consultant.

    by superninja

    This Abrams backpeddaling maneuver just isn&#39;t going to cut it. The guy doesn&#39;t know Superman - just like Jon Peters - he only knows HIS Superman. Typical tunnel vision supported by Warner Bros. Keep it up, WB, and you&#39;ll add another decade of development hell to all your superhero projects. Sure people were scared by Spider-Man, but Raimi took the time to show the fans that mythology would be honored and the character would remain in tact. Raimi clearly won most everyone over. I doubt Superman fans are reassured by the blatant egotism of "MY SUPERMAN".

  • Sept. 30, 2002, 6:59 p.m. CST


    by Kenshiro_Kane

    There&#39;s nothing worse than a rat, Harry. And you, my obese, corporate ass-kissing pal, are a rat. You screwed Moriarty over this Superman fiasco and deserve all of the scorn and disdain you&#39;re getting for it. It&#39;s one thing to sell out your credibility for approval from a group of studio heads who will always view you as a corpulant means-to-an-end who can be bought with a few favors- but it&#39;s another thing to sell out a pal in the process. "SUPERMAN" will suck and, now, so do you, Harry.

  • Sept. 30, 2002, 9:21 p.m. CST


    by Sneako

    Does this all mean X-Men 3 is going to be called "The Uncanny X-Men"?

  • Sept. 30, 2002, 9:26 p.m. CST

    i am australian

    by baff

    i have a sort of different request for the creators of the new superman flick. as tempting and easy it would surely be to use superman as a vessel for affirming americas strength, particuliarly at this time, and giving your country a nice pat on the back, i ask you not to. yes superman traditionally stands for the &#39;american way of life&#39; but this movie is going to be distributed globally, and as normal and healthy it may seem to see the american flag all over your films it is jarring to the rest of us.. and their is a lot of &#39;the rest of us&#39;. you can go ahead and make the superman who saves america as he was no doubt intended (ill give you that).. but if you are redefining him and trying to make him universal, remember there are others of us IN THIS UNIVERSE. superman should be champion of the world. the whole world. he has the power to utilise his strength all over the world..ironically enough, so too does america... and does something so clearly good as a &#39;superman&#39; haved to be wrapped up in stars and stripes with a piece of string. cant he just be good? for the whole world? the whole world who will see this film? after the events of last september this is an enourmous request because superman is an enourous part of your pop culture, but for various reasons mine as an australian as well and for many other nations around the world. this is sort of getting into america&#39;s dominance in the world market which id like to avoid. i feel ive sort of lost track of my point so to summise: you have every right to make him the americest thing youve ever seen.. but i would like you to consider the rest of your audience outside those borders who who understand the wrongs in equating &#39;good&#39; with &#39;america&#39;.. do you get my meaning? the last frame of spider-man had him clinging onto a flag pole with your flag waving proudly.. this seems natural to you but cloying to us or at the very least me. thank you.baff

  • Sept. 30, 2002, 11:22 p.m. CST

    My version of new movie:Superman: The lost sons of Krypton

    by cgkproductions

    Superman: The lost sons of Krypton written by Chris K. It was a time of darkness for the once civilized world. Krypton had fallen into the hands greed. A once peaceful, utopian society had turned into a hostile, savage world. The ways of old had crumbled. War had unleashed its evil fury and was consuming the innocent. The former High Council had crumbled. Its power lost in its attempt to gain control over the House of Lor-Sen when a vote was passed to banish 5 members of the House, for murder. (the deciding vote for this came from the House of El). This caused an up rising among the sympathises of the House of Lor-Sen. Lor-Sen had risen to dominance over the last ten years. Forming a mass army of a number of the high class families of Krypton. Their numbers where great and there power greater. The wave of terror brought destruction to the cities. But whenever an evil arises, goodness will surface to combat its attempts. Resistance fighters had begun springing up. People that where once scientists, Doctors and carers had become soldiers. Fighting for their world. For their way of life. for Peace. The House of El lead by Jor-El, considered by many as the house of peace and justice and once renowned for its Scientific knowledge and contributions to the way of Kryptonian life But like many of the great families on Krypton this one to had been scared and had fallen to the underground. Rebelling against the oppressor. Fighting for truth, justice and freedom. The house of El was suffer even more for the youngest brother, Tor-El had grand ideas. He proposed to create a devastating weapon to destroy the House of Lor-Sen, but Jor-El disapproved and said that such a devastating weapon could have terrible results for their people. Once again Tor-El felt he was rejected and that he was not good enough. It was him who disagreed with his brothers vote to banish the 5 members of the House of Lor-Sen, and now his brother disagreed once again. Upon this he betrayed his House and his brother and joined the House of Lor-Sen for which he had wanted to be part of for many years. For he was promised power and wealth and in his mind respect. Months later, deep in the planets core the House of Lor-Sen was mining a toxic green crystal upon instructions by Tor-EL. Using the crystal to make the deadly weapons he once proposed to his brother. Weapons that directly reacted with the genetic make up of a Kryptonian. These crystal where used in high intensity laser weapons and fragment bombs., a weapon that had proved truly successful in eliminating the rebels, But mining this crystal was causing the planet to become unstable. For it was this Crystal that kept the planets internal energy at bay. Years past. As tremors and Earth quakes added to chaos across the planet, the war continued. Jor-El then realised what was happening and that he had been betrayed. Lor-sens quest for dominance was causing the very destruction of there planet. Knowing that to save his planet, his people, his wife Lara and his new born son Kal-El, he must stop this menace and confront his brother. Crossing into enemy territory and surrendering, Jor- El pleaded with his brother to stop the mining and return the crystals to the earths core. But Tor-El refused and ordered the termination of his brother. But this would not prove so easy, For Jor-El, apart from being a great scientist, was a great warrior and soon escaped. Returning to the underground, he new he had little time to save his family and little resources. Realising that if the could save just one person then it should be his son. Forgetting about the rebellion, he focused now on his one goal. Constructing an escape vessel. He used his years of research to construct a small escape ship of the toughest materials known to Krypton. But he new this would not protect his son from the toxic elements inside the planet, if it were to explode. While he worked on the vessel, his computers scanned the galaxies looking for a suitable planet that could sustain his son. About 6 months ago in his attempt to combat the threat of Lor-Sen&#39;s new weapons, Jor-El had discovered two crystal elements that when combined would repel the toxic effects of the green crystal. These two crystals where red And Blue. Griding them to a fine dust and coating the ship in red and blue, Jor-El new that his son would be protected in his escape journey if the time ever came. As the war raged on above. Jor- El added finishing touches to the escape vessel. Programmed with the history and knowledge of his planet. He knew that his son would not forget his home nor would he forget the House of El. In a special compartment of the small escape vessel, Jor-El was to place the Suit once worn to represent the house of El at the high council. It was represented everything about the House of El. The Suit was Silver and black in colour with the House of El&#39;s emblem on its chest. A long black cape and boots finished it off. Jor-El&#39;s wife, Lara insisted that suit should be modified. It represents the House of El, but it should also represent their sons freedom. Changing the suits colour to match that of the escape vessel that would carry him to safety, the suit now became red and Blue. Another 6 months past. The Rebellion had fallen. Lor-Sens armies marched across the planet. Enslaving the remaining Kryptonians. It was clear that the house of Lor-Sen was not acting alone. External forces were guiding its conquest. (alien influences) The earthquakes had be come regular. Tor-El blamed the position of the near by moon and said they would pass. But he new the planet was about to die. The years of mining the toxic green crystal, had poisoned his blood, his wife (a member of the House of Lor-Sen) recently gave birth. There son had been born with strange powers, a direct result from his fathers involvement with the green crystal as a result she died in labour. Like his brother Tor-El had created an escape vessel for his son and when he realised that the planet was going to explode he launched his son into space. If he was going to die, then he would make sure he destroyed the man that in his mind caused this mess from the beginning, his brother Jar-El. Confronting him, the two brothers fought as the world around them began to erupt into its final stages. The battle was long and tough But Jar-El proved victorious. With moments to spare he return to his wife

  • Oct. 2, 2002, 12:02 a.m. CST

    The MAN OF STEEL needs our help!! JOIN me on the QUEST FOR PEACE

    by scorzamania

    Look. Mr. Abrams is I suppose a talented man just on the fact that people buy his work. Now here&#39;s the thing. He wrote the script in 4 weeks to stop the new batman vs. superman movie from being made. He believed in his mind that the story sucked and that it would ruin both characters. I applaude him on his inititive. But I&#39;m sorry to inform Mr. Abrams that not even god could write a good superman script in 4 weeks. Hell Moses was on the mountain longer than it took J.J. to write superman. It is now we the fans that are standing up and defending the man of steel because we believe that the script sucks. Ironic isn&#39;t it. But not all is lost. Mr. Abrams has the attention of the WB executives. He has the ability to throw the whole piece of shit script that he wrote and start fresh with a realistic idea. After all superman isn&#39;t about destroying buildings and going back to krypton where he would have no powers and not be superman anymore. Superman represents everything that is good in this world and J.J. your taking this character and shipping him off away from us. I just want to say that I am extremely proud of all the people that have written in to and who continue to write because you are not only standing up for something you believe in like superman. You are all fighting for truth, justice, and the American way.

  • Oct. 2, 2002, 12:38 a.m. CST

    HonestAbe30: New James Bonds Don&#39;t Need a Retold Origin

    by CaptDanielRoe

    Respectfully, As I do totally get what you&#39;re saying, I disagree. Here&#39;s why: Seeing an infant Superman pickup another pickup, cr@p supercr@p (which I did read in the review, and that&#39;s just what we don&#39;t need in a Sumperman flick, scatalogical humor)... Who needs to see that again? Or see it for the first time on a big screen. Sure the origin is crucial and should not be mucked with. But if what we all want here is the rockingest Superman flick ever, aren&#39;t there more interesting scenes to show? Let&#39;s hope so, or why bother....Basically, while James Bond is not a character who&#39;s origin is as important as Superman&#39;s, when you make a Bond flick you just get off to a rolling start. That what I want to see. If Warners wants to make an origin flick their are so many good ones: How about The Spectre? Green Lantern? Or my big DC Comics movie-treatment wish, New Gods. Those are some LOTR and Star Wars level origin stories. Superman&#39;s really isn&#39;t that interesting, it&#39;s as Harry says a message-in-a-bottle castaway tale. A little bit Tarzan, if you think about it; a fact not lost on the creators of the recent Tarzan-style Superman Elseworlds book....That said, I can see why the temptation to retell Superman&#39;s origin in a more splashy way may occur to someone who DOESN&#39;T GET IT. That&#39;s not Superman. Superman&#39;s origin is big and splashy, but it&#39;s not an invitation to an @sswhupping. His is a downer orphan story initially, but not a start to a Braveheart-formula revenge fest. Listen, Superman represents a higher level of motivation than revenge, anyway, so stoking the plot with resentful bile and hate is just plain wrong. Krypton blows up, it&#39;s said, he moves on....I was momentarily okay with the idea the Krypton was blown up by aggressors that would later get Super comeuppance. But that was only because in light of all the wrongness that seemed like no big deal. Kinda cool. Well, it&#39;s a cool idea onj it&#39;s own, but really not for Superman, who is just not another "They burn my village and kill my people, I must kill them with my fatha&#39;s sword!" shmoe. Superman represents a higher order of consciousness than that: A scientific mind. Not ascetic antiseptic thinking, but he is The Man of Tomorrow. He&#39;s a cool cat, he&#39;s not apt to be snared by any simplistic eye for an eye vendetta claptrap. Now that doesn&#39;t mean I&#39;m against him laying the smack down with all your new-school smarmy slow-mo. I don&#39;t even have a problem with him callously plowing through public works and even creating new volcanoes while giving Wonder Woman the high hard one as seen in the Dark Knight books. But if he vaporizes bystanders enroute to prevent greater harm, or takes off a perps arm, or whatever, it&#39;s all got to be the level-headed expedient. Not because he&#39;s a j@ckss; because he&#39;s not a j@ckass.

  • Oct. 2, 2002, 2:02 a.m. CST

    new directions.

    by alifeinspace

    i read moriarty&#39;s response. i agree that the movie he described is crap. but it is true that superman has a fractured scope of origins and a reintroduction to an old friend could be needed in this case. the donner film was a classic. but what if, this turns out to be better or if nothing else, almost as good? granted the chances are slim. but what about having put out the script to see a response. superman is american mythos plain and simple. everyone knows about superman and what he stands for. fan response isn&#39;t totally ignored. that&#39;s why they have test screenings and edits. what if this script is just looking for reactions? everyone has their own idea of superman and what this movie should be. so what if they&#39;re reading your suggestions? shouldn&#39;t you suggest rather than complain? there&#39;s a story out there somewhere. an ultimate story we can all relate to. a mythology that hasn&#39;t been explored yet. there&#39;s always room for revision. there&#39;s always a chance that this movie could be scrapped yet again. or it could be nothing like the movie moriarty described to us (i don&#39;t doubt him, i just figure [hope] they change it). mythos is tricky. making everyone kryptonian isn&#39;t the way to fix it. by the way, what the hell is it with his going back to krypton if he&#39;s the same as everyone else there?

  • Oct. 2, 2002, 8:41 a.m. CST

    American Icon

    by JMR_8

    That&#39;s just it, isn&#39;t it? Superman is an American Icon, and as such, there are certain things that people have to take into consideration. <BR><BR> First off....EVERYONE knows Superman&#39;s origin. If they don&#39;t know it lock, stock and barrel, they do know the basics. Ergo: The story doesn&#39;t need to be told again. HOWEVER, it can be told in a more peripheral way. A silent dream sequence with only the highlights is one way (As in the WORLD&#39;S FINEST miniseries in the 1990&#39;s) Or perhaps a mini-origin story contained in quick cuts during the main title sequence (somewhat like the opening of Alien 3 or even Superman II.) Essentially, if you feel that an origin story is necessary, you may want to consider it taking a back seat to the REAL story. <BR><BR> And while we&#39;re on the subject of REAL STORIES, let me point out that there are far better stories that could be turned into movies than THE DEATH OF SUPERMAN. A condensed version of the LEGENDS storyline from the late 1980&#39;s, The SUPERMAN in EXILE story from the early 1990&#39;s, even a modified Bizarro storyline (more like Byrne&#39;s version than the more popular NEGATIVE/OPPOSITE version.) <BR><BR> One more thing that I think NEEDS to be considered is that SUPERMAN is NOT a martial arts expert. His greatest advantages are his strength, speed and stamina. One of the simplest moments in LOIS & CLARK (and The New Batman/Superman Adventures) was that a ninja (or in the case of the cartoon -- Batman) was able to flip Superman simply by using his own momentum against him. While a ninja (or a martial arts expert) wouldn&#39;t do well to land a punch on Superman, he could at least keep him temporarily off balance, until his superspeed kicked in and he had enough. What&#39;s the point here? While Matrix-like sequences and extensive wirework have become the industry standard (Blade/2, Mutant X, Spiderman, X-Men, etc.) I think that the wire work would be put to better use making the man look like he can fly, rather than to make him look like Jet Li. Let his opponent be the Martial Arts expert. Superman is just a farm boy from Kansas who, at best, may know karate. Batman was the one who traveled the world to learn the disciplines. Superman (and I suppose rightfully so) felt that his natural abilities should be enough for anything that he would encounter. <BR><BR> I&#39;m all for an action-packed film. If I had my way, we would have a Superman film, with a brief Batman cameo. This would be a springboard for a Batman franchise. THAT, in turn, would be the springboard for a crossover movie. Warners has to prove that they can do both characters justice before they can consider doing them together. There hasn&#39;t been a good Superman movie in close to twenty years, and a good Batman movie has (arguably) not happened for close to 15. <BR><BR> To be honest, the best rumor I ever heard was that Richard Donner would either be brought in as Executive Producer, or a Consultant. This film doesn&#39;t need to be SUPERMAN 5, or have to be connected in any way to the original series of films. But it does need that magical feeling and that level of sensibilities. <BR><BR>

  • Oct. 3, 2002, 4:51 a.m. CST


    by infantry75

    The WB is doing a great job with the show smallvile why can&#39;t they go off of that story line. Let the cast play the characters in the movie and have the show be like prequals or something. All I am saying is the show is setting up a great story line that many viewers agree with. If you change it up too much you will loose all the smallvile fans who I am sure will make up a majority of the movie gowers. Just a thought.

  • Most of these stores (some great, some terrible) were Elseworld stories,(similar to Marvel&#39;s "What If" stories) or alternate universes. The Kal-El lands behind Wayne mannor instead of the Kent farm was great, but it wasn&#39;t Superman and it sure isn&#39;t being made into a movie. Sure there have been changes through the years regarding various characters, but these have been minor changes with the exception of Lex Luthor. I think the reason the Luthor change (scientist to business man) works is because mad scientists pop up everywhere, but a shrewd business man who wants total control of his beloved city, what can you do? That&#39;s something that almost everyone can relate to. For the most part though, all of the Superman stories have the same basis. Things like Superman&#39;s suit giving him the ability to fly just don&#39;t make sense to me. That is one of the abilities that make him super, because it is his strong will that makes this happen (which translates in the real world to "If there&#39;s a will, there&#39;s a way"). I know, THE original Superman, he could only "leap tall buildings in a single bound", but the Hulk can do that so Superman does have to one-up the Hulk. Anyway, these are my opinions as a Superman fan. Thank you for your time.

  • Oct. 3, 2002, 6:57 p.m. CST

    keanu reeves is superman!!!

    by WhiteWinterWolf

    before anthony hopkins announced he was going to play jor-el in the new superman movie on conan o brien.......conan reported a couple of weeks ago keanu signed on to play the man in blue......cant seem to verify that anywhere though!!!

  • Oct. 3, 2002, 11:17 p.m. CST

    Way to cover your ass

    by ZO

    good one Harry. No one is better than you.

  • Oct. 4, 2002, 3:25 p.m. CST

    Superman Movie

    by Smallville620

    I think that Tom Welling should play the role as Superman. I can&#39;t see anyone else doing it. There are rumors about Keanu Reeves, and he would be horrible for the role. Millions of people are already in love with the show Smallville. The entire cast of Smallville should be in the movie. The idea of the Superman movie might be great, but if you don&#39;t have a good cast the movie will suck. If not Tom Welling for the role then Dean Cain from "Lois & Clark". The movie should take place in the 21st century.

  • Oct. 5, 2002, 12:44 a.m. CST

    Super Silver Lining

    by LukeCagejr

    I accept Harry&#39;s point about "Batman & Robin" setting back the industry. I too feared that it would mean the end of big budget super hero flick for a long time. Not because the movie was bad, but because Studio idiots may mistake the lack of success for dwindling appeal and shelve future projects. With all the promising Marvel adaptations on the horizon, I don&#39;t have that fear anymore. They will be sucessful because everyone else, besides Warners, seems to get it. Adults enjoy comics too! Warner&#39;s live action efforts always seem to overlook this, and we are subjected to poorly conceived trash that is thrown together in about 4 hours or less. The misconception is that "it doesn&#39;t matter what the movie is about, as long as there is a superhero in it kids will love it. We&#39;ll add a big hollywood name for the adults and make a mint." With Superman V, it seems they are at it again. A script rewrite won&#39;t change this thinking I&#39;m afraid. Their whole philosophy must change. J.J. may have to be Superman to pull that one off. Looking forward to the Teen Titans though.

  • Oct. 7, 2002, 6:28 a.m. CST

    Krypton doesnt need to explode ppl...

    by DR ILLA

    Quite simply...there are a lot of other ways to have Krypton end other than an explosion. Perhaps JJ is doing some thinking. Nuclear Holocaust? Disease? Asteroid? ...just hope he keeps the central idea.

  • Oct. 7, 2002, 6 p.m. CST

    Reeves as superman

    by brad8709

    it was part of a joke where he said something about instead of using kryptonite the villians will use big words to stop superman.

  • Oct. 11, 2002, 12:01 a.m. CST

    No Gays

    by blk_Vulcan

    There is no reason to turn the character,

  • Oct. 13, 2002, 3:11 a.m. CST

    All well and good, but...

    by nomad_38

    It&#39;s all fine and dandy if JJ wants to make his own story a movie. I wouldn&#39;t mind doing the same thing myself. However, this is a REMAKE. If you want your own ideas don&#39;t call it Superman, call it something else and everyone just might like it. But if your going to call it Superman then MAKE it about Superman. The one we all know and love. And it just doesn&#39;t seem like JJ is up to that. As for Harry completely changing his tune. some people just need everones approval.

  • Dec. 23, 2002, 3:07 a.m. CST

    How to write a good Superman movie in 9 easy steps

    by MrStinger

    1. Be true to the source material. That doesn't mean slavish, but this character and story have lasted over 60 years. There must be a reason. Changes have to make dramatic sense; making Luthor a Kryptonian alien is just cheap shock value. 2. Don't remake the Christopher Reeve films. If the new movie can be summed up as "the tale of Superman's origin unfolds as he battles Kryptonian villains in the skies" it will rightly be viewed as a combination retread of Superman I and II. And he even saves Air Force One? 3. There are more Superman villains than Lex Luthor. That relationship is being explored effectively in "Smallville," so why not make a movie with Darkseid, the Parasite, or Braniac? London or Paris being wiped from the face of the Earth could make for a very exciting opening sequence. If you want spectacular sky battles, how about the forces of Apokolips? 4. Look at what works: Superman I and II, Batman, Batman Forever, X-Men, Spider-Man. Look at what doesn't work: Superman III and IV, Supergirl, Batman Returns, Batman & Robin. What is the most fundamental difference in the two lists? The ones that work have interesting, compelling, character-driven stories; humor that flows from the characters and not at their expense; effects that support the story-telling; and for the most part lack unexplainable, illogical plot gimmicks where something just "happens" for no reason other than to twist the plot. 5. Cast good actors, not celebrities, and certainly no names in the key roles of Superman and Lois Lane. These characters have baggage all their own; they don't need to be saddled with a well-known actor's personal history. 6. Toss in some in-jokes for fanboys like me (the X-Men line "what would you rather wear, yellow spandex?" or Christopher Reeve pausing at a half-phone booth on the way to change into the costume). We love pointing out these things to the unintiated, and it gives us a sense that the creators of the movie enjoy the characters as much as we do. "You do too much. You're not Superman, you know," did as much to sell audiences on Spider-Man as any effect shot--it let them know "we're having fun with this, and you will too." 7. Look at the WB cartoon series and the John Byrne comics for how changes can be made in the mythos without compromising it. I'll never forget how surprising it was to see Ma and Pa Kent alive in the Man Of Steel mini-series, but it was a pleasant surprise that allowed for interesting character interactions. Don't be afraid to change the mythos to make it stronger. For instance, if you've GOT to do the Luthor story, how about giving him a better reason to hate Superman than hair loss? I know that harkens back to Greek drama (good is beautiful, evil is ugly/deformed) but it never seemed like enough. There are ways to play with this without compromising the integrity of the characters. Look at how "Batman" dropped Joe Chill in favor of Jack Napier as the killer of Batman's parents. It worked. 8. Write the Superman movie you've always wanted to see. I know it will never be as glorious or as amazing as the images in your head when you put words to paper, but if the words are approached with that kind of enthusiasm, it will show up on the screen. 9. Consider the input on this, and similar sites. Just about everyone here is hoping for the best possible Superman movie, and while there will be complaints no matter what movie is made (I still remember arguments about Krypton not being an ice planet and Brando as wrong for Jor-el), the vast majority of people here are hoping for nothing but success, and for the production of a trilogy of movies that we'll enjoy seeing for years to come.

  • Oct. 22, 2007, 6:38 a.m. CST

    Well boy, aren't we all glad Bryan Singer made it instead?

    by ImFixingtoDie


  • Oct. 22, 2007, 10:02 a.m. CST

    No, not really...

    by Abin Sur

    You must've been on CHUD today too, Mr. Die. ;)