Ain't It Cool News (
Movie News

Quint has another shorty interview, this time with Bryan Singer!!!

Ahoy, squirts! Quint here with another super short one on one interview from Comic Con, this time with SUPERMAN RETURNS director Bryan Singer. We spent most of the interview talking about the response of his film, both positive and negative. Click here to read my coverage of the SUPERMAN RETURNS panel, which has further comments on what's in the future for him and Supes!

Enjoy the chat!

QUINT: Last time I talked to you you were here at the Con with the first X-MEN. Now you've done two more superhero movies and are back again...

BRYAN SINGER: I know! It's weird. I never expected to be so intertwined with the comic book universe.

QUINT: Since you did it with SUPERMAN and we're both huge JAWS fans, how about JAWS RETURNS and make the real JAWS 3 now?

BRYAN SINGER: I would never touch JAWS! That's something that's too... No, no, no... I have fantasies about it, especially since lately they've been advertising this shark movie (maybe he meant Shark Week on Discovery?)... at all the bus stops, there are all these shark poster... It's got me in a shark mood... but, no, no.

QUINT: C'mon, you can get Brody and Hooper back...

BRYAN SINGER: I couldn't do it! I could do it! I couldn't do it to Steven! He's my idol!

QUINT: So, what'd you think of the overall reaction to the film? I know it's really hard to find anything positive online. People seem to be quick to call anything that's not a record breaker a failure. I saw that happen with KONG.

BRYAN SINGER: Well, there's great affection for the picture and I feel... You know, it comes in all different ways. Sometimes it comes with the domestic box office, sometimes it comes in the international box office. Sometimes it comes in letters from your idols who have never written to you before and from their families. Sometimes it comes from coming down here and having a few people say, "Why didn't you do this?" and a few people who say, "Thank you so much." I can only make a movie I think someone will watch 10 years or 20 years from now and say, "Oh, I'm affected by it!" Or a movie that maybe a woman who doesn't come to these kinds of movies will actually watch and get choked up about. That's kind of the idea here.

QUINT: And it seems that across the board people agree on Brandon Routh as Superman.

BRYAN SINGER: Well, that was the key. That was the key. I had to introduce this guy and if that didn't work... And sometimes it takes a certain kind of movie. And by the way, in terms of people's perceptions on domestic box office, this is going up in the face of PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN, a sequel, but secondly... the last time a SUPERMAN movie was out was a long time ago and its cumulative domestic gross was $15 million.

When I first made X-MEN 1, it was a comic book, but it was also a Saturday Morning Cartoon. People were like, "What?!?" It took a while to get everybody excited. It didn't just explode.

QUINT: I've also noticed this trend in box office that is pretty different from how things used to work. Back in the day, even great sequels usually didn't match, much less surpass, the box office of the original. Now, I'm noticing that box office on sequels tend to reflect more on the film that came before it. Look at the box office for the MATRIX sequels (RELOADED was huge, REVOLUTIONS was half as big) and LORD OF THE RINGS, with each successive film making more money than the one before it. The box office seems to be genuinely affected by the film that came before it. Look at PIRATES and X2...

BRYAN SINGER: And X3! Look at the opening of X3! Jesus!

QUINT: I think that once you have that audience in place you'll hit it big. That why I keep telling people that a SUPERMAN sequel only makes sense for Warner Bros. It's a good time to have franchises right now... SUPERMAN RETURNS will make its money back no matter what...

BRYAN SINGER: It already has!

QUINT: ... and they'll want the franchise to keep going.

BRYAN SINGER: Yeah. You know, we come out here, we come out foreign, we have the DVD and we build. Suddenly now this group of people, and it took them a while, but they've all finally seen SUPERMAN RETURNS. And now, when you make another one, if they don't like it, then it's not as easy to sell them on another one. My average feedback has been very positive. I feel very good about the picture.

That's that. Short, but sweet. I'd love to sit down and go over the dream of Superman and get more in-depth once he's finished his deal with Warner Bros. for the sequel. Got more shorties a couple half-hour long interviews comin', so keep them peepers peeled, squirts!


Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • Aug. 8, 2006, 8:47 a.m. CST


    by SynapseFilms


  • Aug. 8, 2006, 8:48 a.m. CST

    Anyway... now that that is out of the way...

    by SynapseFilms

    Bryan is a very cool guy. He&#39;s great on our upcoming 2-DVD STREET TRASH release, too. Betcha didn&#39;t know he actually worked on STREET TRASH when he was younger! <plug officially over>

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 8:49 a.m. CST

    is he fucking insane?

    by Fearsme

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 8:50 a.m. CST

    is he fucking insane?

    by Fearsme

    QUINT: I think that once you have that audience in place you&#39;ll hit it big. That why I keep telling people that a SUPERMAN sequel only makes sense for Warner Bros. It&#39;s a good time to have franchises right now... SUPERMAN RETURNS will make its money back no matter what... BRYAN SINGER: It already has! not according to anyone in the business it hasn&#39;t. Is he honestly trying to tell us that at 320 million worldwide, superman returns has already made it&#39;s money back? is he off his fucking rocker?

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 8:52 a.m. CST


    by Westonian

    Yeah! 27th and enjoying the shit out of it.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 8:53 a.m. CST

    Money aside, it still sucked.

    by Uncle Stan

    Why hire Spacey if you only want him to act like Gene Hackman acting like a 60s Batman villian?

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 8:53 a.m. CST

    no apology?

    by Lost Prophet

    SR was the worst film I have seen this year. Easily. I can&#39;t believe the critical acclaim it is gaining. Even if you ignore the gaping plot holes you can drive a truck through, the abuse of Superman&#39;s character, and the terrible acting from Lois Lane- it was still boring as hell. Routh was surprisingly good though.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 8:54 a.m. CST

    Long Singer quote translation

    by JuggFuckler

    "Well, there&#39;s great affection for the picture and I feel... You know, it comes in all different ways. Sometimes it comes with the domestic box office, sometimes it comes in the international box office. Sometimes it comes in letters from your idols who have never written to you before and from their families. Sometimes it comes from coming down here and having a few people say, "Why didn&#39;t you do this?" and a few people who say, "Thank you so much." I can only make a movie I think someone will watch 10 years or 20 years from now and say, "Oh, I&#39;m affected by it!" Or a movie that maybe a woman who doesn&#39;t come to these kinds of movies will actually watch and get choked up about. That&#39;s kind of the idea here" = ONLY 17 PEOPLE LIKED SUPERMAN RETURNS.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 8:54 a.m. CST

    Great flick and I&#39;m eagerly awaiting an even greater se

    by ComicBookGeek77

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 8:57 a.m. CST

    Quint, how DARE you...

    by abiggerboat

    how could you even contemplate a Jaws remake/sequal - even in jest! I&#39;m very dissapointed in you, thought you were a fan!!

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 8:57 a.m. CST

    Superman Returns had an ink blot effect.

    by Edison

    What you felt about Superman Returns said more about you than it did the movie. The negative reactions seem to come from people that were ready to dislike the movie before the lights went down in the theater. I can&#39;t wait for Singer to get back to making another Superman movie.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 9:04 a.m. CST


    by Lost Prophet

    That is simply not true. This was a movie I really wanted to like. I forked out my

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 9:12 a.m. CST

    Even though I am one of the few who enjoyed Superman

    by rubensreviews

    I think Warner should let another Director take a shot at superman. With the technology built, it would be nice to see a fresh new style and see what a new director can do action wise. We all know Singer&#39;s style is gonna be the same in Superman 2.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 9:13 a.m. CST

    Yeah, let him remake and fuck up JAWS, too!

    by JackPumpkinhead

    Why not just ask him about the current price of cocaine? From what I&#39;ve read (and some of the interviews I saw), for the last year or so that&#39;s been the only thing he&#39;s been interested in.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 9:15 a.m. CST

    For those who really want to know why AICN ran this...

    by genro

    It&#39;s because Singer *can&#39;t* get a fucking greenlight for Supes2 and Harry/Quint were hoping this little, go nowhere, mean nothing *interview*, could help provide some decent tracking for Bry-Bry to drag to WB and say "see! they want a sequel"! I say - fuck you. No sequel. And do something original, Singer. Stop trying to rip off Wrath of Khan for the *third time*...and find some real screenwriters next time.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 9:22 a.m. CST

    WB - Dini, Loeb, Millar/Gough or forget it

    by genro

    Let Singer&#39;s anomoly ride with Lex Spacey into the deep, dark void.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 9:24 a.m. CST

    Can&#39;t wait for Singer to make a sequel to RETURNS

    by LilOgre

    I really hope that deal for Singer to direct the next SUPERMAN gets finalized. I know lots of people on AICN hated this movie. I loved SUPERMAN RETURNS and thought it was a well crafted film that asked big questions about expectations, belonging, and mortality and aspired to be more than a "lets blow shit up" comic book film. It also set up a sequel and even a series of sequels rather well and I would love to see Singer develop those ideas and stories.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 9:24 a.m. CST

    A Supes sequel will work if he is fighting someone...

    by Lost Skeleton

    if Singer does whant to go Wrath of Kahn on us....then a sequel will work. We have to see Supes tested, which I don&#39;t think he was in the first one. Now, I am one of those idoits who really believed that a Bay Supes would be fucking insane however I liked what Singer did in reintroducing the character. I agree with Singer that he has to go balls out on a sequel. We got to see every bit of that $200 million on the screen. I know folks have hinted at Braniac (makes sense with the Krpton crystals containing knowledge from the 28 known galaxies floating around in the Atlantic) but I think it needs to be Doomsday and/or Darkseid.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 9:24 a.m. CST

    It&#39;s got to be said...

    by kwisatzhaderach

    Superman Returns stinks...

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 9:25 a.m. CST

    jaws should take on al-qaeda

    by georges garvaren

    or team up with them. yeah, i like that better.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 9:25 a.m. CST

    And Singer&#39;s lying that SR is in the black...

    by genro

    this fucking guy *started* the goddman "it cost 250M +" talk on Sunday Morning Shootout, then had the balls in a recent interview to say he didn&#39;t know how that got started - now says it&#39;s in the black...guess all that bragging about making the most expensive movie ever, backfired.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 9:26 a.m. CST

    bring the sequel with darkseid or brainiac

    by TheResident

    then im sold

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 9:28 a.m. CST

    I loved Superman Returns

    by Andy Dufresne

    And talkbackers are still hilarious. All is right with the world.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 9:30 a.m. CST

    Superman Returns = Hulk

    by Lost Skeleton

    good story...good director...critical love...bad audience reaction...poor box office By the way...the general public likes crap cuz Pirates 2 sucked as well. Matter of fact...the entire summer has been a big fucking disappointment!

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 9:30 a.m. CST

    When a film has made $336 million worldwide...

    by rbatty024

    it&#39;s doubtful that everyone hated the movie. I think that sometimes the perception is that if the talkbackers didn&#39;t like the movie then no one liked it, but if you actually talk to people in the real world I&#39;ve found a very positive response. People like to bitch, and that&#39;s especially true on the internet. Sometimes it&#39;s more fun to tear a film down than it is to talk about it&#39;s better qualities. Personally I was very pleased with Superman Returns. It was a gutsy film that rebooted the franchise and left plenty of stuff to be resolved in the sequel. The only problem I had with it was that at times it felt like it was in the shadow of the original, but the good far, far outweighed the bad. I&#39;m looking forward to Singer&#39;s sequel.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 9:34 a.m. CST

    "a movie that a woman will get choked up about"

    by Rupee88

    That says a lot about what kind of movie he tried to make and why most of all us agree the movie sucked. And the women out there didn&#39;t show up and think it sucked too. Oh well, at least X2 was decent.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 9:35 a.m. CST

    Negative Reviewers on talkback?

    by Norman Dale

    What movie did you see? I realize it wasn&#39;t Citizen Kane (comic movies are generally not great) but it was hardly worthy of the vitriol I read on these talkbacks. I actually thought it was pretty good for a comic book movie.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 9:39 a.m. CST

    And Singer, if you read this -

    by genro

    I&#39;m railing because you&#39;ve lost total perspective on what your career was supposed to deliver. You&#39;re not Mr. Comic Book. You didn&#39;t grow up reading them. You were smart enough to turn X into Trek, but SR shows that it&#39;s a one-trick pony. MOVE ON. Find some writers who will deliver more than a reach-around. In an age of mass horror output - where the fuck is your film?! Stop being so obsessed with being a summer blockbuster director and - drumroll - do something new.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 9:39 a.m. CST


    by Rupee88

    People didn&#39;t pay to see the movie because they liked it. They hadn&#39;t seen it when they plopped down their admission price. Most people thought the movie sucked...not everyone, but an overwhelming with it.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 9:39 a.m. CST


    by JDanielP

    "SUPERMAN RETURNS" didn&#39;t suck. It was just... okay. There simply wasn&#39;t much to get excited about, with the picture. The plane/shuttle rescue was cool, I&#39;ll give you that. But mmmmaaaaannnn, I thought the effects were REALLY going to happen when Metropolis was experiencing the quake. I mean, ....even Superman wasn&#39;t going to be enough with such a disaster, right? --Naw. No prob. In fact, I was expecting him to dust off his hands after the scene, it was so easy. At least in a sequel, maybe he&#39;ll get his ass handed to him. Maybe we&#39;ll see him experience a REAL challenge, next time. At least, I hope.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 9:41 a.m. CST

    bloody hell. Here we go again.

    by Lost Prophet

    Firstly, yes it did have a good director and a ludicrous level of critical love. However, how on earth can you possibly say that it had a good story? it was one of the worst plotted and written movies I have seen in a long time. Also, the general public does seem to like crap (fuck&#39;s sake- look at the numbers on the star wars prequels), and they didn&#39;t like this, then what does it say about it? I am yet to talk to anyone over 20 that didn&#39;t think it was utter unmitigated shit- and everyone seems to bitterly resent the money we spent on it. The fact remains that Singer took a comic book property and turned it into a fucking badly plotted chick flick. Who the fuck wants to see superman behaving like a stalker- if I was Lois and family I would be looking into buying a can of kryptonite mace. My contempt for this knows no bounds. With regards to it breaking even- others have argued over this more coherently than me, so I am not retreading this.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 9:41 a.m. CST

    Lob another meatball at him

    by Superneal

    What a douche! I love how he has an answer for everything. Superman has made its money back- I swear...Bullshit- Even if it has made its money - the movie is still a huge dissapointment.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 9:42 a.m. CST

    And of course he&#39;s lying about it being profitable

    by Rupee88

    There&#39;s no way it has made a profit yet...that is just a big fat Hollywood LIE. Of course it will be profitable in the end with DVD and toys, but the budget for the sequel will probably be less than half of the first...that means crappier effects, and probably even more love story bullshit.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 9:43 a.m. CST

    if you think WB wont greenlit another Superman movie

    by tripp5

    than you&#39;re a fucking retard with a shit-filled adult diaper for a brain. All its gonna take is a much smaller budget, and Superman: Man of Steel will be in theatres in &#39;09. Jerkasses.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 9:47 a.m. CST

    Superman Sequel Needs To Bring The Fun

    by Sean38

    I enjoyed Superman Returns for what it is - resetting the legendary character for a new audience. But next time out it&#39;s time to bring the fun. Returns we very well made but overall it was mopey. I&#39;m encouraged when Singer says he wants to make the next one like Wrath of Kahn. That&#39;s encouraging because in many ways Returns was Star Trek The Motion Picture, well crafted but overly long and overly morose. Supes needs to mix it up with another superpowered villain in the next movie. Hell, he could remake Superman II if he wanted to. Bring back ZOD!

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 9:48 a.m. CST

    While you&#39;re offering Jaws might as well have him ruin

    by Jugdish

    Citizen Cane, Goodfellas, Godfather, The Exorcist, Back to the future, - Quint, you fucking Goon

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 9:50 a.m. CST

    I didn&#39;t just use the worldwide box office as a measure

    by rbatty024

    I also mentioned the fact that people in the real world felt very positive about it, far more positive than you&#39;ll see on the internet. No one can say for certain whether the reaction was overwhelmingly positive or negative, but I can say that given the box office worldwide and people I&#39;ve talked to in the real world it has been more positive than negative. Internet talk will always be more negative than positive because it&#39;s more fun to complain than to commend. Hell, I&#39;d take Vegas odds that Singer is going to helm the sequel.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 9:50 a.m. CST


    by nef

    worst movie ever, superman is a fucking unstopable badass, not some pussy and with some hoe who don&#39;t know who her baby daddy is... jerry springer drama...hell NO

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 10:01 a.m. CST

    rbatty & "people in the real world felt very positive"

    by Lost Prophet

    I am taking issue with that piece of shit statement. Where the fuck do you think the majority of us live? Utopia? Oz? almost everyone I know (most of whom would never describe themselves as geeks) fucking hated it. The only remotely positive review I have heard from a non-critic so far was from our 17 year old female office junior who said that it was OK- but a bit boring, and she liked it as Brandon was hot. This is an unreliable straw poll- but really it is not exactly the overwhelming majority of viewers. Judging by the reaction on TB&#39;s and, more importantly, the grumbling after the film from the audience I would describe its reception as poor. To say the least.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 10:04 a.m. CST

    Gimme a sequel!

    by Mechasheeva

    SR&#39;s problems had mostly to do with the screenplay and editing; it was over-long and the resolution kinda sucked. I think Singer should direct the sequel, though; it was undeniably a beautiful film. Just don&#39;t use Zod; it&#39;s time to get out from under the shadow of the originals and start forging something new. Gimme Brainiac, Doomsday, or Darkseid, and gimme Superman punching someone.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 10:09 a.m. CST

    I really wanted to love SR...

    by Billyeveryteen

    I don&#39;t.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 10:09 a.m. CST

    Pwned By Ratner! RATNER?!

    by ZombieSolutions

    now thats gotta hurt. SR bombed, and X3 (warts and all; clearly a huge step down from the genius of X1 and X2, but still entertaining) went on to become one of the biggest blockbusters of all time. holy shit, Bryan, you really *really* fucked up. I wouldn&#39;t hold my breath for the UBERMENSCH sequel cause odds are it ain&#39;t happening...

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 10:10 a.m. CST

    box office totals

    by spacechampion

    From imdb pro: Budget: $204M (estimated) Opening Wknd: $52.5M (USA) Gross: $336M (Worldwide). Okay, will the supergeniuses of AICN talkback explain to me how is hasn&#39;t made its money back?

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 10:25 a.m. CST

    stay away from Jaws Mr. Singer

    by mattyholmes

    Don&#39;t touch it, don&#39;t even think about it. Feed your obsession -

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 10:27 a.m. CST

    Lost Prophet, one last thing...

    by rbatty024

    I didn&#39;t mean to imply that talkbackers don&#39;t live in the real world, I was just using that term to contrast internet opinion. Hell, I post every now and then and I would like to think I live in the real world. From my experience with those outside of the internet, people either liked or loved the film, and that includes geeks and non-geeks. Maybe your friends have tastes similar to yours, I don&#39;t know, but from my experience there was plenty of positive reaction to SR. That being said, there is no doubt in my mind that the internet reaction is far more negative than the general populace. People who post on the internet like to complain. If you&#39;ve ever written a film review you&#39;ll know that it&#39;s more fun to write a review for an Uwe Boll film than a good film because it&#39;s a joy to tear things down. I think that the internet in general gives a skewed perspective, and it&#39;s usually skewed negative.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 10:27 a.m. CST

    How did people not like this movie?

    by El Scorcho

    I don&#39;t get it. I thought it was pretty damned good, and I can&#39;t wait for Singer to knock a sequel out of the park. SR was quite the set-up film really, and he could really shine with another one. But yeah, SR was pretty great, and it has made it&#39;s money back. Plus, it will be HUGE on DVD. Mark my words.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 10:27 a.m. CST

    sequel please!

    by yeah i'm a jerk!

    i dug this movie. i want to see a sequel, hopefully with brainiac, or bizarro. no doomsday. it seems to me that the box office total domestically stands at $190 million. so if you combine it with the worldwide totals, it has made it&#39;s money back. bring it on bryan, but make mattel put out less discouraging product. those toys did the film an injustice, as did the artwork that accompanied them.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 10:28 a.m. CST

    its called advertising

    by georges garvaren

    and that shit is expensive. add another 100mil or so, then youve got the real budget

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 10:30 a.m. CST

    Why is everyone flipping about Jaws?

    by Mechasheeva

    He said he&#39;d never ever touch it, Jesus. And nobody should, that movie is gold and a remake or another crappy sequel would only tarnish it.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 10:30 a.m. CST

    It&#39;s a few dollars in the black

    by I Dunno

    A film is supposed to make 1 1/2 times its budget, taking marketing and theater take into account. I don&#39;t know what effect the IMAX thing has but yeah, it&#39;s in the black. And there&#39;s still DVD and TV rights. Although I foresee a lot of Superman merchadise in the bargain bin soon. For a regular movie I don&#39;t think it would warrant a sequel but studios have a hard-on for franchises and DC doesn&#39;t have half the film worthy characters Marvel has so they&#39;ll probably invest in another one.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 10:31 a.m. CST


    by supes1m

    He wouldn&#39;t dare touch Jaws because it was perfect and he has too much respect for the director. But no problem remaking Superman, sorry Donner. Singer needs to STFU.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 10:32 a.m. CST

    X-3 was OK...

    by Dr. Opticus

    if you weren&#39;t a reader of the comics, which I&#39;m not. Some of it was a nice continuation of what X2 had to offer, Superman was, I believe to be a quiet prelude of whats to come. It backs up what Singer says about the industy today: how sequels are out performing the premiers. Bryan&#39;s got something up his sleeve fo&#39; sho&#39;.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 10:32 a.m. CST

    Brian, how is the water in Denial?

    by Orbots Commander

    Anyway, wise-ass remark aside, if Singer can film a two-movie story arc featuring Superman vs. Darkseid and/or Brainiac, I&#39;ll be more than happy. Bring on a Metropolis, building smashing throw-down!

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 10:34 a.m. CST

    calm down people

    by hook&pullgang

    Bloody hell, I only joined to post this, I see you uber geeks post shit on this board about people day after day, but how many of you do ANYTHING creative? How many of you bitching wonders are out pitching ideas or even have any? I mean yeah it&#39;s cool if you don&#39;t like the movie, and we are all entitled to our thoughts, but don&#39;t destroy the guy because he didn&#39;t make the movie YOU wanted to see, I saw it at the imax with my girlfriend to a sold out crowd and people were really digging it, I thought it was well crafted and fitting in tone to the original movie, but am looking forward to supes kicking some ass in the next and seeing Singer let loose a little. It&#39;s box office has been big, you are all just comparing it&#39;s takings on the vast amount of money that has been spent on it over the years, it will run a profit, we all know that, and hey I for one hopes he lives to fight for another day.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 10:38 a.m. CST

    I agree that it is easier to be negative

    by Lost Prophet

    and I live in that renowned centre of optimism, London, but still- all the reaction I have heard has been negative. My friends do share similar tastes to me but the reaction I have seen includes that of people I work with, friends of the wife (whom I hate), and (most t importantly) the audience that I was in the cinema with. I even heard a pikey in the pub selling copies and telling people not to buy it as although the copy was good the film was awful. When a DVD pirate starts with that then I take it as a pretty clear giveaway about the film.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 10:39 a.m. CST


    by I Dunno

    You forgot to tell us that we all live in our mother&#39;s basement.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 10:40 a.m. CST

    to be objective...

    by zimraphel

    My own opinion aside, I think part of the reason for the negative &#39;geek&#39; feedback is that too many people were expecting something with the same tone as S:TM and SII. SR was obviously more morose (the fault of the writers) and on top of that, it was a movie designed to generate and renew interest in the franchise, and just another simple summer blockbuster comic book movie. It was a well-made movie, brought up some interesting ideas for a sequel, and was just too much a homage to Donner&#39;s work without enough fun. My opinion: Now that the franchise has been reintroduced, I think a sequel will jump right into the action and will probably forget all the angst of SR. Brandon Routh&#39;s a great Superman, Kate Bosworth is a bearable Lois Lane, and as long as Singer &co. dump Lex Luthor and the angst, I think another movie will be a nice addition to the franchise. I think we could all go for some more plane-saving action, no? That said, those who insist it was sh*t are deluding themselves. Maybe it wasn&#39;t what you thought, but it wasn&#39;t a terrible movie--just unfinished and not thought out enough. A terrible movie: X3. Pirates 2. I think SR is certainly better than those.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 10:41 a.m. CST

    I dunno

    by hook&pullgang

    what you ALL live in your mothers basement?

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 10:41 a.m. CST


    by zimraphel

    sorry, <b>not</b> just another summer blockbuster comic book movie.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 10:42 a.m. CST

    spacechampion, that&#39;s the production budget

    by Colonel_Blimp

    which i assume doesn&#39;t include the costs for promotion and distribution, which are easily just as much as the production costs themselves. so there&#39;s a chance that SR is still in the red. that said, I think it was a terrific film, if a little overlong, and all my friends I&#39;ve talked to (non geeks, most of them over 20) enjoyed it as well. what kind of movie do you geeks want?

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 10:48 a.m. CST

    Oh, and Brian---no Zod. Please.

    by Orbots Commander

    Not another re-quel.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 10:49 a.m. CST

    are you guys that dense?

    by Fearsme

    take the number of the total box office: 320 million worldwide. Take 55% of that number. That is how much the studio has made on the movie. for people who spend a lot of time online, you guys know very little about the breakdown of finances in film. The rule nowadays, is that a movie has to make about double what it cost to get close to profit. take the 60 million in pay or play deals and development costs, add 200 to the production budget of the actual film. Add in about 100 million worldwide for prints and advertising... so, trust me, the movie is nowhere near profit yet. They will probably get close to breaking even on DVD, might see a small morsel. WB had a 500 million dollar or more worldwide projection for this movie, and it&#39;s going to scrape to get close to 400 million. don&#39;t believe the hype: this one was an underperformer, and the sequel is in question.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 10:52 a.m. CST

    oh,. and rbatty

    by Fearsme

    you said &#39;no movie makes 336 million worldwide and is not liked&#39; um. rememeber about 8 years ago... a little movie called Godzilla. It made 350 million worldwide. Would you consider that a movie that people liked?

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 11:02 a.m. CST

    SpaceChampion, Rupee88, Lost Prophet

    by RetroActive

    With all due respect to the yackbackers...they believe that everything&#39;s a conspiracy, so it couldn&#39;t possibly be true that SR made any money. If the real budget was $204m, and then add an additional $30-$40m for advertising, talk show rounds, test screenings, press kits, et al. That still puts the profit line somewhere between $75 & $100m. Record setter? Nah. A disappointment? Sure. But a failure? Hardly. And I do believe the next sequel will draw in the numbers 2X over. Bottom line, the reviews were mixed. Yes, the story could have been better. And personally, I could have done without the little boy. But all in all, I left satisfied; as a lot of others I know did as well. Some wanted more, but I never heard anyone say that they HATED it. Or that it was the worst movie they&#39;d ever seen. Obviously, none of those people ever saw Surf Nazis Must Die, so at least I&#39;ll be able to make them correct that statement about SR after they borrow that VHS gem from their local, defunct, West Coast Video. There will be a sequel. If Steve Martin&#39;s Pink Panther is getting a sequel...SR is DEFINITELY getting a sequel.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 11:05 a.m. CST

    People didn&#39;t like SR because...

    by Batutta

    IT WAS FUCKING BORING!!! I went into this film wanting to like it, but didn&#39;t. I didn&#39;t have any preconcieved notions or animus against Superman to being with. I just wanted to be entertained, and wasn&#39;t. It was like a wax museum version of Superman, pretty but without a pulse. Most people I&#39;ve talked to have felt the same.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 11:12 a.m. CST

    Why does Bryan Singer always look like he&#39;s coked...

    by JohnGalt06

    out of his mind??? My guess is because he probably is. Now bring on SHARK WEEK: THE MOVIE!

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 11:12 a.m. CST


    by RetroActive

    Print reels are factored into the initial budget numbers. If movies had to spend $100 million on advertisinf and prints, movies wouldn&#39;t be doing so hot. Simple profit ratios would explain that if your budget maxes out at $260 million dollars, then at present numbers, SR gross is close to $200 million, it&#39;s net profits after additional expenses and percentages are factored in might reduce that number by about $40 million. Leaving the starving studio with $160 million to show for their massive failure.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 11:19 a.m. CST

    Godzilla was ace as was Speed II

    by tompbeast

    How can that new superman movie have cost so much? how? caught Godzilla the other week on TV and forgot just how shite it was and saw Speed II last night on TV and Laughed til my guts hurt! why dont the studios just give 300 million young Filmakers a million each and see what they gat back for their money?

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 11:19 a.m. CST

    I actually shouldn&#39;t joke about it....

    by JohnGalt06

    because it really is true. I have almost zero doubt that Singer is destroying himself with cocaine and I hope he gets help!!! Even though SUPERMAN RETURNS was a huge disappointment, I suppose we should be grateful is was even mildly coherent considering the amount of white powder Singer ingested while making it. BRYAN, GET YOURSELF CLEAN! Then maybe SUPERMAN RETURNS AGAIN won&#39;t suck...

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 11:21 a.m. CST


    by Lost Prophet

    with all due respect the numbers on this are wrong. Go and search previous TB&#39;s where this has been smashed endlessly. Also, Surf Nazis Must Die is a Troma Movie, and as such is expected to be enjoyable shit- this is the same studio that produced such masterpieces as Femme Fontaine: Killer Babe for the CIA, and Redneck Zombies. It releases thoroughly, and unashamedly B-movie fare. SR is not a Troma production, and certainly not a B movie, and so it is judged by different standards. In fact, I would argue that for all its superior production values SR is (unbelievably) much less fun than the majority of Troma films. Which at least do not take themselves so pofacedly. I do, however, fail to believe that no-one you have talked to has outright hated it.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 11:27 a.m. CST


    by RetroActive

    You&#39;re in my subconscious, man! I&#39;m writing a script right now called "Being YackBacker", the sequel to Being John Malkovich. It&#39;ll be a smash! Little yackbacker fans will be everywhere! Yes, you are a brand, my friend!

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 11:29 a.m. CST

    I said it before and I&#39;ll say it again...

    by Bubba Gillman

    SR is a great film. A GREAT FILM. I say that without equivocation. I don&#39;t care about the box office, although it does kill me that Pirates 2 crushed it, mainly because Pirates 2 is mediocre at best (and I loved the original). Whoa, maybe I do care about the box office. In any event, SR far surpasses any other movie this summer as an artistic achievement. Off topic - any truth to the rumor that there will be Ewoks in Pirates 3?

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 11:30 a.m. CST

    no but there will be MAN-CATS

    by Lost Prophet

    which would be cool

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 11:34 a.m. CST

    SR was not without it&#39;s problems... However,

    by BendersShinyAss

    That shitty situation between Superman and Lois Lane absolutely captivated me. Damn this reality. Damn it to hell. Can&#39;t wait for the next one.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 11:35 a.m. CST

    hey lost skeleton

    by rubensreviews

    were&#39;nt the crystals on the new krypton that superman managed to send to space before it grew to the size of a continent? Kitty dropped the crystals on the ground, not the water from what I remember. and superman managed to dig deep enough before the kryptonite grew out to weaken him which is why he lost his senses just barely when he got to space and fell back down.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 11:36 a.m. CST

    But also bitch about it

    by Lost Prophet

    beforehand, obviously. I would go just to hear superman call lois "catnip tits"(copyright Yackbacker 2006). It would be well worth it.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 11:42 a.m. CST

    Lost Prophet

    by RetroActive

    TB&#39;s aren&#39;t always the answer to the mysteries of the universe. They don&#39;t represent a balnced poll. That doesn&#39;t mean they should be disgarded, but it doesn&#39;t make them the ultimate litmus test either. No one&#39;s told me they hated it? Believe it. Disappointed? Absolutely. And regardless of Troma&#39;s stated goals, a bad movie is a bad movie. And I never claimed that Surf Nazis Must Die was a major studio release. I simply said that it&#39;s the worst movie I&#39;d ever seen. B-Movie or not, it gets an F on any level. But thanks for the Troma history lesson, though I&#39;ve read that chapter before. And although rounded/simplified, the numbers I quoted on SR aren&#39;t wrong. You can cross reference them on several movie profit tracking sites, or contact the studio directly. Since most, if not all studios are publicly traded entities, under the freedom of information act, you can obtain their public financial records for a fee.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 11:43 a.m. CST


    by mraig

    That&#39;s domestic gross - what about foreign? You think WB just tosses Euros and pounds and yen into a big pile, pisses on them and sets them on fire? As long as the same studio is distributing the movie worldwide, other than for PR, why should they care where the money comes from? The movie has made 336 million worldwide now, and will probably top out between 350 and 400 million. That&#39;s got to be enough to at least break even. As for the sequel, there&#39;s no doubt that it will happen one day, but whether Singer will be in charge is another question. It seems insane that they would reboot the franchise for the next movie after it just got rebooted, so I think, unless they wait ten years, we&#39;re stuck with the kid and goofy Lex. That being the case, I wouldn&#39;t mind if Singer has another shot at it, but I think he needs to take the next movie in a pretty different direction. Listen to what people have been saying here: give us a villian we haven&#39;t seen on the big screen before, include at least three or four gotta-see-it big set fight scenes/action pieces (this movie had one: Superman saving the plane, which was great. If it had had two more, this movie would have 50-100 million more in repeat business, I imagine). I believe in Singer&#39;s ability to deliver, but I also wouldn&#39;t be too disappointed if he was replaced - IN AN EQUAL OR UPWARD TRADE. Bring in Ratner on this one and you&#39;ll see what a bad Superman movie looks like in the 21st century. Singer&#39;s SR may have had problems, but it could have been a lot worse.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 11:45 a.m. CST


    by Lost Prophet

    just helping to promote the brand. Here you go for the link

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 11:49 a.m. CST

    A well made movie is not the same thing as a good movie

    by Movietool

    SR was very well made, no doubt. But unfortunately I have to agree with those who argue that it was about as much fun as watching water boil.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 11:53 a.m. CST

    He&#39;ll fuck up Superman but wouldn&#39;t touch Jaws?

    by Badger999

    Fuck Bryan Singer. Fuck him and his boring 19-hour long movie with cute li&#39;l Superbastard.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 11:54 a.m. CST


    by RetroActive

    Even though you&#39;re famous now, you still put on one pant leg at a time, bro. Keep it real! I agree that SR was expected to do a helluva lot better. I&#39;m just saying that, from a profit strandpoint, it made enough to warrant a sequel. As for Singer, I completely agree in terms of action. Like X-Men, the whole build-up around that white bubble turning people into fellow mutants via the Statue of Liberty still makes me yawn. As does the "Christ reference", as Superman fell back to earth. Lots of dead space there. However, I felt that Singer nailed the plane/shuttle sequence. He&#39;s definitely incosistent in that department. Personally, I&#39;d love to see James Cameron take a whack at Superman from an Aliens action point of view. When I think of a satisfying action movie, Aliens & T2 come to mind. Just as long as the savior of the world&#39;s doesn&#39;t become a teen in the next movie and look anything like Edward Furlong! Man, was that lousy casting! Hey, maybe his kid&#39;s mix of Kryptonian & Homo Sapien DNA could tunr him into a vicious MAN-CAT?!! Now we&#39;re talking!

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 11:55 a.m. CST


    by Lost Prophet

    There are movies that are so bad they are good- in a perverse sort of way. Thanks for pointing out that TB&#39;s are not proof of life. BTW. Also the gross figure IMDB (which is hardly the most reliable source in the world) doesn&#39;t take into account the previous shit load of money wasted on development.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 12:06 p.m. CST


    by RetroActive

    My numbers reflect the overall gross of the film. And yes, I do believe they throw all of the world&#39;s currencies into separate piles, but instead of pissing on them, they convert them to American dollars and calculate their profits accordingly. I wasn&#39;t sure about your other point. Are you arguing that the profits I&#39;m estimating are skewed? Because I believe that the movie is doing more than breaking even. As for getting someone else to pilot the ship, no argument there. I liiked all the casting choices. Once again, need a better story without Lex Luthor...and more action. Singer tends to take long, drawn out shots. The one element I enjoyed was that Supes kept moving. When there was a disaster, he was too busy doing 50 different things to stop, smile, and wave. The pace of the action scenes was fine...but some of the slower moments needed momentum and a bigger payoff in the finale (i.e. big, smash-em up battle) would be good too. Oh, and maybe if the little one borrowed SuperDaddy&#39;s ship to see Krypton for himself, disappearing for the next two sequels, that wouldn&#39;t be too bad either! Though I do believe Singer and the kid will be back.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 12:09 p.m. CST


    by Truth0ne

    This sounds like he&#39;s trying to convince himself that the film didn&#39;t flop.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 12:10 p.m. CST

    God, I hope they don&#39;t bring the kid back

    by Lost Prophet

    and Retro sorry for being so po-faced about the numbers thing- as I said, I am not qualified to argue over if it will make a profit. My gripes with this film are all artistic, not commercial. I believe it was a complete waste of a property and I can not think of the last time I have felt such viceral hatred to a movie. Going to pub now. I look forward to being flamed overnight.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 12:11 p.m. CST

    Singer&#39;s Superman

    by Batman_9

    was kinda gay. Heh, couldn&#39;t resist. Seriously though, I liked the film. But I sure didn&#39;t love it. And although I appreciated the signature shots of Big Blue, I would have loved a little more action, no illegitimate child and a better written Lex Luthor. I won&#39;t be disappointed in a Singer sequel but I would absolutely LOVE to see a Michael Bay Superman.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 12:15 p.m. CST

    Lost Prophet

    by RetroActive

    And then there are movies that are so bad, they totally suck. I tend to lean on Box Office Mojo for general numbers, not imdb since they are sometimes filtered through PR departments, but I must admit...I don&#39;t factor in old development failures because they are absorbed in different fiscal cycles (i.e Tim Burton/Kevin Smith/McG development). But if you choose to ball them up together, you&#39;ve got a good point. But on the reverse end, many comic projects linger in development for years (i.e. Hulk, Spider-Man, WonderWoman). So if you factor all of those projects in as well...I guess comic movies have made about 43 cents to date!

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 12:16 p.m. CST

    I want another Superman movie!!!

    by TheButcher

    I just want 3 things. 1 a different director. 2 an original story. 3 a fun movie!

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 12:18 p.m. CST

    the next film should be "Superman Tries Again"

    by TheBaxter

    and after that, "Superman Gives Up and Goes Into Gay Porn"

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 12:19 p.m. CST

    Lost Prophet

    by RetroActive

    Have a pint for me, man! At least we finally got a SUperman movie to forget the L.A. is NY City low budget shoot that was Superman III! Then again, I did...maybe you&#39;re worse off now. Here&#39;s hoping the next one&#39;s better. But please, no Michael Bay! That guy is poison!

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 12:30 p.m. CST

    No offense, jugdish

    by The PimpDragon

    But how do you get off calling Quint a goon when you can&#39;t even spell Citizen Kane correctly? Hello, Pot? This is Kettle. Who you callin&#39; black, yo?

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 12:31 p.m. CST

    Superman Returns is underrated by fanboys...

    by Chief Redcock

    ...too much like the first Donner film, yes, but still a good movie with many quirky and innovative ideas of its own. Singer did a great job of making Supes more human, which I think was his goal... I also think that if Warner Bros lets him make a sequel, it will be much better than Returns and will work out all the bugs, so to speak. As with X-Men, Singer seems to need one warm up film before he really knocks it out of the park...

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 12:45 p.m. CST

    Underrated by Fanboys?

    by nonsensical

    Seriously?! I mean SERIOUSLY!? This movie had one good thing. Routh, and he wasn&#39;t even allowed to play the part directly. I want a SUPERMAN Movie. I want a movie that adheres to the character of Superman and maintains the basic rules of the character that have been established over the last 70 years. I want a Superman Movie that&#39;s going to get me choked up and make me feel like I did when he died. Luckily, I will be getting that from the Dini/Timm group. Superman: Doomsday is coming and so long as Batman is in it and the emotion is conveyed that he just lost his best friend in the whole world, then that&#39;s where my money is. After that give me a "Superman Returns", but make it one where we cheer the return of a great hero and a god in a world of cardboard who just wants to live as a normal man without worry that he might break those he loves. Superman is a great character, my absolute favorite. Singer&#39;s Superman was not it. Not even close.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 12:55 p.m. CST

    Yack - Here they are!

    by Mechasheeva

    And Superman Returns was a good but flawed movie, and the sequel, if there is one, will probably be better by a long shot.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 1:02 p.m. CST

    Superman&#39;s profit

    by Barry Egan

    Anybody besides me notice a large number of Superman-related tie in products in stores this summer? Turns out licensing fees are paid to make those products. I think people are looking at domestic box office as being the only way a movie makes it&#39;s money back. If Superman does $200 million domestically, it will likely top out in the $400-500 million range world wide (WB did not release the film on the same day throughout the globe, so box office receipts will come in more slowly). I read recently that the studios make 6 times as much on DVD sales as they do on ticket sales. Using that number, you can estimate that Superman Returns will make about $1.2 billion when it hits DVD (I think this number seems pretty high). Add in money for pay per view, video store rentals, cable or network TV deals and this is going to be a film that makes its money back and then some.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 1:05 p.m. CST

    how can people think that many people liked this movie

    by messi

    I&#39;m arguing with a dude on a forum that majority of people didn&#39;t like this movie. he&#39;s basing his facts on the imdb voting(but not all users vote) and rotten tomatoes, which isn&#39;t that great anyway considering many of the reviews call SR an ok film but nothing spectacular. But you only have to look at just about every film forum on the net and been on imdb and here for the past month to know many people did NOT like this film. He also seems to be basing it on the people he talks to. And saying that Batman Begins got mixed reactions aswell when it came out, which is untrue since there wasn&#39;t a film website that didn&#39;t love that movie. please talkbackers, give me some fuel for my war.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 1:18 p.m. CST


    by Rupee88

    I would love to be sitting here saying that I loved SR. It would be lots more fun than reminding myself how crappy it was and how it was such a wasted opportunity. The reason people are so negative about it is because it was a piece of shit film...just like X3...just like Elektra or Punisher, sucked.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 1:20 p.m. CST

    If the same writers do the sequel, it will suck too

    by Rupee88

    You aren&#39;t going to get a brilliant screenplay out of a couple of hacks who are just out of diapers. They showed their level of talent with SR. And I include Singer in there as he contributed to the story. Singer + same writers = shit sequel.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 1:24 p.m. CST

    SR Was Incredible

    by MarkoOhNo

    The general rule of thumb is as follows: if you didn&#39;t like the first two Superman movies from back around 1980, you probably hate SR. If you loved &#39;em and missed Christopher Reeves as Supe, SR was freakin candy. If you knew all but nothing about Superman, SR was fun to see but not incredible. If you&#39;re a big, whiney-ass geek who went expecting to see on screen some vision he&#39;d had in his head since childhood, you&#39;re gonna feel like the film was abysmal, everyone else in the world hated it too, and we were all ass-raped by Bryan Singer. Why can&#39;t you just grow the hell up and have fun at a movie like NORMAL people? I&#39;m getting sick of seeing idiots pissing all over a great film. (And now I sit back to watch and see how many flamebacks I get. heh)

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 1:29 p.m. CST


    by MarkoOhNo

    That was possibly the most innane and utterly moronic statement I&#39;ve ever -- EVER -- seen in a talkback. SR? X3? In the same category as Elektra or Punisher? Are you freakin braindead or do you just play it online? Elektra and Punisher were all but straight-to-video! X3 and SR are still in theaters! Clearly more than a few people loved it enough to return many, many times. You lose! End of argument. X3 was cool, although depressing, and SR was freakin amazing. The end.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 1:32 p.m. CST

    Nobody complaining about miami vice box office?

    by ribbitking

    Miami Vice is about 85 million down from said budget on box office mojo.... superman is 70 million down. Plus superman gets int box office, where i&#39;m guessing miami vice aint gonna do too well.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 1:33 p.m. CST

    Comic book movies not to

    by Darth Valinorean

    Norman Dale - you said: "I actually thought it was pretty good for a comic book movie." What are you smoking? First of all, what the heck do you mean by "for a comic book movie" -- do you imply that the medium of comic books are not as important or serious as your tomes on Greek History? If you do think that, read 300! Socio-political issues? Read Watchmen. Good creative "heavy prose"? Read V for Vendetta. There is no excuse to treat a movie as &#39;comic book movie&#39; - if anything, even more respect is due to the movie if it is indeed a comic book movie. While Singer did some things right with Routh, Spacey and some of the really cool effects, he fked it up with the kid, the overall plot and waaay too much homage to the original (right down to Superman being kicked into the water). This was a bad plot. Atrocious. Who the heck is going to buy land in New Krypton where if you turn the wrong way while in bed with your girl, you have a sharp crystal up your ass. Capitalism would be destroyed - when NYC sinks with the rest of the Eastern seaboard. So, who has the money to buy if Wall Street has to Kevin Costner&#39;s Waterworld? THINK!!! Clearly the screenwriters did not do that. And Genro - spot on! This whole interview was a pitch so Singer can try to redeem himself.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 1:36 p.m. CST


    by Harysuxafat1

    "Or a movie that maybe a woman who doesn&#39;t come to these kinds of movies will actually watch and get choked up about" seriously what the fuck has this idiot been smoking to make a damn superman movie thinking about this kind of shit? What a complete fucktard. Him and his insipid butt banger buddies need to drop the fuck off the radar and shut the fuck up about their idiotic brainless boring shitastic superman remake. Seriously it was one of the worst movies of this decaade so far. This fucker brags about all the money he wasted and then has the fucking nuts to say its made its money back? What a shit sniffing dumb ass. Oh and this cocksucking interview is ridiculous. If you wanna pump him in the ass just ask him I&#39;m sure he&#39;d oblige. There&#39;s no need to insult anyone that comes here to read your site with dreck like this.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 1:40 p.m. CST

    Unbiased SUPERMAN RETURNS Opinion

    by BaleISBatman

    Look people i was ready to LOVE this film.I was a huge fan of the originals and i even saw bad reviews of returns saying it was trying to hard to be the originals as good reviews as i love the originals THAT much. However, I watched the movie and was captivated for about the first 20 minutes and the slow pacing kinda sapped the life out of me. They didnt get the pacing and energy right, they didnt get the Character of Superman right, he is not a loser he is a HERO and i didnt feel that in this movie. The writing was severly lacking in the plot and story department i mean if you go back and watch the original Superman they were able to have superman do more things, Lex have his real estate Land mass chaos plan that he did in this new one also, AND fit in the origin story. Im sorry but if you are ognna make the most expensive movie of all time at least mak it more eventful then the first superman movie.Even the tone of this interview reads like a hyped up movie gone terribly wrong somehwere along the line, we didnt see Raimi or Nolan ever have to talk about profits and fan reactions, they nailed their comic movies, singer missed the mark.Big dissapointment for me, I like singer but i wouldnt mind a new director taking a crack at this but if he is given the sequel at least get new writers. I for one am waiting for Spidey 3 and The Dark Knight!!!!

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 1:45 p.m. CST

    A Point Of View Shared By A Select Few

    by MarkoOhNo

    What you&#39;re seeing as "critical errors", most found as entertaining twists which made Superman more Human. (Yeah, yeah, he&#39;s a KRYPTONIAN... but I mean he was raised as an Earthboy.) Many found it all to be quite effective and not at all silly. Imagine your hometown and family were blown to hell in a terrorist attack, then one day you hear a rumor that there may be survivors. Would you not immediately drop everything and rush there? It was genius. The only thing which bothered me was the end. Once he got away from the kryptonite, he should&#39;ve been fine. If for some reason he wasn&#39;t, he&#39;d have been instantly dead or burnt up on reentry. But that&#39;s the lovely thing about comic book heroes... there&#39;s all but little basis in reality. To fully enjoy them, you have to shut down the majority of your brain and let your imagination take over. By the way, Luthor&#39;s wasn&#39;t merely a "real estate scheme"... he was plotting world domination by ruling over his own supercontinent which Superman would be powerless to come near. It wasn&#39;t just the money, it was also about political power. Genius? Eh... not really. But I imagine IQs drop significantly over a period of years in prison with little to do but work out and knit. lol

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 1:50 p.m. CST

    And another thing...

    by Bubba Gillman

    Supes leaving earth to find Krypton, pining over Lois, and all the other stuff some of you are complaining about in my opinion is a logical progression of a character who more or less hasn&#39;t changed in 70 years. Wouldn&#39;t he eventually want to see his home world? Or wrestle with the burden of being the world&#39;s saviour? These things have always been subtext to the Superman mythos, and I think Singer brought them to the forefront beautifully. And the kid? I think Harry said it best in his original review. But I guess that a demographic that prompts MTV to run a 4 hour block of a tv show called "Yo&#39; Momma" whould have no interest in these things. SR rules!

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 1:52 p.m. CST

    by 2LeggedFreak

    Amongst the many big mis-steps on this film I am amazed that the much maligned " studio interference" seems to have gone nowhere near Mr Singer and his pals. Did no-one at any time challenge what this hack was doing. I laugh every time I see the kids tie-in toys for this. Its a 12a so no youngsters are going to see it and , when they do on DVD, they have the wonderful Passion of the Christ beating to carry them off to their little beds. Singer has made a taudry mopey melodrama out of THE Superhero and I&#39;m just bitter because I wanted so much more. Incidentally what was the point at which your mind started telling you things weren&#39;t right. I sat there through the opening credits of this film with a huge smile on my face but, when he threw the dogs ball, something went "whoah , somethings not right here!" From that point on the film just had a weird off kilter tone to it, as if it was some kind of alternate reality Superman. Which is great for fan boys but for a mainstream audience its a huge mistake.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 1:53 p.m. CST

    Waste of time ...

    by Darth Valinorean

    Singer fucked up. Simple. The screenwriters need to be slapped around. The gumption to put themselves in a cameo. Every time I see them in an interview, their smug attitude of &#39;success&#39; is awful to watch. There was no plot. There was no real villainy other than BILLIONS/MILLIONS -- stupidity! Luthor is an evil GENIUS. Not a foolish real estate agent. Get a clue!

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 1:55 p.m. CST

    Yackbacker speaks the truth

    by Neo Zeed

    Personally I&#39;d like Singer to do something original like he did with the Usual Suspects. Find McQuarrie or a new screenwriter and try his hand at another drama. I remember when Usual Suspects came out, it blew me away. He sounds like a nice guy but how long do we have to wait until he knocks it out the park?

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 1:55 p.m. CST

    Liked it!

    by Jeebs

    Not love! There were definitely some great moments like that plane rescue scene, the return from the heavens scene, and that sacrifice. But there were moments that were just too much Superman 1 that it felt so much like a remake. Supes/Clark and Jimmy were great but Lois was not likable, and that kid totally ruins it. I wanted a DCAU Lex, all we got was a Gene Hackman rehash.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 2:04 p.m. CST

    A recent study shows...

    by viranth

    that if you didn&#39;t like Superman Returns, you are 98.42% likely to be mentally challenged.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 2:08 p.m. CST


    by fiester

    See a director shamelessly schill and beg for the rights to do a sequel. Here&#39;s a hint Bryon: If you hadn&#39;t insisted on fucking up the first one by essentially making it a fucking remake you wouldn&#39;t have had this problem. Try making an original movie next time, not a copy with better FX. Oh, and here&#39;s a fucking hint: If you&#39;re going to do a super-hero movie, okay, HAVE A FUCKING SUPER VILLAIN FOR HIM TO FIGHT! And thanks again for killing this franchise for the next 20 years. Let&#39;s just hope other learn from your (and Ang Lee&#39;s) mistakes.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 2:09 p.m. CST

    Darth Valinorean

    by Norman Dale

    By comic book movie, I mean a summer-blockbuster type "popcorn flick" that while it isn&#39;t going to win any awards, people generally like them. There was no disrespect to the comic book genre...I enjoy them just as much as the next nerd. I assume you are a comic reader...thats why I am little confused as to your problems with the plot. You dont like the kryptonite island, because it doesn&#39;t make sense. In a realm where villains are willing to destroy worlds to get revenge, no matter the cost to the villain himself, I find this argument does not hold water. Villains are insane and exxagerated, thats what makes a comic book villain. Go back and read some Superman comics...the villains master plans were ever hardly genius. It&#39;s the villains belief in his own geniusness that makes them fun. As for the plot in general: I found it to be well thought out and clear. At least there was a concise plot. Many movies this summer have had little to no plot, or they made a movie around a few action sequences and filled in the holes with sub-standard plot(Pirates 2, which I also consider a fun movie in the comic book vein). I took SR as a well-calculated setup movie for a new generation. It could have been better....but it could have been much, much worse. Ask Tim Burton and Jon Peters.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 2:10 p.m. CST

    Congrats Singer

    by RezE11even

    You alone can say that you made me fall asleep in a theater. I really didn&#39;t think that was possible, hell, I used to laugh at and mock the people that did it. I used to think, "how could someone fork over 9 dollars to go sleep in a chair?!" What a waste of cash! Right? Well now, the only thing I can say "what a waste of cash!" for is Superman Returns. I was astounded to hear that the plane crash scene was 30 minutes into the movie. I felt like I sat through a good 30 minutes, passed out, woke up, watched thirty minutes more, passed out again, and then woke up to a plane crash. So fucking boring. That&#39;s what I have to say about SR. Oh, and great job, Singer.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 2:16 p.m. CST

    It&#39;s lame, kiss-assy interviews like this that ...

    by UserIDGoesHere

    are to blame for guys like Singer being completely delusional. What a joke. Try asking a probing question or challenging him when he out and out lies (as with the made its money back).

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 2:21 p.m. CST


    by JohnGalt06

    If you ever wondered what happened to the $91 million worth of cocaine from that boat in THE USUAL SUSPECTS...mystery solved.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 2:24 p.m. CST

    My main problem with SR

    by Mechasheeva

    Wasn&#39;t Singer&#39;s direction, the casting, or the acting; it was the screenplay. A lot of these complaints are totally valid; there wasn&#39;t enough action, it was too long, Luthor&#39;s whole plot sucked and didn&#39;t make too much sense. But there were also moments of real emotional power; Supes lifting the whole continent out of the ocean, sacrificing his body while knowing that if he fucks up he kills millions . . . Ma Kent just another face in the crowd, unable to be by her son&#39;s side while he&#39;s dying . . . the pleading in Lois&#39; eyes as the ship sinks and her child, whose powers have just come to light, can do nothing. It&#39;s certainly not perfect, but I get the feeling too many Supes fans here set their expectations so high that when they realized the movie wasn&#39;t living up to them, they focused on only the negative aspects of the film. I went into Supes like I go into every film, hoping to enjoy but ready for disappointment, just in case. And I enjoyed the hell out of the movie.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 2:25 p.m. CST

    Norman Dale

    by 2LeggedFreak

    Your point regarding comic book villains and their exagerated ambitions is right and sits comfortably within a comic book movie where you really shouldn&#39;t be asking too many questions ( Its not Shakespeare after all !). Unfortunately though, SR opens itself up to this form of criticism because of the tone it sets for itself. Lots of Messiah references, very po-faced, takes itself incredibly seriously. When you go down that route and are trying to be too clever by half then people can legitimately say " Hey if this is such a great film about a lonely alien living within us and the Christ-like trials and tribulations he endures, why has it got such a SHITE plot !".

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 2:33 p.m. CST

    i dont blame singer

    by Spacesheik

    he fucked up with SR - he knows it and he wants to make a sequel to eradicate the touchy feely aspect of the first film - which was abdly plotted - climax consisted of supes lifting a grey rock to the sun and going to a hospital - gimme a fucking break - wheres the beef? wheres the action? wheres the heroism? wheres the real climax? oh and ill take hackmans luthor over spacey anyday - what did lex do in the movie, stole crystals from a museum and hung out at his yacht - gimme a break. if only the rest of the film measured up to the shuttle-747 sequence where he lands the plane in th stadium and the crowd cheers! now THATs superman!

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 2:39 p.m. CST

    I&#39;m no film director but

    by 2LeggedFreak

    When the powers that be were watching this monstrosity did nobody suggest that a couple of quick changes could vastly improve things: 1) If you are going to have that hospital scene then why not do the following sequence: Superman gets beaten and stabbed - Superman gets rescued and goes to hospital - Superman recovers - flies back to Lex Land- saves all the bad guys (moral victory) - lifts continent. The end.-----------------------Oh nearly forgot, take out the flipping awful CGI Superman shot just before the end credits and get Routh to SMILE at the camera.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 2:45 p.m. CST

    agreeing on Routh

    by Cory849

    "And it seems that across the board people agree on Brandon Routh as Superman." Wow. Just...Wow. No they fucking do NOT. Actually I read a ton of &#39;Routh was good&#39; from the talkbackers above. All I have to say is: Go watch Christopher Reeves again. Then watch Brandon Routh. Then read some superman comics (any era) then watch Brandon Routh. If you are all still impressed with Routh as Superman I have found my answer to why movies suck today.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 2:52 p.m. CST

    NO MORE!!!!

    by Noeland

    Singer needs to return to making original films, and get the hell out of adapting comic books. Atleast for his next film, I hope to see a thriller or even a comedy from him would be great. JUST SOMETHING NEW!! PLEASE SOMETHING NEW!!!!

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 2:52 p.m. CST

    This is ridiculous

    by Aluccard

    Somehwere along the way the AICN talkbackers turned from sensible and insightful posters into bitter, frustrated and malicious attackers. It&#39;s almost depressing to read these boards now. I can&#39;t remember the last thread I read around here with maybe even...10% of the posts being positive. The negativity around here is ridiculous. It seems like nobody is pleased unless they spew their venom for the day. Superman Returns was a great movie. I&#39;m always shocked when I read these boards because I haven&#39;t talked to anyone outside of the internet that disliked SR. I&#39;ve heard complaints about certain things (the kid, bosworth, early pacing, etc.) but still generally very positive. Yes, there are some horrible films out there this summer (POTC2), but SR is definitely not one of them and not deserving of this sort of backlash. After reading this board, it&#39;s quite clear that nothing Singer could have done would have pleased most of you. Or any other films for that matter.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 2:58 p.m. CST


    by Cory849

    blah blah blah. Brian Singer is rich as stink. he&#39;ll be fine. He doesnt need you to have his back. Save it for some poor overlooked indy guy. In the meantime I will happily reiterate my opionion that while Superman Returns was a technically competent movie, overall it was a poor rebirth of the franchise. Incidentally, I blame Jon Peters not Bryan Singer. That man is crazy.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 3:18 p.m. CST

    Re: Aluccard

    by Aluccard

    I couldn&#39;t care less how much money Bryan Singer makes or made of SR. I&#39;m not defending Singer, I&#39;m just trying to express my frustration with talkback. I know everyone takes pride in shouting the loudest around here, but it&#39;s still annoying for those that want honest and fair opinions.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 3:35 p.m. CST

    by abcdefghijklmnop

    SR was okay, but it was nowhere near the Superman film I wanted to see in 2006. I think Singer just bet all the marbles on the "what happens when old boyfriends return" idea, and it obviously didn&#39;t resonate with audiences the way he thought it would. Warner will certainly greenlight a sequel. After all, it&#39;s still Superman. But I doubt there would be a public outcry if they went with a different director.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 3:35 p.m. CST

    And one other thing...

    by Bubba Gillman

    I think we have to separate budget and box office. Whether a film is a flop and whether it is profitable are two different things. If a film cost $1 Billion to make and grossed $750 Million domestic, I don&#39;t think anyone would call it a flop - the B.O. suggests that moviegoers responded to it. Now whether it was profitable obviously is another matter. I only care about profitability to the extent that it may determine the likelihood of a sequel, not as a signifier of a film&#39;s success or artistic merit. Oh, and SR rules!

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 3:48 p.m. CST

    Shark Movie

    by Dragulf

    is "Meg" aka megalodon(sp?), huge prehistoric shark movie is what he is talking about I believe. As for SR, well I saw it 20+ years ago when it actually made sense. Superman is your daddy! I truly did not like SR.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 4:17 p.m. CST

    Thanks Yack...

    by nonsensical

    I completely agree with you. Singer had two previous "hero" attempts and this one should have been a no-brainer. Instead the total lack of understanding for this character shows through everything except the airplance sequence. Personally, I can wait for Chris Nolan to get the Dark Knight out and David Goyer to present us Ryan Reynolds as the Flash. Those films are going to be amazing. Especially if Reynolds is allowed to really play Wally West as we know he can, unlike Routh who really wasn&#39;t allowed to play Superman. It will be interesting to see what he can really bring to the role if there is a sequel, since he didn&#39;t get to play the part. Not really. Acting like Christopher Reeve playing the part is not the same a actually playing the part. However, if they do get the chance they&#39;ll have to replace the whole rest of the cast, restart the story, ignore the last movie, and pick up a Superman comic for some reference. Again, really want to see Goyer let Reynolds run as the Flash and Nolan&#39;s The Dark Knight.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 4:20 p.m. CST

    Um... Yackbacker...

    by nonsensical

    In almost all things superhero and comic related, I think I&#39;ll allow you to speak for me. It seems that we are on the same page about 99.9% of the time on things of this nature.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 4:45 p.m. CST

    Settle Down everyone!

    by BaleISBatman

    Superman Returns had some great moments we all agree correct! It was overall an OK film and a great one compared to the rest of the summer. No these are also some Facts... Did they make an exciting original movie, No, DId they capture the character of Superman, No, did it have great action, Mostly no, Did they achieve the success of the Nolan Batman and Raimi Spiderman movies, MOST CERTAINLY NOT. We can all argue all day long but there are certain missteps singer made which cannot be overlooked. And for those of you that think all this negativity is noirmal for an AICN talkback just wait for a Batman Begins Talk back or Spiderman 3 and youll see otherwise.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 4:47 p.m. CST

    You guys really know nothing about studio numbers...

    by moto

    No offense, but those saying that the marketing cost $100 million yada yada. You&#39;re just wrong. Work in a studio, meet some marketing people, and you&#39;ll know. Marketing a movie like this is pricey but not fucking $100 million. And no, do not count the $60 million in development over the last decade. Does not and should not reflect on Bryan Singer&#39;s movie. Those costs were paid off through tax breaks, etc. well before Singer started shooting. As far as what a studio really makes? Saying a movie only garners the studio 50% of what it has made is an easy thing to say. Not true. The percentages vary each week, as far as what theaters take, but in the end it is well well well about 50%. SR has already turned a profit, and the $$$ will really kick in to gear once DVD comes out. That&#39;s the new medium. That&#39;s the new measure of a film&#39;s success. Any film. DVD is a studio&#39;s parachute. Even shitty ass direct-to-video sequels for shitty ass movies make big money. As far as a sequel goes. You are naive to think that WB isn&#39;t already planning a SR sequel. Sorry folks... it&#39;s going to happen. It&#39;s already happening. And I can&#39;t wait. SR was a good movie. Not the Superman flick we wanted 100%, but a great start... no different than the first X-Men. Expectations just got the better of most of you. To say it was "the worst movie ever" (yes, someone said that), is just idiotic and takes away any merit from their talkback. I&#39;m pumped for a sequel. There will be new screenwriters, same director and same cast, more action, etc.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 4:57 p.m. CST

    Start up a poll

    by RepairmanJack

    Liked it or Didn&#39;t like it? How &#39;bout it chumps?

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 4:59 p.m. CST


    by RepairmanJack

    Superman had some grating moments. Doubtful that any in the movie were grrrreaattt!

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 5:04 p.m. CST

    Its hard to be pumped for the sequel when...

    by BaleISBatman

    there were so many missteps. I dont think a movie should be made for the sole purpose of pumping us up for the next one. Batman Begins stands on its own so does spiderman 2, we like those for what they are on their own not because oh dont worry they got all the boring shit out of the way now the sequel is ready to kick ass from the start. That doesnt fly with me, im not pumped for the next one im just hoping it gets me pumped for the third one! Bryan cant hold back anymore he cant play it safe hes gotta go balls to the wall in the sequel.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 5:17 p.m. CST

    SR was AWESOME


    saw it 3 times, and it got better each time. look at X1, sorry but it wasn&#39;t good. X2 was exponentially better. singer will do the same with a SR sequel. and to those saying he can&#39;t direct action, the action in X2 was some of the most awesome sequences in comic-book movie history(yeah i said it); nightcrawler&#39;s attack on the white house, the attack on Xavier&#39;s school, the fight between wolverine and Kelly Hu(don&#39;t know the character&#39;s name). anyways, he can direct action and i have full faith in him making a kick-ass sequel. &#39;nuff said

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 5:25 p.m. CST

    I Agree With Schorcho And The Others, This Movie Was...

    by The Ender

    Actually pretty damn good. I liked the hell out of it. It had a lot of hear to it, and was nice to have a super hero movie that didnt resort to shoot em up 24/7, blow shit up action. Routh was great, the Win A Date With Tad Hamilton chick was a little dry but served the purpose. And the directing was excellent. Bring on the sequel, I eagerly await.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 5:26 p.m. CST

    Heart, It Had a Lot of Heart To It

    by The Ender


  • Aug. 8, 2006, 5:27 p.m. CST


    by Jibarito

    Superman Returns was awesome! I just got weirded out by Supes as he looks at the camera before the credits. Reminded me of when the Pteranodon looks over his back to look at his prey in Jurassic Park 3. There were two AMAZING scenes: when people are just walking around town and Superman justs tears through the street and everyone just kind of gasps. I like the way the camera stays on the speck in the sky as he just disappears. Makes me wish Superman was real. I also love it when Superman plucks that falling guy out ok the air before he falls and drops him off and flys off before the guy has good footing. I liked that immensly. I want to see what happens....bring on the sequel! X-Men was ok, it was just cool to have a movie, you know? X2 was incredible, a major step up. We need a Superman equivalent of X2....

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 5:44 p.m. CST

    There will be a sequel

    by Ridge

    WB already said if it made over 200m USA they&#39;d greenlight one. Considering outside the USA its done fairly well too, by the end of its run it&#39;ll hit the needed target no doubt. The main thing is, they also said that the sequel would drop the budget too. I believe Routh is signed to a multi movie deal, as is Bosworth. It&#39;s easy there, keep their paychecks low for the next one and only if its a success would you raise it. Whilst I loved the movie, I can easily see why others loathed it, there were bits for me as a father that I could relate to with circumstances in my life, and they touched upon those well. I can see again, why others thought it slow and ponderous, maybe if I weren&#39;t able to relate personally to those moments I too would feel that way. Either way, you know, I believe the only way to financially redeem this series is to make a balls to the walls action movie for the next one. Superman fighting Doomsday would be what I&#39;d consider the best option. Have him fight Doomsday, die at the end of 2, Brainiac comes along leaving the end sort of &#39;negative&#39; with the earth open to invasion, and in part 3 he comes back from the dead ala the comics to kick Brainiac and his minions asses. I mean seriously, with the effectiveness of cgi and prothetics, Doomsday wouldn&#39;t be that impossible to do now. And you know, it&#39;d supply the ultimate plotpoint for killing off Lois&#39;s husband and opening up her and Clark/Supes getting together in part 3... (fiancee... whatever... lol)

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 5:45 p.m. CST

    The one certain sign of celluloid shit.

    by JackPumpkinhead

    You are watching, say, "Superman Returns" - or rather trying to watch. After a very long time you sigh and mutter "Well, at least it will be over soon, it&#39;s been over 90 minutes"... Then you look at a clock and realize that it has actually been 20 minutes. That&#39;s true for ANY horrible movie, except for the ones that are so bad they manage to be funny all the time.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 5:46 p.m. CST

    Really liked the original and really liked SR

    by Knugen

    I think that is the key. The fucked up nerds wanted a fucking hard on in a cape spewing supersplooge over all those nasty girls who won&#39;t speak to them because they are all fat fucks who masturbate to their gandalf dolls.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 5:49 p.m. CST

    Good times

    by johnnykool

    Quint, I enjoyed this interview. Great job, mate!

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 5:50 p.m. CST

    and kids:

    by Knugen

    remember the ritalin before entering the theater. Oh , and the asscock is served at noon as usual in Ratners poolhouse.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 5:52 p.m. CST


    by johnnykool

    I&#39;m amazed at the vitrol spewed by some of the fuckheads in Talkbacks. I&#39;m glad you guys aren&#39;t in charge of MY annual review.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 5:57 p.m. CST

    I Think We Need More Talkbackers Like Knugen

    by The Ender

    That way I can just agree with them, and not risk being banned for speaking offensively against other peoples retarded fucking opinions.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 5:57 p.m. CST

    Knugen That Means I Agree By The By

    by The Ender

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 6:05 p.m. CST

    Blahh, haters can suck it

    by The Dum Guy

    I say bring on Doomsday. I hope Singer can make a sequel that surpasses the original ala X-2. My prediction: Singer will return, the budget will be slightly smaller (only 200 million this time) and it will include alot more action.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 6:05 p.m. CST


    by Knugen

    That&#39;s enough bipolar posts. SR was, if not revolutionary, a solid evolutionary step in the saga. Superman is a lot more alien but interestingly enough more human in this iteration. Strong performances (albeit a bit truncated in the villain department) and wonderful story and action.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 6:09 p.m. CST

    i hate people who say that

    by slappy jones

    "the people who hated superman were always going to hate they were ready to hate it before they saw it"...FUCK THAT MAKES ME ANGRY. I was fucking hanging out for this film...I couldn&#39;t fucking wait...I paid my money and you know why I hated it?? because it fucking sucked. there ya was so depressing and a complete bummer of a film. the scene that I hated the most was superman perving on lois at her home...I don&#39;t want to be a total geek but superman wouldn;t do it hardly had an original idea....if you wanted to remake donners film just say thats what you are doing but don;t pawn it off as some kind of quasi sequel when all you did was up date the original...without a sens of fun I might add... a cold sterile dark film..but not good dark...oh and then theres superman in hospital..hows that for a climax to a film...the fucking hero in hospital....terrible

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 6:16 p.m. CST

    Why wouldn&#39;t Superman "perv" ?

    by The Dum Guy

    The guy is like next to God as far as being all knowing/seeing, so why wouldn&#39;t he use his powers in order to find out if the chic he still loves recipricates those feelings. Since all women lie, and Supes can&#39;t read minds, I can see why he would do such a thing and I don&#39;t think that that part of the film is all that uncharacteristic of Superman.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 6:26 p.m. CST

    people online do not uniformly support the SR casting

    by lynxpro

    Uhm, there are plenty of us online that never supported the decision of casting Routh, nor ever will. Its obvious from the domestic box office performance that the millions of fans of *Smallville* chose to stay home and not watch the film. Just as many of us said online that they would do. As for the excuse that its been so damn long since the last time Superman was onscreen in terms of laying the blame of its dismal B.O. performance, that is beyond lame. Look how long it had been since ROTJ had been in the theatres before TPM debuted. It doesn&#39;t wash. So word to the wise at Warner Bros., REBOOT!

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 6:34 p.m. CST

    Thanks Mr Singer !

    by Bellock

    You&#39;ve done the Superman i wanted to see. A movie made by someone who was influenced by the Donner movie in his childhood, and now become a great storyteller. It&#39;s the third time i see it tonight, and i still find it beautiful and powerful. I have a favorite shot : Supes flies above a street while the night is falling on Metropolis. People stop walking to look at him. We just hear the sound of his cape. And he flies to hear the woman he loves telling she hasn&#39;t loved him. Motion and Emotion. For me, simply the best superhero movie with the Donner, and "Batman Returns".

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 6:40 p.m. CST


    by Steve Zodiac before the release of SR, Singer was considered as a brilliant, you guys are pissing on him because he didn&#39;t fulfill your impossible to reach expectations. Granted, it was not an amazing movie, but by the way Singer talks about the sequel, he knows it too. I&#39;m sure he could do a great job with a second one...But damn would I love to see what Micheal Bay could do with Superman.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 6:42 p.m. CST

    Singer&#39;s defense: SR grossed more than Superman?

    by CreasyBear

    Yeah, when the Christopher Reeve movies cost a couple bucks to get a ticket. Who is deluded enough to think that, for example, The Mummy Returns was more popular than Gone with the Wind, just because Mummy grossed more? If you&#39;re going to compare older movies with newer ones, you have to look at tickets-sold (which even then is complicated by the fact there are more theaters and screens these days). Passing 100 mil is not the amazing feat it was back in the 70&#39;s and 80&#39;s.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 7:05 p.m. CST


    by Immortal_Fish

    He was comparing SR to the *last* SUpes film, meaning the Quest For Peace. That&#39;s how low golden boy here has sunk. People, you were never going to get a comicbook SUpes flick out of Donner and you still ain&#39;t going to get one with stalker Singer at the wheel. Forget Doomsday. It doesn&#39;t fit the cinematic world that had been created for the last 5 films. It&#39;s that far removed from the source material. I&#39;d love to see Superman in the next feature. No, not more Routh (who wasn&#39;t that bad, given what we got to see of him). I&#39;m talking about the guy from the funny books. The salt of the earth fellah. The Big Blue Boyscout, not the big blue boner. He should eventually make an appearance at some point.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 7:21 p.m. CST

    To the brainwashed lovers of Superman Returns...

    by Spiderhulk

    I&#39;m not sure you totally understand why you enjoy Superman Returns. I can put myself in that mode of loving the film too... It came from the first half of the film or so, and even the washed over feeling I got after the film and as I was walking out of the theatre into the fresh air. It wasn&#39;t until maybe 15 minutes of being outside of the theatre and then going through the entire film in my head I realized it was a shitty film. My love for superman (and the genuine heroic nature of that Icon through America&#39;s history leaving all archetypal heroes in his dust) was just fogging and clouding my judgement of the film. Was the film any good? FUCK NO! The film had so many fucking misteps you could have hooked it up to a defibrilator and an IV and it still wouldn&#39;t have survived. It was a disaster giving superman a child, a 19 year old lois lane who cant act, a superman that never talks, a terrible motive and plot riddled lex luthor, and a terrible plot riddled movie (from supes magical reappearance on earth after being gone so long, to supes never really brawling with anyone or anything, to lex&#39;s terrible jutting rock island) .... THE FILM JUST PLAIN SUCKED

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 7:25 p.m. CST

    my expectations were not impossible to meet

    by slappy jones

    The film was a drag. It was far to depressing for me. I didn&#39;t want to see a depressed superman. I found the film to be an incredibly cold heartless piece of work with no soul to it whatsoever. But thats just me...I find all of singers work to be a little cold...I think he is great director but personally he dropped the ball on superman. I wish it had had a bit more of an adventurous us a little more the fun side of being got close..the best scene is where he steps he lands the plane, the crowd cheer for him and he looks happy to be back. At that moment I thought the film was going to launch into the magnificent film it should have been but it just went downhill from there....that fucking stupid plan of luthors was lame.....the rest of the film from then on was boring and depressing.and I don&#39;t believe for a minute warners have made their money back yet. If they had made their money back and were into profit why are they delaying the sequels greenlight?? and if it does go ahead please no general zod...we just got a remake of superman the motion picture...lets not remake superman 2 as well....doomsday please. mind you they probably won&#39;t use doomsday if they are making that aminated film for dvd....wouldn&#39;t make sense to potentially ruin the film by having a direct to dvd film come out first telling the same story so i guess it won&#39;t be doomsday....

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 7:35 p.m. CST

    The next superman will be in 2029 after many delays...

    by Spiderhulk

    again..... The villain I&#39;m sad to admit will again be lex luthor played by a much older haley joel osment and lois lane will be played by a much older dakota fanning. Superman will be played by another unknown who is probably as we speak now in his bedroom, awaiting the fall start of grade 8 at school, and enjoying his superman comics during the summer..... This is sad, but it is true. We will never ever get a live action doomsday, brainiac, or darkseid (the most coveted I might add of all supes villains and a goldmine if ever brought to film in a meaningful way) ....... These three villains are practically made of money and screaming to be put on the big screen, but the studios will never grasp this fact.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 7:41 p.m. CST

    "Superman Lifts"

    by Nodwick

    The Superman flick was fun while you watched it, as long as you didn&#39;t think about the plot too hard. Once the lights came up, if you actually pondered the coherence of the film, it started to seem more and more nonsensical.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 7:44 p.m. CST

    I&#39;m hoping Singer comes back

    by corky1031

    I&#39;ll be really happy if WB gives Singer the go ahead for the sequel. It seems like there is a group of people who didn&#39;t like Superman Returns and they are always posting about how they hated it. But I think there&#39;s also a lot of people that liked it and just don&#39;t feel the need to justify it to everyone else. Don&#39;t be so sure you&#39;re the majority, haters.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 7:47 p.m. CST

    why do they keep letting comic book virgins direct?????

    by Spiderhulk

    Seriously... dont fucking tell me that there aren&#39;t very talented directors fresh out of film school, or with a few independent films under their belt that aren&#39;t obsessed with comic books and could deliver on a rockin&#39; hardcore superhero flick. I&#39;m sick of all these pricks and their martinis, and their hollywood snobbisms, and their esoteric sycophantic mannerisms. who are directing great comic book heroes. IM SICK OF IT.......

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 7:51 p.m. CST

    John Galt O6, you&#39;re right!

    by Uncapie


  • Aug. 8, 2006, 7:52 p.m. CST

    Slappy and Spider are right

    by #1 Zero

    Singer definitely has to go back to "The Usual Suspects" territory he was in earlier in his career. I just read an interview with Edward Burns in Filmmaker Magazine. He says that the indie guys who came out about the time he did like Singer and maybe even Raimi (although Raimi was on the board since the 80&#39;s) are now making giant comic movies and not making the smaller personal movies that they were known for at the beginning. Basically Burns says you should do one for the money (for them) and one for the art (for you). The old Paul Newman philosophy. Singer hasn&#39;t done one for himself in a while, and let&#39;s face it, his comic book visions may be a little more artistic and meaningful than say Daredevil or Catwoman but they are far from art. Bottom line: Singer should go back to his smaller minded intellectual thriller roots, give himself a break from $200 million dollar productions that seemed more based on the first two Superman movies than anything in the history of the comic. How about Superman fighting Nazis in World War II. That&#39;s what he was created for, it would be a throwback sure, and maybe you incorporate Doomsday into it too or some other huge bad guy fighting for the Nazis. Get away from this Superson storyline and go back to a time when "The American Way" meant something. (By the way, I&#39;m not a huge Edward Burns fan but he makes some good points in that interview. I don&#39;t think we&#39;ll ever see the character study indie films of the nineties again especially when FOX Searchlight puts out "The Ringer" and "Phat Girlz")

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 8:04 p.m. CST

    Just because you&#39;re making big budget comic book movies

    by JohnGalt06

    doesn&#39;t necessarily mean you&#39;re sacrificing your art. BATMAN BEGINS is as textured, smart and intellectually stimulating as anything that played at any indie film festival this year... or any year, for that matter. SUPERMAN RETURNS... not so much.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 8:06 p.m. CST


    by Shermdawg

    "And it seems that across the board people agree on Brandon Routh as Superman." What are you smoking Quint? Even if they don&#39;t support MELTING OWL, a good percentage of talkbackers are not behind Routh! I know, the Supes talkbacks are freakin&#39; huge, but you really should read them. Hell, even critics didn&#39;t like Routh. (EBERT) I could never be a entertainment reporter, I couldn&#39;t stand kissing someones ass, and downplaying the majority of negative opinion that a film has generated, in order to get the interview, or future interviews. Not that I&#39;m busting your chops Quint. Everyone does it, that&#39;s just how the business goes....and frankly, it&#39;s disgusting.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 8:07 p.m. CST


    by JohnGalt06

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 8:09 p.m. CST

    Let&#39;s just stop fighting and play a game...

    by JohnGalt06

    Come up with the best caption for each of those two pictures. My submission for pic 1: "Cock or coke, cock or coke...nope, I can&#39;t decide which one I like better." Pic 2: "Superman Returns made more than Baby Geniuses! That&#39;s a success, damnit!!!"

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 8:23 p.m. CST

    "Must... catch or lift ... object . . . SLOWLY!!!"

    by Tall_Boy

    That&#39;s my problem with the movie. Sure was pretty, though, and Everybody Loves Brannon Routh. So that&#39;s something. Lets see Supes do some "BURN, MONGO, BURN!" shit in part 2, please.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 8:24 p.m. CST

    I liked Superman

    by peopleintrees

    But the kid ruined it for me. The girl who played Lois Lane killed it for me too, she looks like fucking Felicity!

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 8:27 p.m. CST


    by Barry Egan

    I agree with you that SR is a disappointment in terms of box office. Before the summer began, would anybody have thought it would struggle to make $200 million? I thought it was going to do at least $300 in Norh America. The point I was trying to make was that Singer&#39;s statement that the film is in the black could very easily be true. SR is a disappointment, but hardly a disaster.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 8:34 p.m. CST

    Please god, if there is a sequel, recast Lois with...

    by Shermdawg

    Anne Hathaway.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 8:48 p.m. CST

    Great Caesar

    by Evil Chicken

    Singer nailed the dismount.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 9:04 p.m. CST

    Evil Chicken stop eating retard sandwiches

    by Superneal

    Are you a retard? Every one knows that Superman returns benefited an extra 30 million because it opened on a Wednesday rather than Friday. It made a huge chunk of its money during the first three days. The 50 + million was the opening "weekend Fri-Sun" which is weak if you compare it to the weak opening of MI3 - so the bonus 30 million is gravy. To think- this shit movie grossed almost 50% of its total within its first 5 release days!

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 9:20 p.m. CST

    Shermdawg wtf is this melting owl and hammer shit?

    by Spiderhulk

    You post it all the time... it doesn&#39;t make any @#$%ing sense. Is it just some kind of brain throw up? You think your john lennon when he wrote I am the walrus... googoo gajoob? eggman? semolina pilchard? juba juba juba?

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 9:26 p.m. CST

    Superman Returns is an abomination of the cinema

    by b3mike

    I can&#39;t even fathom why anyone in their right mind would defend this atrocity. No heart, no plot, dull, boring= Superman Returns

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 9:36 p.m. CST

    Was that Baby Geniuses 1 or 2 there, John Gault 06?

    by Uncapie

    Just checking.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 9:36 p.m. CST

    I think Borat should be the next Superman villain

    by JohnGalt06

    I don&#39;t think it could be anymore ridiculous than Spacey&#39;s Luthor. "You like-a my continent? It&#39;s niiiice."

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 9:49 p.m. CST

    "Must... catch or lift ... object . . . SLOWLY!!!" haha

    by slappy jones

    you forgot...."in weird gymnast poses" but you just summed up the entire film right there...all he fucking did was lift shit. terrible film.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 9:49 p.m. CST

    it seems

    by The Dum Guy

    It seems to me that the majority of people who express hatred of Superman Returns tend to focus on individual aspects of the film, such as the whole Luthor continent, or the kid, or the fact most of the actors are under 30. I cannot say Superman Returns was as a great of cinematic experience as say, Batman Begins, but I can think of ALOT of movies that are vastly worse. It appears that the real gripe people have is that the film didn&#39;t "blow them away", so they decide to hate the whole film for its individual flaws, to me the film was greater than the sum of its parts.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 9:52 p.m. CST

    RE:"Shermdawg wtf is this melting owl and hammer ?"

    by Shermdawg

    They..."WILL OWN YOUR ASS!!!" ;)

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 9:58 p.m. CST

    Two extremes on Superman Reboot

    by ckane123

    Seems to me from the comfort of ye old easy chair there are two extremes to Superman Returns - one side says it was "the worse film made EVER" and the other side says "OMG it was a RELIGIOUS experience." Both are right to the person(s) who wrote the opinions. Remember, movies are SUBJECTIVE. There are people who LOVE the Larry the Cable Guy Health Inspector movie, I guarantee it, and other people HATE Citizen Kane or Star Wars. Understand that, deal with it, move on. The subject of the BUSINESS of film and movie making is different - separate opinion from that, people. It&#39;s show BUSINESS. So, whether Superman Returns was the greatest or worse movie of all time DOES NOT MATTER when anyone talks about a possible sequel. Grok? It&#39; about the benjamins. Brian Singer, good diectr or bad, is WRONG when he said in this interview that SR was ALREADY profitable. It ain&#39;t (remember, Hollywood puts AS MUCH OVERHEAD into productions as possible, and that INCLUDES all the development cost prior to Singer). Superman WILL NOT MAKE $200 mill domestic, based on the number of theatres who are dropping it week to week, WB will only get 45 to 55% of the total Box office and Singer has JUST SIGNED with ABC a multi-million dllar deal to do three pilot sight unseen for the network. If Singer was offered a Supes sequel anytime soon, would he be doing this? NO. He has bills to pay and no offer is forthcoming. IT&#39;S NOTHING PERSONAL. IT&#39;S STRICTLY BUSINESS. No new Supes on the big screen for a while, but Batman WILL return (to paraphrase the Bond flms a bit).

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 10:03 p.m. CST


    by The Dum Guy

    Do you honestly believe that WB will just drop the Superman franchise that quick? Maybe sans Singer, but the whole kit-n-kaboodle?

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 10:20 p.m. CST

    Superman franchise IS dead and I&#39;ll tell you why...

    by JohnGalt06

    The good reviews. The good reviews for SUPERMAN RETURNS ensure that there will be no more Supes movies. How do I figure that? Simple, movie executives are stupid. They look at good critics&#39; reviews and poor box-office and figure people just don&#39;t care about the Superman character and won&#39;t show up for ANY Superman movie. It never occurs to them that Singer&#39;s movie just sucked balls...

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 10:49 p.m. CST


    by Harysuxafat1

    this will mean Singer will not be back. God what a shitty movie. So much to choose from and the trio of shit dick and the testes come up with this tripe? Go away and reboot this franchise because it&#39;s already so fucked up it&#39;s beyond fixing.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 11:09 p.m. CST


    by Gswan10050

    I think the new superman Returns Movie was GREAT It Has been a long time since superman was on the screan again i was a die hard fan of chris reeves and now glad his suite is beeing worn again. Even though its beeing woren by Brandon Roth im my eyes he did a great job. i would love to meet him personaly and tell him what a great job he did. They should make 4 more supermans in the nex 2 years to keep up with pirates and spider man who have there nex for movies allready filmed. People stop being so hard on Superman returns it was a great story. And to know superman has a son now. If Chris reeves was here i think he would have liked this film. Thank you Gus Swanson

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 11:11 p.m. CST

    They have options.

    by Shermdawg

    Hint, hint, nudge, nudge, wink, wink.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 11:20 p.m. CST


    by b3mike

    Wow.......who is "chris reeves"? Why would anyone wear a suite? Who&#39;s Brandon Roth? Please explain in further detail why the story was great. On second thought........don&#39;t.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 11:32 p.m. CST

    Bring in Alex Proyas and Rachel McAdams

    by brokebackcowboy

    as the next director and actress to play Lois Lane. Singer gave it a good try (you can&#39;t imagine it would be easy bringing Superman back after 20 years or more), but Proyas would nail it. He is one of the least publicized but most proficient action/sci-fi directors around. Rachel McAdams can&#39;t go wrong either - she&#39;s Hollywood&#39;s It Girl!

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 11:33 p.m. CST

    In concl: Superman is not a pussy

    by nef

    He is not a pussy lifeless character who has romance drama, he is the fucking leader of the JUSTICE LEAGUE, that means every superhero works under him and listens to every fucking word he says, his presence has to be felt as a FUCKING FEARLESS leader, when he comes on the battlefield, vilians have to be like oh shit, i am fucked. Not lol here comes this pussy on our kryptonite land caz hes mentally retarded and we gonna puch him lolz. SR was the worst idea ever for a super and i quote signer "superman is a date movie, perfect to take your girlfriend to" WTF IS WRONG WITH HIM???? i wanna see supe pummel some dude into a building bringing him down, not be like is he my child?? why can&#39;t u lub me :(

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 11:34 p.m. CST


    by Gswan10050

    I think the movie was so great that i have seen i 20 times now 17times in imax and 3times onreg screen i think pirates 2 sucked if you want to down a movie grow up people keep well rude comments to your self Go Brandon Routh kate and all of them cant wate for next film to come out soon WB WILL GIVE THE GREEN LIGHT YOU ALL JUST WAIT AND SEE!!!!! Gus Swanson

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 11:37 p.m. CST

    RE: b3mike

    by Aluccard

    Classy. I believe that was exactly his point. So he mispelled a few words, big deal. It happens all the time on this talkback. Did you run out of negative things to say here so now you have to attack him personally? Give the hate a rest already.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 11:38 p.m. CST

    Catherine Zeta-Jones for Wonder Woman

    by brokebackcowboy

    If she can get back into her Entrapment physique. Get more!

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 11:41 p.m. CST

    You&#39;ve seen Superman Returns twenty times?

    by Shermdawg


  • Aug. 8, 2006, 11:44 p.m. CST


    by Gswan10050

    YOU SUCK TOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 11:46 p.m. CST


    by brokebackcowboy

    Your vision of Superman is just one of many. Sorry but the Superman of DC Comics lore was pretty much the same guy Donner, and then Singer, put on screen. He was a loner, an outsider, who had a lifelong crush on Lois. That is why Donner&#39;s Superman was such a great film - he and Tom Mankiewicz really understood the legend and the hero. I think a Justice League or Avengers film is better left as an animated feature. It could end up looking pretty silly with real actors. Unless you have Scarlett Johanssen as Black Canary in which case I&#39;m all over Fandango.

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 11:47 p.m. CST

    RE: b3mike by Gswan10050

    by Shermdawg

    I&#39;m guessing Gus Swanson didn&#39;t write that post, because he didn&#39;t give his name at the end, which means....SOMEBODY HAS HIJACKED HIS AICN HANDLE!!!

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 11:53 p.m. CST

    Re:b3mike by Gswan10050

    by Gswan10050

    Hi Shermdawg thanks for helping me but b3mike has got me going i did post that comment but forgot to sign my name:-) Gus Swanson

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 11:58 p.m. CST

    Gus Swanson

    by brokebackcowboy

    Why do you sign every post, and did you really watch SR 20 times? Don&#39;t let the haters get on you. Juct flick em off.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, midnight CST

    Gus Swanson

    by brokebackcowboy

    I have a question for you, since you watched SR so many times. Did the sound for the opening credits seem muted to you? I mean, the swooshing sounds in the Superman DVD credits absolutely rumble and rock but I was underwhelmed by the SR credits. What&#39;s your take?

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 12:03 a.m. CST

    Gus Swanson by brokebackcowboy

    by Gswan10050

    thank you your right i thought you had to sign the post:-)

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 12:08 a.m. CST

    sound and credits

    by Gswan10050

    Your right i thought sr credits underwhelmed me too. and i was thinking it me lol

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 12:14 a.m. CST

    23 times

    by Gswan10050

    just say im a diehard fan of superman returns and i allso work at the theater near me so i can see all the films if i want to but i choose to pay for superman in stead thank you for you comment but i happen to like my life

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 12:17 a.m. CST


    by brokebackcowboy

    Hey cut the kid some slack, he&#39;s not hurting anybody, just likes to see SR on the big screen. Although 20 times is a little over the top? I agree about Catherine Zeta-Jones. Amazing beauty, I don&#39;t care if she&#39;s 35 or 40. If she can fill out the Wonder Woman costume, she should get the role (and I&#39;ll have more masturbation material, thank you) I don&#39;t care to see Wonder Girl, know what I mean? If I wanted to see a generic cute chick I&#39;d watch TV. On the big screen, I want to see a beautiful heroine played by a more accomplished actress. Get more!

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 12:21 a.m. CST


    by BNITT

    Definitely a gay film. The whole movie stirred Richard Donner&#39;s pourrage from start to finish.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 12:22 a.m. CST

    Oh snap!

    by brokebackcowboy

    Yackbacker are you gonna take that??

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 12:25 a.m. CST

    If I was casting Wonder Woman, I&#39;d go with Krista Allen

    by Shermdawg

    For obvious reasons. Emmanuelle in Space = Best Sci-Fi show EVER!!! ;)

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 12:25 a.m. CST

    Superman Returns BEST MOVIE OF THE YEAR

    by RenaudMan

    Superman Returns is the best movie still so far this year, and also the movie most bashed on in an organized dirt throwing campaign from competitors. The fact is Bryan Singer and some of the Superman cast should concentrate on the more positive genuine feedback, and keeping in mind that world wide the movie has not open yet in many countries, and it&#39;s not over yet, and huge markets like Germany & Japan, they should take a few days to go there to promote Superman Returns and kick some serious box-office a$$. Personally I thought the Warner US & Canadian marketing campaign was too small in the direct TV spots, don&#39;t drop the ball in Germany, Japan and other countries Discussion here: DC PLEASE RELEASE ABSOLUTE SUPERMAN FOR TOMORROW HARDCOVER

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 12:31 a.m. CST


    by brokebackcowboy

    Hey did you know Jennifer Aniston&#39;s Rumor Has It was produced by George Clooney, Brad Pitt&#39;s best pal? And that the movie was about a woman who cheats on her fiancee, with a man who could be her real father? I have 2 points to make. The first that I found the whole thing intermingling Aniston, Clooney and Pitt with a movie about cheating to be completely ironic. The second is that the possibility that Aniston slept with her own father really turned on my kink meter. Get more!

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 12:32 a.m. CST

    Bryan Singer - Thank you for Superman Returns

    by hargon27

    I loved it. When I was watching that movie I was 5 years old again. PLEASE do a sequel! Screw the haters on this board.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 12:34 a.m. CST

    Oh Shit I forgot the Spoiler warning

    by brokebackcowboy

    in that Rumor Has It post. Anyone here planning to see the movie, I apologize. But somehow I don&#39;t see anyone here about to watch it. Unless your woman makes you or you get no love.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 12:35 a.m. CST

    Superman Returns was great

    by deadlegend

    This was a great movie and I can&#39;t wait for the DVD so I can see all those deleted scenes and extra shit. Those who hate Superman Returns all have one thing in common - they compare it to other superhero movies like Spiderman 2, or X-Men 3, or Batman Begins. It&#39;s obvious you losers were expecting to see a movie that wasn&#39;t a Superman movie, because you expected to see self-brooding in a falsely realistic shell, or a movie that lacks any personal depth and throws out dumbass one liners like "I&#39;m Juggernaut, bitch!" and crams it all into a ridiculously short movie, or a movie that tricks you into thinking it has good visual effects when it showcases a character that web-slings but turns into a shitty, cgi, plastic-looking doll every time he web-slings. Superman Returns was a movie for the fans of the original two movies and for those who don&#39;t care for the Hollywood angst and love triangles that you see so fuckin often. The movie is easy to enjoy if you know or appreciate the history and mythology of Superman, but if you don&#39;t, you&#39;re gonna miss the boat and walk out with a withdrawl for explosions, cheesy shots of nipples poking out of wet shirts while kissing a guy, over-kill special effects sequences that fool your sense of reality, and a angsty guy in a rubber suit speaks in a retarded Solid Snake voice with a hint of a lisp.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 12:38 a.m. CST


    by brokebackcowboy

    Hey I understand your appreciation for SR but please don&#39;t knock Kirsten Dunst&#39;s wet t-shirt scene. It was a great cinematic moment in superhero film history. One that I can pause on DVD and appreciate for 5 minutes. Get more!

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 12:46 a.m. CST

    Rachel McAdams for Lois Lane

    by brokebackcowboy

    I wanted to repeat that, so it will happen. Hollywood&#39;s It Girl is so cute, and she can act.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 12:47 a.m. CST

    Did the guy has a mental breakdown?

    by AlwaysThere

    Seriously what the hell happened to him and his crew after the 2003 release of X2?

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 12:47 a.m. CST

    Other pic from this article

    by zfisk

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 12:48 a.m. CST

    superman returns saw it 3 times loved it

    by skiff

    best move of the summer by miles

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 12:48 a.m. CST

    Spider-man was entertaining...

    by deadlegend

    and I appreciated the upside-down smooching with wet nipples just like the next guy, but if her nipples were never so obviously placed in the frame, you wouldn&#39;t have known the difference. Spidey is entertaining, but in a shiny, plastic, cartoony kind of way. Not like real cinema.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 12:50 a.m. CST

    Just out of curiosity

    by brokebackcowboy

    I would like to see Stuart Baird re-edit Superman Returns. Donner and Mankiewicz gave him a shitload of credit for making Superman such a great film, and you cannot deny that the editing really defined the greatness. Well, you could deny it, but you&#39;d be wrong. I think Singer&#39;s Superman would have been far better if he had a great editor and composer who could work the Williams score better.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 12:59 a.m. CST


    by brokebackcowboy

    That Tobey Maguire sure is a lucky guy. I&#39;m not one of those a-holes who thinks Kirsten Dunst is ugly, because I would be quite happy to have her naked in my home. Although Raimi took some inspiration from Superman to help with the Spider-Man origin storytelling, he was fairly mindful of the fact that Spider-Man is a comicbook character, and the film needed to be shiny and fun. Maybe having Stan Lee on set helped him keep his focus on that. Superman The Movie was a truly unique film - a mature superhero tale made with Donner&#39;s verisimilitude. It will probably never be duplicated with the same degree of &#39;realness&#39; and sharp dialogue/story-telling and perfect casting. What a gift that movie is. But I look forward to the SR sequel, as I think they can only improve from here.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 1 a.m. CST

    Pirates vs. Superman

    by deadlegend

    All those who compare Superman to Pirates... please. You&#39;re talking about a sequel to a recent B.O. smash starring Depp, Bloom, and Knightly versus a sequel to two movies over 20 years old starring two virtually unknown actors and a few vague actors. Of course Superman Returns is gonna suffer next to Dead Man&#39;s Chest. It&#39;s inevitable. But that doesn&#39;t make it a bad movie in any way. But of course, Marvel fans and angsty "Batman RULES!!!" losers are gonna shit on Superman no matter how great the movie is. All I know is that SR is a setup movie that will allow for a sequel featuring super-villains, a more direct relationship between Lois and Supes, and a bigger, broader storyline. You goddamn haters expected something else. Just refer to my previous post.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 1:07 a.m. CST

    Gswan10050 Your enthusiasm is misguided

    by b3mike

    Superman Returns=SUCKS In a couple of years when you get older, you will figure out this equation. More than anything, you&#39;ll remember that a random guy with the screen name of b3mike was right. No need to thank me, ciao.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 1:14 a.m. CST

    dead legend=DUMB ASS

    by b3mike

    All of those movies that you attempted to thrash are works of art compared to Superman Returns. That film is an abomination of the cinema. No real Superman fan would stand behind Superman Returns.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 1:24 a.m. CST

    Hulk remake why not Sup 2?

    by #1 Zero

    If there is a Superman sequel anytime soon it would have to follow the plot threads from the first one. That means (spoiler) superkid and probably the same actors for Lois and Kent, especially if Singer directs. They used the same actors for X3. If they want to go in a new direction, the sequel will be at least five years off. Then again if "The Hulk" can be rebooted four years after the original why not Sups.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 1:37 a.m. CST

    SUPERMAN RETURNS is an excellent film!

    by Darth Bono Jr.

    I&#39;ve seen it four times. BUT IT IS NOT A SUMMER POPCORN FLICK FOR TEENS! That&#39;s the big problem. It&#39;s got way too much talking for the acne crowd. If the sequel has Superman FIGHTING someone, the teeny comic fans (and you all know who you are!) will be happy.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 1:45 a.m. CST

    If the internet were around for SUPERMAN: THE MOVIE...

    by Mike Nesmith

    ...the reaction would have been THE SAME as it is for SUPERMAN RETURNS. Donner&#39;s film got mixed reviews in the press, and with all the comedy Donner put in it (not to mention the plot about sinking the West Coast and turning back time)--I&#39;m sure that you kids would have burned that film at the stake, too. Fortunately, the Ain&#39;t It Cool Talkback is NOT representative of the world opinion! In fact, it&#39;s not representative of much of anything. LOL!

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 1:55 a.m. CST

    Superman Rebooted Again

    by Prof. Pop-Cult

    I could see WB keeping Routh but getting rid of everybody else (including recasting Lois). Maybe they will even require the next screenwriter to drop the kid from the continuity. Budget will definitely have to be under $100 mil.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 2 a.m. CST

    Could you have...

    by CardinalHog

    Could you have been any more homerish in your interview, Quint?

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 2:12 a.m. CST

    I really don&#39;t understand...

    by andrew coleman

    Everyone claims it cost 260 million even though it hasn&#39;t really been shown anywhere.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 2:26 a.m. CST

    SR was better than X3

    by RedScab

    X3 was a steaming pile of shit compared to the first two films. SR is not as bad as everyone says it was just marketed very poorly. The Superman franchise has a bright future while the X-Men franchise is dead after the failure of X3, yeah they will make a wolverine and magnento film but they will both suck. Spiderman and Batman remain the gold standard of superhero films.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 2:46 a.m. CST

    X-Men franchise is dead after the failure of X3

    by Shermdawg

    Uh, X3 didn&#39;t fail, it was the highest grossing one. And there are tons of spinoffs in the works....unfortunately.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 2:49 a.m. CST

    I&#39;m shocked at the love Returns is getting here.

    by Shermdawg

    That certainly wasn&#39;t the case the first few weeks after release.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 2:57 a.m. CST

    SR = Phantom Menace

    by Bono Luthor

    Fans wait for ages. Childhood memories invested for many. Hype. Anticipation. Excitement. Dissapointment. I still pop Phantom in the DVD player and TRY and watch it without noticing the huge holes and problems, but I just can&#39;t. I have a feeling many will feel the same about SR soon enough. I used to try and convince people around me that Phantom was a better film than it really was, so I know what you guys are going through and feel for you. Superman Returns was a pretty shitty film and Bryan Singer should never again be given the keys to the Porsche if he&#39;s going to bring it back in such a state. Shame on him. If anyone from WB actually reads this talkback, DON&#39;T let him do another. Many people will not even show up for more of that crap. By the way, any chance of more AICN coverage of the Superman II Donner Cut. That and Smallville are the only Superman product worth getting excited about this year.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 3:23 a.m. CST

    You people are idiots.

    by deanamatronix

    You sit there and scream &#39;SUPERMAN RETURNS SUCKS!&#39; ad nauseum, but the fact of the matter is, not one of you could make a better film. SR was great. Not the best film of the year by a long shot. But it is in no way the piece of shit you bunch of fucking losers claim it to be. Lost Prophet, Uncle Stan, people like you. And dont bother replying. I wont be back to this article.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 3:24 a.m. CST

    I think a sequel will be made

    by Archduke_Chocula

    Hell, X1 an X2 didn&#39;t set the Box Office on fire butare movies people pull off the shelf on DVD, Singer&#39;s gross usually hit&#39;s $200 something million so it&#39;s really a matter of cost of the flick, but I stil expect a "Superman: Man of Steel" sequel or something.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 3:45 a.m. CST

    Bryan Singer...

    by Bono Luthor

    will probably be in the pub selling bootleg DVD&#39;s this weekend in order to convince WB that there is &#39;love&#39; for this turd. "3 for 15" Bryan?

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 3:48 a.m. CST

    what do you expect when singer said

    by messi

    after someone asked him what superman comic books should he read. &#39;ummmm early action comics?&#39; he recommends golden age superman which is a vastly different character to the superman he directed which is silver age superman. guy has no clue. i&#39;m not saying that superman comics are the be all and end all and should even be respected to the utmost degree, since they are all generally horrible comics. but there are good things in them and if you are given 200 million dollars for a project, you would at least try and do your homework, even to not sound so stupid at a convention.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 3:53 a.m. CST

    X3 was alot better. at least it had

    by messi

    entertainment. and a climax. all these guys saying that SR was better just have hate on ratner. Look X3 wasn&#39;t a great film but i can objectively say it was better than Superman returns. There were fun bits in it. which there were none in Superman Returns. The climax was actually pretty amazing. The phoenix destroying everything around her with that amazing score. definately alot better than superman lifting an island into space. Plus there was that big end fight scene. Wolverine fighting people in the woods. Definately alot more entertaining. Film geeks forget that entertainment is a big factor in movies. and that doesn&#39;t mean just in action. dialogue can be entertaining too. X3 had the action side. Superman had none of it. I was looking forward to Superman Returns so much and just ahhhh.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 4:12 a.m. CST

    Superman Returns kicked you in the nuts - Kneel!

    by Poetic Colossus

    As many of you have already astutely pointed out, I

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 4:26 a.m. CST

    You should not...

    by Bono Luthor

    have to wait for sequel to justify your movie. Films that set up great sequels need to be great films in themselves to justify in their own right. Wrath Of Kahn does not make STTMP a better movie and MI3 does not make MI2 any less painful. A great SR sequel will not put a shine on the turd that is SR. Bring on the Donner Cut of Superman II!!!

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 4:38 a.m. CST

    Story-arc, not quality of movie...

    by Poetic Colossus

    is what I was talking about Bono. You have a very valid point, but I never said that a sequel was needed to make SR a good film, rather that it was needed to setup a realization of what Superman&#39;s struggle ensues. Could any of LOTR&#39;s installments stood on their own? Of course. But they were much more gratifying in a three-part format. Er, I&#39;ll omit the fact that they were meant to be presented as such, but alas.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 4:53 a.m. CST

    Footage from Donner Cut of Superman II online

    by Bono Luthor

    I see what you&#39;re getting at Colossus, unfortunately SR just doesn&#39;t work for me as is. Donner nods and Routh were the good, everything else was pretty bad. Hey! Did we just exchange civil, differing, yet respectful opinions in a talkback? No way! For those interested in the Donner Cut of Superman II, I found this: - So cool to see new Christopher Reeve footage!

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 4:56 a.m. CST

    Let it go Bryan, just let it go

    by Kenny8

    Nobody&#39;s buying it, no matter how possesed you look in the photos!

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 4:56 a.m. CST

    Still going- I see

    by Lost Prophet

    there seem to be 3 basic points that defenders try to make. The first is "Waah you&#39;re all 17 year old "pube-mustached dullards" that can&#39;t appreciate emotion etc. The second is that it was poorly marketed, hence why people didn&#39;t understand/ disliked it. Finally, it was a worthy addition to Donner&#39;s canon. Now, to take them 1 at a time. I am in my late 20&#39;s, several of my favourite films are emotionally charged. This has nothing to do with my detestation of this film. 2) Granted, the marketing for it was utter shite. Some heads should roll in that department. However, I do not see films based on the quality of the marketing. All I want to know is the property, the director, who is in it and vaguely what it is about. This is enough for me to go and pay to see it. In this case I knew (obviously) that it was superman, I knew Singer (someone I previously trusted) was directing, I worried a little about the cast but saw Routh interviewed and so was prepared to keep an open mind, and finally despite serious misgivings about the Superbrat still was pro enough to go and see it. What I got shat all over all my expectations- It was so awfully plotted and written that the good qualities of the film got sucked up by the plot holed travesty of a screenplay that was clearly written by drug-addled retards. On the third point, I actually don&#39;t agree that this is a worthy addition to Donner&#39;s canon. I think it took all the features that made the original great and sullied them to such an extent that it actually slightly tarnished the originals. Rather like the Star Wars prequels nearly did with the OT. Finally, on a different point. "Haters" always have a hatful of reasons for disliking the film, whereas those that are pro-SR never address any of these valid points. For example, to mention one huge plot hole- why couldn&#39;t Superbrat open the door on the boat, after having just discovered his powers by twatting a henchman with a fucking piano? why didn&#39;t he at least try? poor plotting. Sorry about the length, I feasted on catnip tits last night and feel a bit hazy today.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 5:20 a.m. CST

    There will be another movie, but without Singer...

    by Jim Jam Bongs

    That&#39;s what I&#39;m betting. Warners probably will feel that they should go in another creative direction with Supes. So they&#39;ll find another director, and stick him with a budget that&#39;s less than 100 million. I agree with the other Talkbacker that they&#39;ll keep Brandon Routh but fire Kate Bosworth. The kid will probably just be forgotten.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 5:27 a.m. CST

    Bono Luthor

    by Lost Prophet

    I have a copy- (it was given to the missus before we went to see it, and by christ do I wish I hadn&#39;t stubbornly insisted on watching it on the big screen)and will send it to you with a

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 5:45 a.m. CST

    Lost Prophet

    by Bono Luthor

    3 for 15 was a popular chant around the pubs of West London at one point from a chinese gentleman who I do not believe worked with the backing of any major studio. I believe Bryan will probably want to keep the pub bootleg price as high as the market will allow him to in order to start turning a profit on SR. So I would expect to pay around 50p. More if it&#39;s a re-recordable disc obviously. I can imagine Sunday newspapers giving it away free before long. Such is the &#39;love&#39; for Mr Singer&#39;s vision round these parts. Didn&#39;t even make number 1 in the UK. Was that kryptonite you were just stabbed with Bryan? Or was it a pirate&#39;s blade? Ouch!

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 5:49 a.m. CST

    tell me about it.

    by Lost Prophet

    Camden must be cheaper than West London, but it is still overpriced at 50p. Have you noticed that there seems to be absolutely no British support for this film, maybe this is a transatlantic difference a la Forrest Gump? and wasn&#39;t POTC released first in London- by 10 days-ish as I remember.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 6 a.m. CST


    by Bono Luthor

    no interest over here, but by all accounts it&#39;s performance, given the hype and budget and time we&#39;ve been waiting for a new Superman film, has been a dissapointment everywhere. At least when Star Wars was shit it was still, you know, Star Wars. When this was shit is was just, well, shit. I wonder if WB wish they has waited and gone with a Smallville movie, or at least a movie with Welling and the Smallville Lex which treats that show as the back story. It&#39;s embarrassing when a director has to schlep himself around defending his film like this. Lucas was powerful enough to piss (some of) his audience off and still carry on as he wanted. Sad thing is I think Singer thought he had the next Titanic on his hands in regards to the box office. I&#39;m waffling. Back to work!

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 6:15 a.m. CST

    I know what you mean about hype

    by Lost Prophet

    It seems to have been plastered across the side of every bus around. So they can&#39;t blame a lack of awareness. it is sad that he is still whoring himself out to whatever adoring critic he can find. Fuck work, the internet was invented to help unmentionable british skiving wage slaves such as us "defraud our employers" (just for you brokeback)

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 6:35 a.m. CST


    by Bono Luthor

    don&#39;t panic mate. I didn&#39;t actually say I was going to DO any work. Anyway, at the risk of sounding like a broken record, why isn&#39;t there much love for the Donner Cut of Superman II on AICN? Is is because WB still has them pimping SR. I would have thought plenty of geeks would be all over the Donner cut.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 6:37 a.m. CST

    I&#39;m getting ready for work too...

    by Jim Jam Bongs

    Singer should make non-comic book movies again. He did a great job with X-Men and a fairly decent one with Superman. No shame or apologies should be given on his part, but he should know when to quit and move on.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 7 a.m. CST

    It must be because of all the slavering over SR

    by Lost Prophet

    and also- do you want to take a bet on there being a box set of Superman and Superman 2 released just before SR goes out on DVD?

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 7:11 a.m. CST

    There is a boxed set...

    by Bono Luthor

    of all the films coming out later in the year (Nov I think) which will have the Lester and Donner cuts for II. I think the Donner cut of II is available on its own as well. I hope so, because I don&#39;t want to have to buy something that has SR in it just to see the Donner cut of II, no matter how desperate I am to see it. Having said that, they will probably only make it available in the set now, just to shift some SR discs. I&#39;m sure we will start to see it all mentioned on AICN when the suits in the WB marketing dept deem it the appropriate time to declare SR dead in the cinema and start peddling the DVDs for Christmas. What do you think Bryan Singer will be giving everyone he knows for Christmas this year? "Oh for f*cks sake Bryan. Do you have the reciept? I may try and change it for some socks of something. Bryan? I&#39;m sorry Bryan. No Bryan don&#39;t cry again..."

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 7:15 a.m. CST


    by brokebackcowboy

    Bwahahhaahha that was a funny pic. Bryan Singer and Whitney Houston?? Where do you come up with this stuff?

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 7:18 a.m. CST

    Lost Prophet

    by brokebackcowboy

    Thanks for the shout out, LP. Capitalism doesn&#39;t prosper on bad cogs in the machinery so get to work! Slave wages? That&#39;s just globalization doing its job!

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 7:21 a.m. CST

    Donner Cut

    by brokebackcowboy

    I don&#39;t even enjoy watching Superman II. Dick Lester completely ruined the whole film. The Donner cut looks promising. I still think it should be the Struat Baird cut, though. Will it be in widescreen and digitally remastered?

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 7:25 a.m. CST

    Attention Warner Brothers!!

    by brokebackcowboy

    Call Alex Proyas and ask him for his Superman treatment. What can it hurt? You already wasted $3 million on the McG treatment for the sake of Christ. McG????????

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 7:28 a.m. CST

    Actually, Brokeback

    by Lost Prophet

    I am a fully working cog- I can do my work for the day and still fuck about and post. (really, it&#39;s not that hard to post here). Regarding, Bryan Singer&#39;s Xmas presents- Superman Returns on DVD will not amount to the same value as a pair of socks. "Coming soon to a motorway service station near you"

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 7:29 a.m. CST

    and not slave wages

    by Lost Prophet

    hmph. Pricked my capitalist pride with that one. Wage Slave does not mean slave wages.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 7:37 a.m. CST


    by brokebackcowboy

    Well, every DVD eventually ends up in the bargain bin. Even LOTR. Personally, I&#39;m looking forward to watching SR on my home theater. Special effects-wise, it&#39;s a highly rewatchable DVD. It would be even more so if there was a Kate Bosworth wet t-shirt scene. You know what gets me, is that the whole movie, Lois didn&#39;t even like Superman. There was no chemistry. Richard White should not have been introduced, nor the kid. Even in Spider-Man, MJ&#39;s boyfriends were completely background characters, leaving the focus on her relationship with Peter. This should have been the same. Oh well, now Superman can battle Doomsday without a woman to nag him too. And please, no more Lex Luthor and no General Zod. New villains. How about Dave Chapelle as a computer genius who creates a supercomputer to battle Superman?

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 7:40 a.m. CST


    by Bono Luthor

    As far as I can tell it will be ws and remastered by the same people who cleaned up Superman The Movie for DVD.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 7:42 a.m. CST

    Bono Luthor

    by brokebackcowboy

    In that case, it&#39;s in the shopping cart! I hope, hope hope they cut out that sillyness with the "Man on the phone while cars are flying" Lester shit. OMG ... Salkind + Lester = Shit.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 7:46 a.m. CST


    by Lost Prophet

    I call bullshit on that one- where&#39;s your evidence? Unless Singer is trying to (erroneously) claim credit for the suit&#39;s intervention, the picture I got from his interviews and such like was that it was his and those 2 twats homage to donner. This is the first I have heard about Lex and Superbrat being forced on him.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 7:53 a.m. CST


    by Lost Prophet

    I am astounded to find myself somewhat in agreement with you. This was just one feature that really bothered me. Special effects/ features notwithstanding, I am certainly not buying it- fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me. Unless I need a shiny dartboard. Then I might buy it to try to get some amusement from the disc.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 7:55 a.m. CST

    Donner Cut

    by brokebackcowboy

    Also hope they&#39;ll include a bunch of making of docs like those with Marc McClure. Highly watchable stuff - I watched those docs more than I did the LOTR docs. Because Superman rules, and Donner had verisimilitude. Hehe.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 8:01 a.m. CST


    by brokebackcowboy

    Don&#39;t be so astounded, we&#39;re talking Superman here. Not some other, more divisive issue. What I am looking forward to most on the DVD, are the scenes of New Krypton on my home theater. Very other-worldly look, I love that stuff. I hope they include the "trip back to Krypton scenes". I was really looking forward to seeing that and it would have sete up his return to earth scenes much better had we been there with Superman while he was away. See you later LP ...

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 8:28 a.m. CST

    Donner Cut

    by Nicky Butane

    I just watched a couple of clips from Donner&#39;s Supes II. Why the fuck woudl anyone cut that fight scene over Metropolis? I enjoyed SR but singer needs to get to work to jazz up that DVD if he wants a shot at a sequel. Bryan if you get the sequel Supes has to defeat someone more powerful than he his and save the world from destruction...maybe sacrifce his kid to save the world. There you go, balls in your with it.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 8:28 a.m. CST

    Isn&#39;t Singer In The Witness Protection Program Already?

    by MetalWater

    After destroying Superman, Singer must be in the Federal Witness Protection Program right now...which, if true, should garner the AICN reporter who secured this exclusive...a Pulitzer Prize for some truly amazing work in obtaining this interview from within the hidden layer Brian Singer is currently in hiding and secure from angry Superman fans!!!

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 8:38 a.m. CST

    It&#39;s not like we called a fatwah on him

    by Lost Prophet

    It is only a movie at the end of the day, what are we going to do flog him to death with comic books and copies of teh DVD of Donner&#39;s original? I don&#39;t want him to pull a Salman Rushdie and spend years in hiding- although, now I say that. Hmmmmm.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 8:38 a.m. CST

    Shit...rubensreviews you are right

    by Lost Skeleton

    There goes my attention to detail...well...bring on Braniac or Doomsday anyway!

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 8:43 a.m. CST

    I liked SR ...but I didn&#39;t love it...

    by Lost Skeleton

    that said...Supes needs to fight somebody and destroy shit in the next one!

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 8:49 a.m. CST

    Box Office Grosses and Film Budgets

    by Batman_9

    There seems to be wide confusion and speculation on grosses and budgets. I don&#39;t know much, but I do know a little about this subject. First off, I get all my from and Those are terrific sites that report non-biased, non PR filtered numbers. Now, whether a film is a box office success or not is usually based on how much the film cost. For example: X-MEN was produced for 65 million. It grossed 156 million. The budget does not include marketing costs because typically, studios have licensing deals which negate the marketing costs. The studios only look at the "negative cost" when they talk budget. The negative cost is what it actually cost to produce the film. SUPERMAN RETURNS had a negative cost of 260 million. That does include approxamately 40 million from the years of false starts. I don&#39;t know why Warner Bros. chose to include those costs when they reported the budget, but they did. Supes has currently grossed 190 million. Now I know films make international coin as well, but for whatever reason, studios typically do not count on international grosses to measure success. They count on domestic takes. Unless the film makes HUGE coin overseas. Like SPIDER-MAN which made over 500 million overseas. So although the worldwide total is at 336 million for Superman the studio is still most likely looking at domestic the hardest. As for the "Studios only make about 55% of the films gross" comments, I don&#39;t know if that is accurate or not. I&#39;ve never read that but it does make sense. However I can tell you that studios consider matching a budget with a final gross to be breaking even. So if a movie cost 100 million and it makes 100 million, it broke even. DVD&#39;s are the new money maker however. I&#39;ve read that studios make 3 times more from DVD sales and rentals than they do from domestic box office. Actually I read an article that read in 20 years, cinemas may become exticnt. Studios are getting to the point where they could produce a film and release it straight to DVD and make just as much as if they released in the cinemas first. When it gets to the point that they would make MORE from releasing it straight to DVD, we will see a decline in cinema releases. The reality is, ticket prices are to high and they keep going up because less and less people are going to the movies. So, I hope this has cleared all this up a little. SUPERMAN RETURNS did not cost 400 million. It is going to come up short of breaking even by about 65 million, but if DVD sales and rentals are strong, Warner Bros. will probably greenlight a sequel. Expect a wait and see game as for an official press release. After all, BATMAN BEGINS cost 150 million, made 205 million and was very big on DVD, but just got an official press release regarding a sequel last week. Over a year after it&#39;s theatrical release. BATMAN: DEAD END owns all our asses!

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 8:50 a.m. CST

    Superman Returns

    by Big C

    Can anyone name a comic book hero movie that didn&#39;t have flaws? Even Christopher Reeve&#39;s Superman had a few problems.Sure, at times I was bored with a few things about Superman Returns, but overall it was a good movie. Brandon Routh was the right choice for the man of steel. The biggest problem I had with Brandon was the costume. It just didn&#39;t work. At times it looked like he was choking with that high neckline. And of course, the colors were wrong. Even the boots looked strange. They should have left well enough alone and gone with the Christopher Reeve costume.Maybe Bryan Singer will listen to the fans for the sequel. As far as Lex Luther as a villian, he was ok for this movie, but I agree that the next movie should have a villian equal to Superman. As for those who think that Bryan Singer should&#39;t direct the sequel, who would you suggest,Tim Burton? The sequel would be "Superman Versus Edward Scissorhands". Too weird. Bryan should direct the sequel. Enough said.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 8:57 a.m. CST

    Big C

    by Lost Prophet

    no-one has complained about Routh. He is not the problem. No-one has complained about the costume. The vast majority of the problems come from the lousy plot and horrible script. And why should Singer be given the sequel- because you can name one (previously discarded) stupid suggestion for director? That makes no sense. I would rather go with Brokeback&#39;s suggestion than this flawed process of elimination, and I would much prefer Singer to go back to his roots and stop fucking up comic book properties. As a crazy out there suggestion- has anyone seen "Way Of The Gun"- I think it was directed by Mcquarrie. I would piss myself laughing if WB gave SR2 (at least the writing duties, if not the direction) to Mcquarrie (I know it is not going to happen- that would be the ultimate slap in the chops for Singer, and final recognition that his vision for Superman, frankly, blew.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 9:08 a.m. CST

    Superman proceeds

    by Cult Exiter

    Jude Law will be Zod. This is a fact - as much as anything can be chiseled in stone -kind of fact, in Wollyhood... My opinion regarding SR: kryptonian-earthling child diminishes Superman&#39;s halo, psychologically at least, specially for those who are virgins to the man of steel. The saga is not about Superfamily, is it? ;) P.S. and just for fun: *proceed* Pronunciation: prO-&#39;sEd Function: intransitive verb Etymology: Middle English proceden, from Anglo-French proceder, from Latin procedere, from pro- forward + cedere to go -- more at PRO- 1 : to come forth from a source : ISSUE <strange sounds proceeded from the room> 2 a : to continue after a pause or interruption b : to go on in an orderly regulated way 3 a : to begin and carry on an action, process , or movement b : to be in the process of being accomplished <the work is proceeding well> 4 : to move along a course : ADVANCE synonym see SPRING

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 9:16 a.m. CST


    by Lost Prophet

    repeat. Where the fuck are you getting this? and don&#39;t give me that "It&#39;s well known in the industry, and my roomate&#39;s cousin&#39;s dog told me" nonsense. Cmon man- proof, is there at least one comment from Singer somewhere that points to that? Furthermore, surely he would have already referred to it to try to appease some of the vocal criticism that his film has received? In fact, if that was the case then he is a bigger turd than I thought. He should&#39;ve sacrificed his choice for lead (welling isn&#39;t bad)to preserve the script and storyline.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 9:31 a.m. CST

    Brian Singer Murdered The Superman Franchise!!!

    by MetalWater

    To: JayJew...You are so full of it!!! Brian Singer wasn&#39;t forced to include Super Kid or Lex Luthor in the film...he had a choice: 1) Go and direct X-3...or, 2) direct Superman Returns instead!!! Singer, however, chose to direct Superman Returns...complete with Super Kid, who murders people, and Lex "Lame Ass Criminal Scheme" Luthor!!! And I suppose that Warner Brothers threatened Singer and forced him into directing the film with a gun to his head that shoots outs millions of dollars for a lucrative pay day...the kind Singer couldn&#39;t refuse!!! Ruthless, those execs at Warner...twisting a guy&#39;s arm by offering him the job of a life time, and threatening to make him handsomely rich!!! Oh, don&#39;t we all wish studios were running around threatening us that way???!!!...Look, if Singer had any integrity, he would have simply said no...and walked away if certain story elements were forced on him...but he didn&#39;t. And the truth is, as I understand it...he, Brian Singer, was given total creative control, and script control ala M. Night Shyamalan. Now that Superman Returns has bombed so badly, Singer is making up excuses all over the place...first attacking the Warner Brothers marketing department...and now, he&#39;s blaming the studio execs...claiming they forced all the bad elements of the Superman Returns story arc on him. Oh yeah, then who forced Singer to make Superman an A-sexual stalker in Superman Returns? I mean, did you notice he only kissed Lois once in the if it were a friendship kiss between a gay man and his female best friend? Superman&#39;s was made to be sexually ambiguous in the the Pat character that used to be on Saturday Night Live. And the voyeuristic spying Superman was doing on Lois and her family was absolutely creepy!!!...Who was responsible for that...Brian??? No wonder why Warner Brothers kicked this asshole out of his Logan&#39;s Run offices on the studio lot, just as I predicted!!! Brian Singer seems to be falling apart at the seams in respect to the way he does business in Hollywood...and making enemies with studio big wigs by trying to pass the buck isn&#39;t a smart move...BTW, Singer has pulled this with 2 studios now, Fox and Warner Bros., back to back...Which makes you wonder, is the trouble here, regarding Singer, eminating from these studios...or from Brian Singer himself???!!! Right now, Mel Gibson has better standing in Hollywood than Brian Singer!!!

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 9:59 a.m. CST

    Not about Singer

    by Cult Exiter

    This was a tiny bit of news on an afternoon paper (in Finland, far far away from America...), regarding what&#39;s up with Jude Law right now. That particular paper is not likely to publish anything speculative (except for tomorrow&#39;s weather). So, yes, I believe this to be true. &#39;twas not really an interview though. Would Jude say something like that, if it ain&#39;t real...

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 10:12 a.m. CST

    God you people are dumb.

    by rev_skarekroe

    You got a straight-forward, old-school Superman movie. Would you have prefered this?

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 10:19 a.m. CST

    Jayjew you talk crap

    by messi

    WB wanted a gene hackmanish smallville luthor? how can that be if Gene Hackman&#39;s Luthor was all campy and ridiculous whilst the smallville Luthor is menacing and ruthless. In the words of Chi McBride " talk alot of shit"

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 10:36 a.m. CST

    I don&#39;t think it&#39;s fair...

    by Bubba Gillman call the Superkid a murderer. That guy was going to brain his mother with an ashtray, what was he supposed to do? At worst it&#39;s justifiable homicide. Oh, and SR rules. Greatest superhero movie ever. So there.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 10:45 a.m. CST


    by Lost Prophet

    If this is the greatest Superhero movie ever made- justify all of the points listed above. Start with Kate&#39;s performance and then move onto the plot holes, then Singer&#39;s flaws as a director, then the script, abuse of chracter etc. I would be interested to see a fan&#39;s reasoning about why these things are not shit.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 11:02 a.m. CST

    Well, well...

    by Mr Nice Gaius

    Did they pull a post by zfisk? Anybody seen him lately?

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 11:06 a.m. CST

    Lost Prophet

    by Bubba Gillman

    I won&#39;t try to justify my opinion, or convince you that you should share it. As far as why I love the movie, I&#39;ll say that it&#39;s thoughtful, beautifully shot and well acted. Yes, even by Kate Bosworth. I don&#39;t see what&#39;s so wrong with her performance, other than that some (not myself) seem to think she&#39;s too young or miscast. As far as the plot, my feeling is that it&#39;s just a catalyst for Singer to explore what he really cares about - the character and inner workings of Superman. What do you think are Singer&#39;s flaws as a director, or his abuse of character? I&#39;ll responds to specific points if you like (in a civil manner, as is befitting this talk back).

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 11:07 a.m. CST

    *I* liked it just fine, but think what u will

    by 1derWoman

    Let me say first that I am female (duh) and *well* over 20. I dig action flicks, kung-fu movies, spooky crap, period pieces and retrospectives. I even like the Three Stooges just fine. No, Superman Returns wasn&#39;t a spectacular movie, but it didn&#39;t suuuuuck, either. Yes, the Son of Superman element is too confining for future stories, but it wasn&#39;t too weak since it wasn&#39;t a major part of the story. It&#39;s a horrible mistake in plot that should never have happened and it was the one plot point that we&#39;ve ALL read Singer had disputes with The Suits over. I&#39;m saying this even though that final scene was very touching to me, AS A PARENT. I Still LIked It Just Fine. It brought heavy tears to my eyes. Despite that fact, it should not have been. When it comes to movies based on established mythos, I can deal with a bit of free-license, but at the core of my being I am a bit of a story purist. Ya know, stay true to your roots. I would also like to say that I left the theater unsure of what to think beyond "it was ok". As time went on, discussions with my teenage son took place and we slept on it, thought about it, etc., the story grew on us. Aside from the child plot point, it was a pretty good re-intro to Superman. This opinion was shared with every person in our party who attended the screening (myself, my teen, my tween, a mid-40s woman and a late-40s Superman Comic FanMan). I believe I was overly stunned with Routh in the suit and his resemblance to others who have taken up the mantle. For the life of me I can&#39;t remember a single line of dialog coming out of his mouth. I know he talked. I can recall situations where it was to happen, but as for what his speaking voice is, if he faltered, stuttered and sputtered, anything at all, I couldn&#39;t tell ya. *shrug* Can&#39;t really explain it. A weird thing, my brain, go figure. The fx were uber-kewL to our whole party. The other adults in the party really liked the picture as well. The other female&#39;s favorite scene, I found out later, was the robber shooting Supes in the eye. That was nifty, I must admit. I always wanted to know about/see that. I want another one, but I&#39;m not DYING with anticipation. I want them to take their time. They could leave out Lois for all I care. I never liked her character anyway. Jimmy was ok, though. (Loved seeing Jack Larson as the bartender!) Frank Langella is always a pleasure. Spacey was fine, too. I do think he needs to reel-it-in a bit the next time around. I understand the &#39;why&#39; of how he was, but his calculating side wasn&#39;t exposed enough - again, a story issue or perhaps an editing issue, but not an actor issue, I think. We only saw the calculating side at the dying woman&#39;s bedside and "years later" in her basement &#39;playing&#39; with the train set as he formulated his scheme. Parker Posey was entertaining, if nothing else. How could she NOT fall for the Guy in Blue&#39;n&#39;Red, ya know. Luthor was a tad much on the barely-holding-it-together-insane side, though. I look forward to seeing how future incarnations of Lex are handled. I&#39;m a Luthor fan as much as a Supes fan. As a reintroduction to the world of Superman, the film stands, if a bit wobbly at first glance. Again, I do look forward to the sequel and will see it opening weekend. That&#39;s cash in the bank, guaranteed unless I die between now and then. Oh, and that stuff about Jude Law as Zod... I&#39;d buy it, but ..been there, done that, why on Earth go back again? These aren&#39;t supposed to be remakes, afterall, and the first time around was corny with extra chunks. If retracing steps of old, you will definately lose audience numbers because they can rent what came before for less. (99cents at the supermarket for several days) There is far more and better villians in the Superman universe to tap. Spidey is doing it, Supes can too. (this is what annoys me about the Batman movies redoing the Joker thing - BUT I&#39;m a sucker for Christian Bale, so I&#39;ll still see it in the theater) Complainers, get over being jerks about it, already. Stealing my favorite tagline from Stan Lee&#39;s latest funfest "be a winner, not a wiener".

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 11:09 a.m. CST

    OK then

    by Lost Prophet

    you think it is fine to sacrifice the entire plot on the altar of character development? I&#39;m not being rude- but surely there has to be a balance, for example the point that I used above about superbrat being able to fling a piano into a henchman but then not open a door, or not even try? that is asking for too much suspension of disbelief. Also, the abuse of character is turning superman into a stalker and lois into a harpy- these are not developments that sit well with me. In regards to singers flaws as an action director I refer you to Yackbacker&#39;s post and Retro&#39;s answer to it. Finally, MNG- nope the little parasite is still there, his post is above.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 11:13 a.m. CST


    by Lost Prophet

    where are these links or quotes about Singer begging the suits not to make him include the brat? Bullshit, says I until either you or Jayjew shows me one. "everyone knows" is heresay. Check out The posts after Harry&#39;s WTC review for other examples of stuff Everyone knows.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 11:46 a.m. CST

    Lost Prophet

    by Bubba Gillman

    I don&#39;t necessarily think that the entire plot was sacrificed. It&#39;s just that Singer seems to be more interested in exploring character than plot machinations. I felt the same way about X1 (which I, apparently in the minority, preferred to X2) - the strength of that film was the character development and interplay, especially between Wolverine and Rogue. That said, I guess I would concede that the Luthor portions of the film are the least compelling (at least to me). As for the complaints that Superman acted out of character ("stalking" Lois, leaving Earth for five years, etc.), as a long time Supes fan I think that this is just a logical exploration of his character. Admittedly, this take is perhaps not something that has been in the forefront of the comics or the prior film and t.v. incarnations but the subtext has always been there. Think about it - after years of living selflessly, his wanting to search for a deeper connection, and perhaps feeling at least some weariness in his role as savior, makes sense. I won&#39;t refer to other talkbacker&#39;s opinions re. Singer&#39;s efforts as an action director - I&#39;ve already formed my own. I don&#39;t think you can really call this an action film, but in my opinion Singer acquited himself quite nicely in the film&#39;s action centerpiece (i.e., the plane rescue), without the use of many of the tactics common to action films these days and which annoy me personally (e.g., the quick edit/music video style favored by the likes of Michael Bay - flame on, Bay fans). And I saw Lois as more sad and hurt than a harpy - again, just my take. Regarding the kid not opening the door - I agree with you. I guess I just chalked it up to his being afraid to act. Just not a dealbreaker in my opinion. Interesting the divide this film has caused - I know people who really disliked it and others, who I expected would dislke it, love it. In any event, Prophet, I appreciate the intelligent discourse.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 11:54 a.m. CST


    by Lost Prophet

    I appreciate that it is not a deal breaker- it is an example of the sloppy mentality that I felt went into the writing of the script. This is not the only obvious plot hole, but I feel one that is rather indicative of a "the Audience will swallow any old tripe" attitude. It is official, by the way, you are the first fan that has actually responded to the points rather than "You haters know nothing- you all blah blah blah" that is usually the stance.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 12:06 p.m. CST


    by Bubba Gillman

    While I agree with you on the point about the kid, I don&#39;t think the film overall was approached with a sloppy mentality. If anything, I think Singer&#39;s passion for the material (and obvious love for the Donner film) is evident even to those who don&#39;t like it. But thanks for the kudos - never enjoyed the either "it sucks" or "it rocks" mentality (and there&#39;s enough of it on both sides of the issue). As an aside, when I first heard about the kid via internet rumours, I hated the idea. The one flaw we agree upon aside, however, I like how it was approached in the film, and how it tied in with the themes that Singer was interested in exploring. There is an earlier post suggesting that the studio made him put the kid in, but I&#39;m not sure how accurate that is. I recall reading an interview, maybe posted here, where he credits a crew member with the idea. But I digress.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 1:06 p.m. CST

    Superman Returns was just about OK

    by Neon Killer

    SUPERMAN RETURNS was FAR from being a satisfying cinematic experience, and I think Brian Singer&#39;s beat-around-the-bush dialogue in this interview reveals that he now realises this himself (how crushing it must be to wake up in the middle of the night and realise you&#39;ve made an okay, functional, sporadically exciting; but ultimately dull 250 million dollar movie)....I agree with other talkbackers: why bring in these 2 kindergaarten writers? They might as well have hired Syd Field to write it...And Spacey was a boring, toothless Luthor with an irrelevant dastardly plan to absorb the U.S with a giant crystal!? BORING!!! Routh was O.K. (but lacked Reeve&#39;s sparkle) Singer&#39;s direction was highly competent, but ultimately bland and drifty.......I came out of the film narratively underwhelmed but impressed with the production values....Definitely a damp squib of a Return I&#39;m afraid......

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 1:46 p.m. CST

    I agree with the statement

    by ewokstew

    made about most of the negative stuff I&#39;ve heard regarding SR is from Fanboy sites like this one. Everyone I&#39;ve talked to who could care less about AICN talkbacks and have never been to AICN love the movie. Yes, and some geeks actually love it to.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 2:46 p.m. CST

    The problem with critics of SR

    by zooch

    It seems to me like the problem with critics of this film is that they really don&#39;t know what they want in a Superman film. He is so iconic, everyone thinks they know everything about Superman, how he is supposed to act, what he is supposed to be doing, and what he is supposed to represent, etc. Everybody is going to have a different opinion and it would be impossible to satify everyone. Some will not be able to put aside those petty differences in order to appreciate Singer&#39;s vision. (This explains the many failed attempts to re-start the series) What we got was a real Superman and an amazingly well-made film that blends action and romance with a clear theme and still manages to be alot of fun. I think Quint and Singer are right about the sequel, they will be accepted more now that everythings been re-established. Hopefully we will continue to get more and more of Superman films of this calabur.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 3:05 p.m. CST

    the plane sequence at IMAX

    by zooch

    was the COOLEST thing I have ever seen in a theatre. The ship saving sequence was also beyond amazing. And people actually say they didn&#39;t like the action in Superman? WHY? he doesn&#39;t punch people? Are you forgetting the #1 thing that Superman does best is SAVE people. Bryan Singer is the director of this thing, not you, this is his vision of Superman, not yours, his Superman saves, of course his is different (and probably better) than yours, and the film is GREAT.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 3:34 p.m. CST

    reboot in 3 years and how to do it!

    by lynxpro

    Here&#39;s how to do it. Here&#39;s the template. Hire John Bryne to write the story and have John Logan, David Goyer, and/or even Christopher Nolan chime in on it. Make it a loose continuation from *Smallville*, as in pick up the cast but be hazy about the backstory other than the relationships between the characters, that way you negate the Smallville h8ers while preserving the best aspect of the show...the cast. You start out the movie with a flashback of Clark&#39;s backstory - made up from clips from the series (like the fast backstory clip of Blade in *Blade2*) - and then you quickly move on. You focus the story on CLARK KENT, just as the story in *Batman Begins* focused on BRUCE WAYNE. Lois and Clark get jobs at the Daily Planet. Lex completely takes over LuthorCorp/LexCorp and becomes even more high profile. But you have him existing in the "grey", not as the villain, but obviously heading in that direction. Then you bring in a villain (Metallo, Parasite, Lobo). Clark becomes *Superman* after defeating said villain and famous throughout the world after Lois names him as such after the victory. The end. Roll to credits and begin planning the sequel. It could be done for $100 million or less. Hell, I&#39;d even be tempted to write in Bruce Wayne traveling to Metropolis to investigate the super being if the film was to be 2 1/2 hours of entertainment (as opposed to boredom like the current flick). After all, *Batman Begins* could have been another half hour longer without bogging down the pace of the second half.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 3:42 p.m. CST

    Superman Returns Sucked!

    by hallmitchell

    Except for the shuttle scene. What was up with that interview? Bryan is acutally panicking. It cost $260 million. It&#39;s only limping along at around the $320 million mark. What a dissapointment. With all the money and talent behind this. Superman Returns is a waste of money. It should have done Spiderman business. Should have gone with Kevin Smith&#39;s script.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 3:42 p.m. CST


    by lynxpro

    "Singer had atleast two long arguements witht the suits at WB pleading with them to remove the kid from the script. They wouldn&#39;t budge. It was that, or give Supes role to Tom welling." Wait a sec. Are you trying to tell us that the film could have had the right actor in the role from the start AND had the entire stupid kid plotline cut from the film in one swoop? And you think the studio brass are the stupid ones? Wow, Singer is even dumber than I imagined, or has an ego made of steel, or both. But for the record, I think you are making it all up.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 3:56 p.m. CST

    It should be obvious to the suits

    by 2LeggedFreak

    That SR $300m came from people who wanted to and therefore went to see a Superman film. The fact that its not made a huge chunk of cash is because at the end of the day these people were disappointed with the product. And whilst AICN can be a cauldron of negativity I have yet to see somebody who likes this mother actually make any convincing arguments as to why it is any good. The nay sayers have a lot of good arguments for their views and its interesting that nobody is having to resort to "web shooters or costume" style arguments or crappy CGI because there are more fundamental flaws than the usual nit picking nonsense. What the people who are decrying the naysayers don&#39;t realise is that many of us wanted a decent Superman film and were disappointed. And I wasn&#39;t asking for the earth, for christ sakes I can even find things to like in S3. Singer hasn&#39;t got a clue

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 3:58 p.m. CST

    Superman Returns

    by deadlegend

    The point of Superman Returns was NOT to shit all over the legacy of Christopher Reeve. By doing a remake, that&#39;s what you&#39;d do - shit on Chris Reeve. Continuing the story from the first two films was the best bet for the franchise knowing that if a remake was done, you fanboy assholes would accuse it of ripping off Batman Begins. Superman Returns was never meant to be non-stop action or super-villain battles - it was meant to reintroduce Superman to the moviegoing world. It didn&#39;t resemble Spiderman 2 or Batman Begins because it didn&#39;t need to. Obviously, the haters wanted to see self-brooding in a perpetually night-time setting or a plastic cgi character web-slinging and fighting a villain while climbing a building. That stuff is cool, but it isn&#39;t Chris Reeve&#39;s Superman. It&#39;s Chris Noland and Sam Raimi. I quite enjoyed SR, but I realize that it was meant to usher in a super badass sequel with super villains and smooching and non-stop action that the mindless drones need to stay interested in a superhero movie. Routh is a better Superman than Bale is as Batman.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 4:12 p.m. CST

    I&#39;d like to hear...

    by deadlegend

    exactly what plot holes or continuity flaws or mistakes were made in SR. I&#39;ve seen the movie five times in theaters and I&#39;m a huge fan of it and the original films. I haven&#39;t seen a single mistake. All the arguments that I&#39;ve heard point at issues that are either explained in the movie, the previous movies, or that you just have to think for a minute about what is happening in the story. Can anyone explain?

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 4:15 p.m. CST

    deadlegend is DEAD WRONG

    by RepairmanJack

    Routh as Superman better than Bale as Batman!!! You are out of your goddamn mind!!! Routh was doing a character based on work previously done. Bale created a new Batman and embodied him in a way never seen before... and it knocked our socks off. Routh gets a pass for doing what he could with such weak material and that&#39;s the best that can be said at this point. With a better director he might have had a chance.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 4:22 p.m. CST

    Bale has a lisp

    by deadlegend

    and as Batman he sounds like a bad Solid Snake impersonation. He ripped off the voice from other characters and did it poorly. Begins was good, but his huge, gaping mouth, his lisp, and shitty Batman voice ruined it for those who expected a realistic Batman movie. That lisp and his smoker voice screwed the pooch. I can&#39;t believe people can believe him as Batman, maybe as Bruce Wayne, but not the dark knight.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 4:25 p.m. CST

    I agree...

    by Harysuxafat1

    Routh was trying to do Christopher most of the time. I think if he&#39;d done his own thing it would&#39;ve been much better. However, Bale needs to get someone to get rid of that fucking lisp for him. That thing sounds ridiculous when he&#39;s trying to do the Batman voice and he goes all Sylvester the cat on them.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 4:25 p.m. CST


    by deadlegend

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 4:29 p.m. CST


    by deadlegend

    If Bale was doing a new, fresh Batman, then why does he wear the same rubber armor that was in the previous films? Jesus Christ, he can&#39;t ever turn his neck, he has to turn his torso to look left and right. Creating a new character is alot easier than living up to another man&#39;s performance. Anyone can make up a personna, but not anyone can convince you that he may be the reincarnation of a man who has died. You tasteless, angsty fools give Bale too much credit.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 4:30 p.m. CST

    Yes, the truth is now revealed

    by Evil Chicken

    I do kind of like retarded sandwiches. Oh, and

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 4:37 p.m. CST

    Evil Chicken

    by deadlegend


  • Aug. 9, 2006, 4:38 p.m. CST

    Quint - you blew it.

    by hallmitchell

    You know that the box office for Superman returns is lacklustre. I used to think you and Moriaty were equal on talent. That puff piece brought you down bigtime.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 4:41 p.m. CST

    Singer is nervous

    by hallmitchell

    Comparing it to Superman 4&#39;s box office. What a joke. Everyone knew 4 was going to suck. I expected Returns to be great. It wasn&#39;t. Only die hard fan boys like it. You had money and talent behind you. You blew it. Too long, You took it too seriously. Too expensive. Biggest dissapointment since Hulk.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 5:37 p.m. CST

    Living up to another man&#39;s persona...

    by RepairmanJack

    Will always be harder. Especially when it was perfect the first time. It&#39;s like trying to cast someone other than Wesley Snipes as Blade. OOPS!!! I think it&#39;s too late. Superman Returns sucked. Batman Begins kicks it&#39;s ass. And no one will top Bale. Suck on that.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 6:07 p.m. CST

    Routh is a better Superman than Bale is as Batman.

    by b3mike

    Further proof that dead legend is talking out of his ass again. Bale owns Routh, get over it. You delusional Returns fan boys along with Singer can keep making up excuses for the failure of your film. The disappointing box office gross represents how the general public feels towards this travesty. Sorry scumbags, (this includes you Bryan Singer) but numbers speak louder than words.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 6:11 p.m. CST

    Has any actor in HISTORY been given more adulation than

    by CarmillaVonDoom

    Christopher Reeve??? WHY does this movie have to be a continuation of "HIS" superman??!? Superman is much, much bigger than any one actor. It is laughable how much people fall all over each other praising Reeve. I&#39;m perplexed actually...dozens of major supes books/show/movies have already been dedicated to *Chris Reeves* memory. WTF!?!?! Returns would have been so much better if relaunched like BB. Hell, even Smallville would have been better than REMAKING the 1st movie just cause it would upset (?) people as being disrespectful somehow. imo

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 6:14 p.m. CST

    what superman did you watch?

    by zooch

    The action rocked and the way it was handled was very clever and original and dramatic. The film was not all serious as some have claimed, (seriously did we watch different films?) the comic relief moments were handled correctly and had the audience laughing. I hold Superman Returns in the same league as other recent greats as Batman Begins and Spiderman 2. It&#39;s that good.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 6:27 p.m. CST

    many people like Reeve&#39;s Superman

    by zooch

    including Singer, to him and many others that&#39;s how Superman is. This after all is Singer&#39;s vision so why would he change that? Instead he added to it. Get my point? Obviously you don&#39;t like Singer&#39;s version of Superman, well we can&#39;t please everyone including you. If you can&#39;t put that aside and accept that not everything is gonna be how you want it to be and appreciate the creative interpretation of another, then just shut up and go write your own comic.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 6:34 p.m. CST

    Bale is a great actor, but BB isn&#39;t a great movie

    by Bellock

    The script is so lame !! The first part is excellent, but when it comes to the asylum and the scarecrow it&#39;s getting really flawed. Action sequences are plain bad (please, Mr Nolan,try to make them fun and understandable next time). The climax is close to ridiculous. And Cillian Murphy is just so... unbelievable ! Superman Returns is a much much better movie !!! Singer has understood what is Superman, and it&#39;s not just a big blue boy scout that punches at ridiculous aliens. It&#39;s a god. And as a god, he saves. So, of course, SR is not just an addition of action sequences. It&#39;s a mythical and mystical story. If you don&#39;t want to understand that, go see POTC. It&#39;s light, full of action, and you won&#39;t miss anything...

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 6:35 p.m. CST


    by deadlegend

    the general public, huh? I guess that means that if another director had made the movie, you would&#39;ve liked it? Oh no, wait, you wouldn&#39;t have. Because you&#39;re obsessed with men who have lisps and forcibly speak with an overly-done alpha male voice. They have names for those people, asshole. They&#39;re called transvestites. Bale and Katie Holmes nearly ruined that movie, but was saved by properly casted actors like Freeman, Oldman, Caine, and Hauer. Yer a fuckass for sucking Bales cock so hard.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 6:40 p.m. CST

    If you want to complain about action...

    by rbatty024

    then you should bitch about Batman Begins. Don&#39;t get me wrong, I loved BB - in fact I liked it even more than Superman Returns - but the action in that movie was poorly executed. Nolan had a habit of doing awkward quick cuts rather than just letting the choreographer do his thing. I think directors do this so the audience will think something exciting is on the screen rather than actually putting something exciting on the screen. I just hope he fixes this in the sequel.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 6:41 p.m. CST

    Tom Welling > Brandon Routh

    by lynxpro

    Let alone trying to compare Routh to Bale and then claiming Routh is better. Sheesh. I told ya&#39;ll that *Superman Returns* would be as big of a let-down as 1980&#39;s *Flash Gordon* was. Except that production did have a semi-cool theme song.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 6:52 p.m. CST

    Opinions About Superman Returns

    by Barron34

    Routh was OK, but I would have preferred to see a post-Smallville movie. Michael Rosenbaum is great as Lex Luthor. He is ruthless, smart, threatening, yet still human with real reasons for why he is the way he is. Singer made a competent yet lackluster film. We could have had something much, much worse, like the non-flying, giant spider-fighting, black-suit wearing non-Superman that Tim Burton was going to make years ago. But, a competent yet lackluster film is still not good enough. I went back to see Batman Begins several times during its theatrical release, and happily watch it multiple times on DVD. It is just a good movie, and an excellent take on Batman. Superman Returns, on the other hand, I saw once in the theatre. That is it. It had its moments, but its flaws and drawbacks overwhelmed whatever positives there were, for me at least. It had strong FX and some cool iconic visuals, but it was strangely airless and joyless. The plot didn&#39;t make much sense (Luthor&#39;s plan was nonsense), the villain was unconvincing and not threatening, and the romantic sub-plot as well as the child was just completely out of place in the Superman mythos. Further, Superman did not really go up against any worthy opponent in combat (the scene where he calmly walks towards the machine gun where he has a small smile as the bullets bounch off him was good; we needed more of that, with Supes also facing a major villain that could threaten him). The scenes of Superman saving the plane, stopping destruction in Metropolis, etc, were good, in character, but they were not enough to compensate for what I personally view as the drawbacks of the film. And, for whoever was saying that the "naysayers" want an "angsty" Superman: I think you miss the critical fans&#39; point entirely. They feel that this Superman IS too angsty. We don&#39;t want a Superman who is having emotional problems with his girlfriend and who has a kid; we want an heroic, upbeat Superman, not an alienated, down-beat Superman. Despite some positive moments, I think Singer&#39;s Superman delivers too much of the first kind of Superman, and not enough of the second kind. It is not a bad movie, per se, but it is also not a great movie, or a thrilling movie that inspires one to see it multiple times. Just one man&#39;s opinion.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 6:56 p.m. CST

    Superman Returns

    by deadlegend

    is only a let-down to those who expected Spider-man or Batman or something else. I got what I fuckin expected - a serious, realistic depiction of Superman that followed in the footsteps of the only real Superman, Chris Reeve. Anything else just isn&#39;t Superman. Those who wanted a relaunch like Batman Begins obviously never watched or didn&#39;t like the original Superman films. Remaking the franchise is like erasing Chris Reeve&#39;s quintessential work as an actor, just as Batman Begins did with the previous Batman movies. People don&#39;t want to watch those anymore because Bale is a more brooding, angsty Batman than Keaton or Kilmer was. Bale looks like Batman, but fucked up the voice, and frankly, comes off like a guy who&#39;s TRYING to sound "scary" instead of a guy who doesn&#39;t have to try. Routh never has that problem - he sounds just fuckin like Superman and just like Clark Kent, and he doesn&#39;t have to force himself. And Bale has a GODDAMNED LISP, YOU MORONS!!!!!!

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 6:59 p.m. CST

    Superman Returns is not a gay film

    by brokebackcowboy

    Brokeback Mountain is a gay film. If Superman Returns was gay, then Superman would have been huddling alone with Richard White (aka Dick White, aka White, Dick bwahaha) in the helicopter, and Dick would have been stroking Superman&#39;s hair gently. Superman would appreciate his rescue and give him a deep kiss. They would have caressed each other&#39;s flesh and ... if you are getting stiff now you are gay. HEHEHEHe. Superman Returns rocked. I am looking forward to the DVD.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 7:02 p.m. CST

    Batman Begins missed the boat

    by brokebackcowboy

    They should have filmed scenes of Bale when he was in The Machinist physique. Like Bruce Wayne goes all depressed in the mountains and is emaciated. They he comes back to life looking like me, basically, all muscular. That would have been an Oscar-caliber Batman film.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 7:05 p.m. CST

    Bring back Mr. Freeze and pit him against Superman

    by brokebackcowboy

    I don&#39;t like Arnold. Arnold bad. Arnold is big joke. Arnold make politics look like big joke. Arnold stupid. Arnold molest many women. Arnold too old for Terminator. Arnold no make any more movies. Me happy.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 7:07 p.m. CST

    I would like to point out...

    by nonsensical

    I went to see Superman Returns on three separate occasions, not because I loved it, quite the contrary, I went because I fell asleep during the film... twice! My reason for going was so that I could actively participate in a discussion about the film. A film that I might say, I ended up hating. As a huge fan of Superman, I hated this film. It just wasn&#39;t Superman, and I&#39;m glad it&#39;s doing so poorly. Also, I noticed in someone else&#39;s post that they got their info about the budget being 260 million which included the false start budgets. This is not true. The 75 million from the Burton and Cage contracts is not included. This film just cost 260 million to make. 40 million in marketing which makes 300 million. The point is that the film cost so damn much to make, but didn&#39;t deliver a great Superman Movie. Instead it hurt Superman and sadly, that&#39;s going to get rippled into the comics. I hate this movie, and I&#39;m just happy that Dini and Timm are doing Superman: Doomsday in the Animated DCU. That should be amazing.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 7:08 p.m. CST

    Bale would have been a great Bond

    by brokebackcowboy

    He picked the wrong franchise. Now we&#39;re stuck with Daniel Craig. I should be a casting director.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 7:13 p.m. CST

    Bale vs. Routh

    by brokebackcowboy

    Bale was being a jackass on stage. He&#39;s a far more accomplished actor, more seasoned, and he picked on Routh. Routh can&#39;t help it that he&#39;s a nice guy. Sure is better than casting an asshole to play Superman! Came close ... if McG had ended up directing, we would have had an asshole playing Superman.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 7:15 p.m. CST

    I wish Superman would just

    by brokebackcowboy

    snap Batman&#39;s neck. There&#39;s no debating who&#39;s cooler. The guy who can snap the other guy&#39;s neck in a nanosecond is cooler. Sorry.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 7:15 p.m. CST

    New Superman Villain

    by deadlegend

    should be Metallo, Bizarro, the Parasite, or the Brainiac. It should be a pairing of two of those villains somehow having to do with Luthor. Like in the Superman cartoon, Luthor should build Metallo out of an ex-con who hates Superman and should make a Superman clone-gone-wrong that ends up as Bizarro. Or something else. The 2009 movie will top Superman Returns and redeem it from all the assholes that throw shit at the man who single-handedly revitalized the superhero genre - Mr. Bryan Singer. Even though he really doesn&#39;t need redeeming - he made an excellent movie that IS making profit. The movie was made for 208 million and has only been open for a little over a month in the US. We&#39;ll see what the foreign market thinks about it.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 7:17 p.m. CST

    Kai Kai Kai

    by moto

    "So and So is a plant" "WB publically stated that the $200 million mark would be the only reason they&#39;d make a sequel (not your direct quote)"... where do you get this shit? Why can&#39;t you just accept the fact that a lot of people liked Superman Returns, and a lot of people didn&#39;t like it? Instead, you accuse people liking the film to be plants. Do me a favor, cut and paste a link to a reputable quote from a reputable trade site/paper that has WB execs saying "We&#39;ll only make a Superman sequel if the film makes $200 million domestic." I just can&#39;t resist reading your posts. They make me laugh. Some of us liked the movie. Some of us hated it. Give it a rest. We can&#39;t all agree on everything and your opinion of the movie is not the final word for everyone else. People like different kinds of movies. I for one appreciated the fact that Singer didn&#39;t make some cheesy big actioneer flick with no character. What other "inside info" can you give us? Anyway, I respect your feelings on you not liking the movie, I don&#39;t respect the way you continue to try and belittle anyone that did like it and then continue to pull shit out of your ass. Your SR nemesis... Moto.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 7:18 p.m. CST

    Brandon Routh got canned from the soap

    by brokebackcowboy

    Because he is far too talented to be on a soap. It&#39;s like putting Tom Hanks on a soap. He&#39;d get canned because he can&#39;t do soap. Only cheesy turds can do soap. God bless them, they serve a purpose. I got nothing against them.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 7:23 p.m. CST


    by Shermdawg

    Let Singer finish his "kid storyline" but then get rid of him, and let the real guys takeover. SMALLVILLE WILL OWN YOUR ASS!!! EACH AND EVERY ONE OF YA&#39;S!!!

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 7:24 p.m. CST

    Oh yeah, and another thing ...

    by brokebackcowboy

    Alex Proyas as director for the sequel. Rachel McAdams as Lois Lane. Adriana Lima in a cameo role as a bikini model who needs to be saved from the ocean by Superman. The torrential winds blow her bikini off. That will make $500 Million.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 7:26 p.m. CST

    Hold up!

    by brokebackcowboy

    I changed my mind. Adriana Lima as Lois Lane on an undercover investigation of bikini model-trafficking. Yes, that works better.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 7:31 p.m. CST

    And also...

    by moto

    If you think $337,327,245 worldwide to date is something that the WB is scoffing at, you are insane. Is it Spider-Man numbers? No. Were they expecting more? Yes. But it&#39;s a respectable gross thus far. In short, settle down people. It&#39;s not the huge flop that so many here are making it out to be. It wasn&#39;t a perfect movie no. But it wasn&#39;t the terrible train wreck you guys are making it out to be. You didn&#39;t like it. Fine. Get over it.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 7:32 p.m. CST


    by deadlegend

    Take a look at "The Fog". Tom Welling was in that and it sucked because of Tom Welling. If he&#39;s such hot shit, then let&#39;s see him in a Superman costume, or better yet, let&#39;s see him act along side real actors in a major motion picture. He could have easily played Superman in a movie, but can only pull it off for a half-hour at a time. All they had to do was write the series to lead up to the storyline of the movie and then make the movie with Tom Welling. But he sucks as Superman and can only play Clark Kent. End of gay "TOM WELLING OWNS ASS" debate. It&#39;s obvious he only owns yours.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 7:41 p.m. CST

    We haven&#39;t seen him play Supes yet.

    by Shermdawg

    And you know what, a Peter Parker themed Supes, is a hell of a lot more interesting than Returns&#39; god on earth. And blaming The Fog&#39;s suckage on Tom Welling is ridiculous. There was a lot of stuff that caused that film to suck.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 7:46 p.m. CST

    And I never said "TOM WELLING OWNS ASS".

    by Shermdawg

    I said SMALLVILLE. Meaning Welling, Rosenbaum, Glover, and Mack.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 7:54 p.m. CST


    by GreatWhite

    I for one hope they make a sequel. Superman Returns was an excellent movie -- magical and charming and fun. I&#39;ve never thought Superman himself was a particularly interesting character, but Singer (and Routh) MADE him interesting. And they set up some great stuff, character-wise, for next time. It would be a shame if they weren&#39;t able to make another. Just don&#39;t try to compete with Pirates again. Although, on that note, I would like to see Superman fight Davey Jones . . .

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 7:58 p.m. CST

    More Superman Returns

    by Barron34

    Who said we wanted to alter Chris Reeves prior work with a different kind of Superman? We just wanted a Superman movie that was smart, fun, and full of action, like the first two Superman movies. This movie wasn&#39;t much of any of the above, at least in my book. The reason that Batman had to be "re-booted" was that the franchise was ruined by the bad Schumacher films. Despite Superman III and Superman IV being sub-par, they did not completely ruin the franchise in the same way that the Schumacher films did for Batman. So, a re-worked version of Batman was neccessary. Superman, on the other hand, was fine the way Reeves portrayed him. Singer&#39;s Superman DOES link up with the Donner/Reeves Superman, it just doesn&#39;t do so in a very enjoyable way. And why shouldn&#39;t we want to see a Superman movie that is like the Spiderman or Batman movies? They are all about the same thing: superheroes. Superhero movies should essenitally be the same thing: smart and fun action movies. Now, Batman is dark and dour, whereas Spiderman is brighter but with a young hero who can&#39;t get his personal life together, but they are both essentially action films. Superman needs to be likewise: an effective action movie, with a sensible plot, effective conflicts, and strong villains/oppostition. Some would argue that Superman Returns does not measure up on these accounts. My own main objection was the tone: Superman Returns seemed rather joyless and mechanical to me. It never really came to life, although it had its moments. Personally, I think that Singer is a good director. I am, like most people, a fan of Usual Suspects, Apt Pupil, as well as the X-Men movies. Singer deserves a lot of credit in general. That doesn&#39;t change the fact that I (and others) found Superman Returns to be less than stellar. That said, I think that the flaws of the first film could be overcome with a second film that is brighter, more upbeat, with more action and with a smarter script. The villain needs to be more convincing than Luthor was in this film. Smarter, tougher, better written. Superman&#39;s personal life is fair game, but relly as a sub-plot to the main action and threat. Giving Superman a kid was really a bad move, and reflects absolutely nothing of the comic book canon, which stretches over more than 50 years. I think that those who have suggested that Singer should take on a small project are right: Singer used to make good little films that were terse and smart. Making a mega-budget Superman movie would be a tall order for anyone. Expectations were certainly high. I don&#39;t believe that Singer crashed and burned by any means, as some seem to imply, but neither did he hit the ball out of the park. Perhaps, just as he improved upon X-Men 1 with X-Men 2, he could improve upon Superman Returns with a sequel. I think that is what he meant when he said he would like to make the Superman sequel in the vein of Wrath of Khan. That is, not a revenge flick, but rather a second movie than has more bite and action than its predeccessor.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 7:59 p.m. CST

    More Superman Returns

    by Barron34

    Who said we wanted to alter Chris Reeves prior work with a different kind of Superman? We just wanted a Superman movie that was smart, fun, and full of action, like the first two Superman movies. This movie wasn&#39;t much of any of the above, at least in my book. The reason that Batman had to be "re-booted" was that the franchise was ruined by the bad Schumacher films. Despite Superman III and Superman IV being sub-par, they did not completely ruin the franchise in the same way that the Schumacher films did for Batman. So, a re-worked version of Batman was neccessary. Superman, on the other hand, was fine the way Reeves portrayed him. Singer&#39;s Superman DOES link up with the Donner/Reeves Superman, it just doesn&#39;t do so in a very enjoyable way. And why shouldn&#39;t we want to see a Superman movie that is like the Spiderman or Batman movies? They are all about the same thing: superheroes. Superhero movies should essenitally be the same thing: smart and fun action movies. Now, Batman is dark and dour, whereas Spiderman is brighter but with a young hero who can&#39;t get his personal life together, but they are both essentially action films. Superman needs to be likewise: an effective action movie, with a sensible plot, effective conflicts, and strong villains/oppostition. Some would argue that Superman Returns does not measure up on these accounts. My own main objection was the tone: Superman Returns seemed rather joyless and mechanical to me. It never really came to life, although it had its moments. Personally, I think that Singer is a good director. I am, like most people, a fan of Usual Suspects, Apt Pupil, as well as the X-Men movies. Singer deserves a lot of credit in general. That doesn&#39;t change the fact that I (and others) found Superman Returns to be less than stellar. That said, I think that the flaws of the first film could be overcome with a second film that is brighter, more upbeat, with more action and with a smarter script. The villain needs to be more convincing than Luthor was in this film. Smarter, tougher, better written. Superman&#39;s personal life is fair game, but relly as a sub-plot to the main action and threat. Giving Superman a kid was really a bad move, and reflects absolutely nothing of the comic book canon, which stretches over more than 50 years. I think that those who have suggested that Singer should take on a small project are right: Singer used to make good little films that were terse and smart. Making a mega-budget Superman movie would be a tall order for anyone. Expectations were certainly high. I don&#39;t believe that Singer crashed and burned by any means, as some seem to imply, but neither did he hit the ball out of the park. Perhaps, just as he improved upon X-Men 1 with X-Men 2, he could improve upon Superman Returns with a sequel. I think that is what he meant when he said he would like to make the Superman sequel in the vein of Wrath of Khan. That is, not a revenge flick, but rather a second movie than has more bite and action than its predeccessor.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 8:36 p.m. CST

    More Superman Returns

    by Barron34

    Who said fans wanted an alteration of the Chris Reeves character? The reason that Batman need a "re-boot" was that the franchise was (nearly) irrevocably fucked up by the awful Schumacher movies. The only way to revive the character would be to start with a clean slate, which is exactly what Chris Nolan did, and did quite effectively. Superman was never screwed up on film in this same way(despite the mediocre Superman III and Superman IV), so Superman did not need to be "re-imagined" like Batman, merely "revived". Singer did this, but simply reviving a character does not an enjoyable and effective superhero movie make. *****Also, why shouldn&#39;t we expect a Superman movie to be like a good Batman or Spiderman movie? They are all movies about the same thing: superheroes. Yes, they are different kinds of superheroes, but they are superheroes nonetheless. A superhero movie is basically an action movie, regardless of whether it is dark and angsty (Batman), an ensemble cast with a message/theme (X-Men), or bright and flashy with undertones of teenage conflict (Spiderman). Superhero movies are essentially action movies, good versus evil, and that means having some sort of worthy villain/conflict and some good action scenes with combat. It is good to have other strong dramatic elements and sub-plots, and to make this all as smart and well-executed as possible, but to make a superhero movie that is not an effective action film kind of defeats the purpose of the superhero, which is to fight evil. *****Superman Returns is not a bad movie by any stretch of the imagination, and indeed has some great moments, but overall the effect is not of a great Superman movie. The movie is lacking in joy, seems rote and mechanical, has an awful plot and a poorly written villain (Michael Rosenbaum&#39;s TV Lex Luthor is ten times the villain of the unfortunate Kevin Spacey version). The movie also includes elements that do not belong anywhere in the 60 year (plus) history of the Superman character (the super-kid being the key dischordant note here). The movie seems to have many of the ingredients to make a good Superman movie, but the elements just do not come together, ultimately.*****And do not get the idea that I am a Bryan Singer hater. I am not. The guy is an obviously talented film-maker, and I have been a fan back since the Usual Suspects and Apt Pupil days. I am a comic-book fan as well, and thought his X-Men movies were great. I just think that this Superman movie missed the mark. It is not by any stretch of the imagination a bad movie, but neither did it hit the ball out of the park. Therefore, perhaps a follow-up film will compensate for some of the perceived short-comings of this film. *****Hopefully a Superman Returns follow-up will have a more upbeat, heroic Superman who is not mired in a down-beat domestic melodrama (no wife and kids please). Rather, let us have Lois Lane as a fun, adventurous, wise-cracking dame, (as per the better versions of the character), and let us have a meek and mild-mannered Clark Kent contrasted with a more upbeat and heroic Superman. Let us also have a smartly drawn and effective villain (or villains) that are real threats to the world and to Superman, and who have logical and sound motivations and characterizations (Kevin Spacey, a good actor, was wasted in a poorly drawn role; for a well-written and well-acted Lex Luthor, see Michael Rosenbaum on Smallville). Finally, let us have some real action, some good, superheroic combat, good guy versus bad guy, and so on. The best example of this kind of stuff are the excellent combat scenes of Superman versus Zod and his cronies in Superman II. For those who said that the "naysayers&#39; want a revisionist version of Superman, I say: wrong. What we want is a Superman that is as fun and smart and spectacular as what Donner and Chris Reeve gave us back in those first two films. Superman Retruns might be good as a prequel to such a movie, but it was not that kind of movie in itself.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 8:37 p.m. CST

    Sorry For The Multiple Posts

    by Barron34

    I am at a public terminal at my University, and there was some sort of server lag. Sorry again.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 8:45 p.m. CST

    Super Kid The Murderer! Here&#39;s A Better Story Arc!!!

    by MetalWater

    Yeah, you&#39;re right...the Kid should have killed the thug trying to rape and or kill his mother (Lois)...But from the screen writing and even from the point of directing...the Kid never should have been placed in such a circumstance where he had to kill anybody...and the audience shouldn&#39;t have been put in a place where they had to consider the vile motivations of the thug who was approuching...and menacing Lois. If the scene was never written, at least as it was, we wouldn&#39;t have had to!!! Let me write a better scene for the film that will demonstrate a way to more appropriately reveal the kid&#39;s powers. Scene: Superman has just been stabbed by Lex using his specially made kryptonite knife and thrown into the sea. This, as Lois and the Kid look on. All seems lost as Lex and crew prepare to expand their Krytonite Continent even further by launching more crystal packed rockets into the seas of the Atlantic ocean. Suddenly, Lois&#39; husband flies in his plane and rescues a drowning Superman. Together the two crash land the plane in Lex&#39;s secret dwelling...drawing the attention of the villian&#39;s men. Superman, now without his powers, must take of Lex&#39; thugs to save Lois and the well as stop Lex from his latest missle launch. Joined by Lois&#39; husband, the two fight off Lex&#39; thugs via hand to hand combat. This as Lex moves ever closer to his missles launch. Lois mixes it up Lex Luthor&#39;s girlfriend and takes on Lex. Managing to grab her, Lex uses her as a human shield as he draws a gun and fires it at Superman and Lois&#39; husband. In slow motion, we see the bullets struck down, one by one. Startling Lex, Superman, Lois and her new man. Each turns to look at the source of this power...and discovers its the Kid. Shocked, Luthor fires several bullets into the crystal krytonite ceiling bringing down much of it on our heroes. Suddenly, instantly, Super Kid springs into action and grabs the large mass as he floats suspended in the air. Even the Kid is surprised by his own actions and abilities. Spying the launch of a number of Luthor&#39;s missles, the Kid hurls the crystaline mass at them. Quickly, the Kid fires his x-ray vision turning the crystal into shot gun like projectiles which take out the missles...In the confusion, Luthor flees as Lois breaks free of his grip. Super Kid lands and is hugged by his awed mother. Realising that Lex has the place wired with explosives, which are on count down to detonation...A back up plan should Superman prevail...Our four heroes must escape on Lois&#39; husband&#39;s plane after the Kid falls ill due to his exposure to krytonite. Flying away on the plane as the continent begins to explode in sequence...our heroes seem all but saved until the plane starts to fall from the sky...thanks to the effects of the explosive shock wave. When all appears to be lost, the sun breaks threw the clouds recharging Superman&#39;s strength. From within the falling craft, Sups downwardly crashes through its bottom and lifts the craft to safety. Later, capturing Lex...Sups uses the stollen crystals from his Fortress Of Solitude to revive his son...who because of his krytonite exposure has now and forever lost his powers...He&#39;ll live and grow up as a normal boy...most likely? Lois&#39; husband gives her, her freedom to be with her true love Superman...However, she rejects him...for someone...who she has always secretly loved, but now has come to appreciate him...his name...Clark Kent. She asks him out on a date...happily Clark accepts her invitation...they kiss. The End!!! Now that&#39;s better than the bullshit Singer and crew gave us any day!!!

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 9:42 p.m. CST

    Superman Returns suck big donkey dick!

    by SpeweyTheAlien

    Superman Returns was the biggest piece of shit. I cannot fathom how any male could like this movie unless they are a pussy bitch. Superman didn

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 9:50 p.m. CST


    by deadlegend

    Superman movies shouldn&#39;t be like Batman or Spiderman movies because he ISN&#39;T BATMAN OR SPIDERMAN! Once you start to compare Superman to other characters like those, you diminish him. And I think you&#39;re confusing the point of my previous post - I was addressing the idiots who wanted to remake the original Superman movies or just plain do away with them like Batman Begins has done with the Burton/Schumacher Batman movies. Go back and look at previous posts by all the Kinkos employees and basement retards that want Superman done like Batman. All I said was that would more than disrespectful, it would give the border-line retarded throughout this country the idea that Chris Reeve is obsolete or some shit. It isn&#39;t true. What I saw in SR was REALISM. Clark/Superman was bummed out because Lois has a kid with another man, Lex Luthor is pissed and little insane over being in prison for five years, and the world has gotten used to not relying on Superman. THE MOVIE WAS SUPPOSED TO BE DOWNBEAT. IT&#39;S CALLED REALITY. And Luthor&#39;s plan was quite innovative if not ambitious. When Superman lifted the krypto-continent into space, it was still growing. Luthor never counted on Superman having a son who would help save him after Lex krypto-shanked him in the back. If not for little Jason, Superman would&#39;ve died and Lex&#39;s scheme would&#39;ve succeeded. After Superman was dead, the continent would&#39;ve kept growing, and while merging with the earth&#39;s minerals and natural properties, it would&#39;ve been completely habitable. It would&#39;ve been a bit different, but with half of America gone, along with nearly the entire agricultural world, Lex would&#39;ve owned an entire continent. Not soon after that, he would&#39;ve grown the Kryptonian weapons and vehicles that he mentioned in the movie and would&#39;ve been unstoppable. The way I see it, this move was made too soon on Luthor&#39;s part, and he&#39;ll learn from his mistakes and won&#39;t repeat them in future schemes. Too many people talk about "plot holes" and "mistakes" in SR, but I fail to see them.

  • Aug. 9, 2006, 10:28 p.m. CST

    Hate to say it AICN has zero respect in the film biz

    by Jugdish

    Think about it. We all know the players here and you would think that anyone associated with this website would get any interview with any star - but what we see here is a series of literally "2 minute" interviews with Singer or Bryce Dallas Howard as they shuffle from real interviews. Sorry but if this website is such an important site in the film industry you would think that someone from the upcoming Spiderman 3 flick would be happy to discuss the upcoming film for 10 minutes. not the case. I understand Singer dodging a true interview, but its been obvious in the past. Harry had a 2 minute interview with Brandon Routh over the phone as Routh mentioned his "girlfriend" 3 times. Gimme a break. As much as I love this site- Its clear as day that Quint and his fellow contributers get as much respect as I did as a feature writer for my college paper.

  • Aug. 10, 2006, 12:29 a.m. CST

    what did all the money go on??

    by slappy jones

    thats what I don&#39;t get?? say they did spend 200-250 million where the fuck did it go? on the servicable effects that were pretty standard...not crap but hardly groundbreaking? on the bland art design?? where did all the money go?????it was hardly an ambitious was actually kind of small in scale really.... it fell flat for me..i hope we get a sequel but obviously warners are not sure about it or they would have greenlit one by now....I do think they will do it but if they were happy with its performance so far announcing a sequel while it is still in cinemas would make sense.....i just don&#39;t think it as much of a sure thing as some of you...why not announce it if is such a sure thing?

  • Aug. 10, 2006, 1:22 a.m. CST

    Realistic Superman is an oxymoron

    by SpeweyTheAlien

    I love how all these pansies who love Superman Returns praise its realism. Uh, Superman is a guy from another planet who flies and shoots beams from his eyes among other things. Yeah, really realistic character. Singer completely ignored all the endless cool possibilities that could

  • Aug. 10, 2006, 3:38 a.m. CST

    The majority of people DO like it.........

    by T8OO

    Look at imdb 72% and rottentomatoes 76% Doesn&#39;t matter what you think of the sites, the numbers speak.

  • Aug. 10, 2006, 4:11 a.m. CST

    Talk about reaching............

    by T8OO

    How the hell would Lois Lane "know" that the goon can play a piano and would join in ? Get real. The fact that SR is a remake of the first one is true, just like T2 is a remake of T1, it doesn&#39;t make it less entertaining.

  • Aug. 10, 2006, 4:35 a.m. CST

    No. T800. Just no

    by Lost Prophet

    Do not give me that shit about rotten tomatoes. You know as well as I do that that is accumulated critical opinions and this film has been receiving a mystifying level of critical love, not exactly the majority of people. And C&#39;mon Jayjew/ 1derwoman, where&#39;s my link? As the conspiracy argument on the WTC boards rages on- No Proof= BULLSHIT. Finally- the hatred for this movie is not a fanboy issue. My wife has never been on AICN and mercilessly takes the piss out of me for posting, and she hates SR more than me.

  • Aug. 10, 2006, 4:59 a.m. CST

    Justify IMDB then Lost Prophet

    by T8OO

    Fair comment about rottentomatoes but can you justify the IMDB figures? I know 6 people who have seen SR and comments range from OK to really good. None of them have been on AICN.

  • Aug. 10, 2006, 5:05 a.m. CST


    by T8OO

    Why is the Kid story a bad idea ? He could have flown to the front of the Airplane and stopped it dead but it would have ripped apart and killed all the passengers, he tried to control it via the wings first but it ripped off, he chose to stop it as slowly as possible hence taking it all the way to the floor. There are some plot holes but they don&#39;t bother me, I&#39;m very happy with how the film turned out. You can ridicule me all you want but I&#39;ve a new Superman film that I like, YOU haven&#39;t.

  • Aug. 10, 2006, 5:14 a.m. CST

    Fair enough

    by Lost Prophet

    what is the total posting on IMDB- give me that and I will justify it. BTW, not to turn this into a pissing competition, but on Saturday I was at a party with upwards of 30 people. We got round to talking about films (after copious amounts of beery, beery gorgeousness) and SR was bought up- and universally despised. In fact, I actually can not think of the last film that met with such a vehement negative response. For the record, these people are not my friends, they are work acquaintances of the wife- so I am not just talking to my friends (people that are likely to share my opinion). Most of these people have never, and will never, post online so I can make a convincing argument for a Silent Majority of haters.

  • Aug. 10, 2006, 5:39 a.m. CST

    The original Supes movie was a one off ...

    by Ghostball

    It was a screwball romantic comedy with in a sci fi situation that worked - but it shouldn&#39;t have, and can certainly never be repeated for Superman. The only people interested in him now are the ones who want to see him kicking ass, and getting his ass kicked, and that&#39;s it. Basically, someone needs to have the balls to say lose the love interest. Look at the state of the planet for fuck&#39;s sake - If Supes was real I&#39;d WANT somebody to kick his ass - he&#39;s ain&#39;t got time to worry about getting laid when he&#39;s got all that power to stop catastrophes. Sheeeit. On another note, every time shit happens,why doesn&#39;t he just turn baahhck tahhm again? What, it&#39;s only okay when his squeeze bites a bullet?

  • Aug. 10, 2006, 7:24 a.m. CST

    What, it&#39;s only okay when his squeeze bites a bullet?

    by T8OO

    Would you not do the same ?

  • Aug. 10, 2006, 7:32 a.m. CST

    IMDB: 9957 people give it 10/10, 1743 give it 1/10

    by T8OO

  • Aug. 10, 2006, 7:52 a.m. CST


    by Lost Prophet

    I will still go with the anecdotal first person evidence I have seen and heard- this is just the majority of people that have posted on imdb- as the majority that have posted here have been anti.

  • Aug. 10, 2006, 7:57 a.m. CST

    SR was good but not great. Liked X3 more

    by drmidnite

    SR had a great score and some good actor but the script was poor. Judging by the pictures, Singer should put a halt to the "partying" before his nose crumbles and go back to making great films. If they decide to do a sequel, get another director and writer(s)

  • Aug. 10, 2006, 8:10 a.m. CST


    by Ghostball

    Listen, mate - I was asking, why if he has that power, why doesn&#39;t he use to time reverse ALL fatalities? Is it all right that he only does it if he&#39;s hot for you? And don&#39;t say &#39;he&#39;s only human&#39;... So let&#39;s see, nothing after Lois getting her ass killed in Luthor Earthquake 1.0 has motivated Superman enough? What, like, not even the countless other threats to her and fellow Earthlings? Shit - Now I&#39;ve fallen into Vern&#39;s trap: "funny books and the internet go hand in hand. I don&#39;t know what it is but everywhere you look on the internet, you find some dudes that are into superman and punishman and what not. On the extreme side, you got the talkbackers on the ain&#39;t it cool news. These fuckers can&#39;t let anything go. If harry puts up a story about what kind of food spiderman eats, there will be 700 angry responses like: I AGREE WITH LOBO44!!!! THIS FUCKING SUCKS SHITE!!! IF HOLLYWOOD KNEW WHAT THE FANS WANT THIS WOULD NEVER HAPPEN! ON PAGE 44 SPIDERMAN WAS EATING CHEESE AND CRACKERS, *NOT* PEANUT BUTTER AND CRACKERS!!!! THIS P.O.S. IS GONNA SUCK GIANT COCKWADS FOREVER! SIGNED DARTH SUPERMAN"

  • Aug. 10, 2006, 8:27 a.m. CST

    Every living thing has priorities, even Superman.

    by T8OO

    Would I risk my life to save someone I don&#39;t know, maybe, maybe not. Would I risk my life to save a loved one, yes, yes I would. Superman might be saving people all day long but they mean little to him in comparison to Lois, that&#39;s why he will go the extra million miles for her. If he has to choose between Lois and some other victim, he&#39;ll do everything he can for the victim but they will always be a second priority. Countless other threats ? If he never caught the plane in time in SR, I would have expected him to get the rewind button out, no doubt.

  • Aug. 10, 2006, 8:47 a.m. CST

    Some people wear Superman pajamas.

    by Shermdawg

    Brandon Routh wears Tom Welling pajamas.

  • Aug. 10, 2006, 9 a.m. CST


    by Kal El Vis

    My first post, and I had to respond. The people who "don&#39;t see the flaws" of this film justify that as Superman "ignoring" the affects of Kryptonite. See, he&#39;s such a HERO in this movie, that he "pushed through the pain" to chuck that Krypto-island into space. Nevermind that they showed Kryptonite making him powerless 15 minutes earlier. Nope, not lazy story-telling. Superman just has the super-ability to "ignore" things. Especially if they don&#39;t make sense.

  • Aug. 10, 2006, 9:13 a.m. CST

    "It makes you look really pathetic....."

    by T8OO

    That made me laugh so hard. A greenlit sequel also doesn&#39;t mean it&#39;s a good film, FF4/xXx 2 anyone ? Box office performance and amount of people that have seen it don&#39;t give any indication to what viewers though of it. imdb isn&#39;t a perfect way to reflect this but it&#39;s better than your "effort". 5 year engagement, my brother was engaged for 10 years before he got married. Imo she knew he was Supermans kid,but not that he had powers and I&#39;m pretty sure Richard White knew he wasn&#39;t his also. Surely the mixture of Lois&#39;s DNA and Supermans would produce something slightly different to a Krytonian. I agree that putting a child in the story wasn&#39;t the best idea but it&#39;s not like it&#39;s gonna ruin my life like it has yours. btw, insulting my intellegence doesn&#39;t make you look clever, more the opposite. If you want a stupid plot hole, how about no one noticed Superman is Clark Kent without the eye wear.

  • Aug. 10, 2006, 10:14 a.m. CST

    I just don&#39;t get it

    by AskaniSon2001

    anyone that thinks Superman Returns is a GREAT film is seriously, I honestlt doubt your tastes in good cinema. Technically, visually sure- it&#39;s gorgeous, and I went in super excited to see the film. I even went on Friday because I wanted to be surrounded by people in the theater and it felt more "exciting" going on a Friday- yes I know that&#39;s lame but I&#39;d been dissapointed by every movie this summer and wanted Superman to change that... It didn&#39;t. Oh well, and I don&#39;t see how anyone can call it amazing. It has plot holes, the acting is weak- the lead character has barely anything to do. I still don&#39;t know if Brandon Routh is a good actor he just kind of...did this lifeless thing. I left the theater thinking "Well, at least James Marsden kicked ass" It should have been called "James Marsden Returns" because that&#39;s basically what it felt like. Maybe there is just something terribly wrong with me but I just don&#39;t see how someone that sees themself as a lover of film can call Superman Returns an AMAZING film...entertaining...sure i&#39;ll take it, fun- sure. AMAZING? doubtful. peace.

  • Aug. 10, 2006, 10:34 a.m. CST

    It&#39;s not fun

    by Lost Prophet

    It&#39;s just the worst fucking film I have seen so far this year (and I have seen some shockers). Anyone else think 2006 has not exactly been a vintage year, or is it just me?

  • Aug. 10, 2006, 10:49 a.m. CST


    by GreatWhite

    Kai, I&#39;m onto you. You too have a secret identity -- the Grinch! There. You&#39;ve been found out. Boy, you sure hate SR. Methinks you protest too much. Just like the Grinch, someday you&#39;ll come around and realize just how much you love it, and then you&#39;ll return all our presents. That shiny red bike is mine. BTW, I love the idea of Supes having a kid but not able to claim him; it adds a new and interesting facet to his character, and I don&#39;t think it paints Singer into a corner. Quite the opposite. I can&#39;t wait to see what complications it brings on the next outing.

  • Aug. 10, 2006, 11:22 a.m. CST

    Tom Welling Is A Fucking Queer

    by The Ender

    Seriosuly that guy&#39;s acting skills are pathetic, and he seems like a total asshole in real life. Just watch any interview with him. He has this condescending way of talking to people, and seems to really think he is hot shit. Fuck that prick, At the very least Brandon Routh Seems like a genuinely nice guy. He plays Warcraft with some of you fucktards for christ sakes. That&#39;s got to require god like patience.

  • Aug. 10, 2006, 11:31 a.m. CST


    by lynxpro

    Hey man, I&#39;m in total agreement, but I&#39;ve posted that in numerous other threads about how Welling aced out Routh for *Smallville*. And I thought it ridiculous that they got the idea to cast him as Supes just because he dressed up for Halloween as the character and then posted it on the net. I mean, there&#39;s a chick that&#39;s been trying to do the same thing with Wonder Woman for years, so should WB cast her in that role? Not in my opinion, although they&#39;ll probably do even worse with Joss Whedon picking some emaciated female for the role. Perhaps he&#39;s really a gay man trapped in a straight man&#39;s body based upon many of his casting choices over the years.

  • Aug. 10, 2006, 11:41 a.m. CST

    Hopeful for a Sequel

    by RenegadeClone

    I have seen SR three times in the UK and it gets better with every viewing. I have yet to meet anybody who did not enjoy the film. Personally, I do not see the so-called &#39;plot holes&#39; that others seemed to have identified, and I am usually very critical of such plot holes and continuity errors. SR is a thoughtful film with lots of heart, but unfortunately people just want non-stop Bay-Bruickheimer action nowadays - very sad indeed :( Anyway here&#39;s hoping for a sequel! :)

  • Aug. 10, 2006, 11:55 a.m. CST


    by Lost Prophet

    You are the first Brit I have heard of that liked it. Amazing. How on earth can you say "I am usually very critical of such plot holes and continuity errors" when even other pro-SR posters (Bubba being a good example) noticed and said they were shit. Don&#39;t used so-called in that derogatory fashion. They are not so-called they are FUCKING OBVIOUS. Congrats on wasting well over a score that you could have spent on catnip on that shit you cunt. Mind you- looking at your post I doubt you are old enough to buy a cup of fucking tea- let alone alcohol.

  • Aug. 10, 2006, 11:56 a.m. CST

    Tom Welling IS Superman.

    by Shermdawg

    The Best one we&#39;ve had so far. Who cares if he&#39;s "a prick". Some would say Reeve was one also. (South Park) Who cares if he "can&#39;t act"? It&#39;s not like this stuff is Shakespeare.

  • Aug. 10, 2006, noon CST

    sorry man that was harsh

    by Lost Prophet

    your post was just the straw that broke the camel&#39;s back. Please try and reason it out with me (you have 3 minutes before I go to the pub)- why can you not see them? they are obvious- not subtle in the slightest. What about bosworth&#39;s horrible performance? you found nothing repellant about Superman&#39;s behaviour? SUperbrat was a good thing? Again, apologies for the explosion. Lost my temper.

  • Aug. 10, 2006, 12:08 p.m. CST


    by RenegadeClone

    Firstly, enough with the profanity. It is completely uncalled for. Second, I am 27 years old. Third, I can choose to spend my own money on anything I wish. I enjoyed SR and I still think it is one of the best films of the year. Obviously, it is not &#39;Lawrence of Arabia&#39; or &#39;Citizen Kane&#39; but I find it amazing you can be so venomously vindictive against the film. If you don&#39;t like it fine, but there is no need throw insults at those who did enjoy it and would like to see Singer continue his vision.

  • Aug. 10, 2006, 12:13 p.m. CST

    "Singer continue his vision"

    by Shermdawg

    Don&#39;t you mean Donner&#39;s vision? ;)

  • Aug. 10, 2006, 12:20 p.m. CST

    Wrath of Khan - apt analogy

    by Ninja Nerd

    You know, I was in high school when Star Trek ran on NBC in 1966. Loved it. Then it died. Much sadness ensued. THEN...Star Trek: The Motion Picture. I couldn&#39;t wait to see this sucker. And truthfully, I was disappointed and underwhelmed. Heck, when I need a laugh, I do an impression of Chekov during the wormhole sequence; "Photon torpedoes AWAY!" But I digress. The movie franchise "worked" for me with the 2nd film, TWOK. I still think it&#39;s the best of all of the ST films, hands down. 3 and 4 were not bad, just not as good as Ricardo Montablan chewing scenery like a rabid goat. So, I think that the current incarnation of Superman COULD be prime for it&#39;s own "Wrath" sequel. Something that will have the same effect on the Superman franchise as ST:2 did for Trek. For the record, I liked the movie (Superman Returns). I do think Luthor was kinda weak. Personally, if he had shoved Kitty out of the chopper at the end, that would have been more in character and consistent with his fleecing of the widow at the beginning. But hey, just my twisted thought. :o)

  • Aug. 10, 2006, 12:40 p.m. CST

    You know why this movie fucking failed

    by SpeweyTheAlien

    "Oh, yeah. This is my first chick flick. There&#39;s plenty of stuff for the boys, but in the past I&#39;ve made movies that boys have to drag their girlfriends to. This one shows my friends that I have a romantic side." -Bryan Singer If you are a male and liked this movie, reach down between your legs and check if you have balls.

  • Aug. 10, 2006, 12:54 p.m. CST


    by zooch

    Superman is weak on the island because of too much krytonite exposure, it drains him of all strength that he had. Once Lois removes the krytonite shard Superman regains his strength. He flies towards the sun and gains as much enegry as he can absorb, this gives him enough strength to lift the island into space. Superman battles through the exposure long enough to fly the planet safely into space, this injures him far more than before, it even almost kills him. Compare this the plane sequence. The island is stationary, it is not moving at a incredible velocity. A plane moving at such speed would be harder to stop because it&#39;s g-force. It&#39;s psychics. This also explains why grabbing the wing would make it break off.

  • Aug. 10, 2006, 1:02 p.m. CST

    Moto - you&#39;re wrong about the A&M dollars...

    by genro

    WB pumped a shitload into new TV spots for the second week, which were not apart of the initial A&M costs. The last number was around 125... as for development costs, it&#39;s write-offs and not tax breaks that covered them, but that still does not make them go away. Studios pay for write-offs in the quarterly earnings because they act as pile-ons if the numbers are already weak. The justification is the movie will be made in the near future and recoup the write-offs during release. You&#39;re talking like a studio doesn&#39;t give a fuck if it throws 50-60 million and gets nothing for it...and with flatlined DVD, the projected sales are not what they once were when SR was in pre-production...SR will break even, but that&#39;s not why WB produced one of the three most expensive films to for Legendary, that&#39;s not relief for WB, either. If they lose on multiple WB pics, they&#39;ll walk away or close shop. That only makes things more difficult for the studio. Look at the hole Village Roadshow left...Singer has been in full damage control mode since SDCC because even if he gets a sequel greenlit, the budget has been halved and the stipulations he had at FOX with X-Men are back in place.

  • Aug. 10, 2006, 1:06 p.m. CST


    by T8OO

    I&#39;m from the UK too, I&#39;ve been twice to see it. I was surprised when I started reading about people not liking it.

  • Aug. 10, 2006, 2:02 p.m. CST


    by Kal El Vis

    Maybe he has "Super Ignore" powers too??

  • Aug. 10, 2006, 2:02 p.m. CST


    by SoCaliCyco

    Apparently since a few of you loud-mouth individuals didn&#39;t like the film, that necessarily means that the entire world didn&#39;t either. Perhaps, instead of incessantly bashing the film like a pack of morons some of you should do something more productive, like bungee jumping off bridges with untied ropes. Get over it. Don&#39;t like the film, move on. Your friend, Scott.

  • Aug. 10, 2006, 2:09 p.m. CST


    by SoCaliCyco

    Ah, the beauty of Kai_Mah&#39;gra explaining the science and apparent un-realistic physics regarding a film about a FLYING MAN WHO SHOOTS BEAMS OUT OF HIS EYES, FLYS AT THE SPEED OF LIGHT (or is it the speed of sound, Mr. Scientist?), GETS HIS POWERS FROM THE SUN AND PROTECTS THE EARTH IN A RED AND BLUE SPANDEX SUIT. After all, people, the number one aspect we can all agree on is that a COMIC BOOK movie should always rely on REALISM. Hilarious.

  • Aug. 10, 2006, 2:13 p.m. CST


    by Kal El Vis

    Does no one see the irony in complaining about others complaining? The inability to move on from telling other&#39;s to "move on"? And I do believe it is the BS "Apologists" who threw in the word "realistic" waaay up at the top of the thread. But why bother reading, when you can just tell people to "move on"?

  • Aug. 10, 2006, 2:15 p.m. CST

    Oh Yeah

    by Kal El Vis

    That suit was maroon/brown and blue.

  • Aug. 10, 2006, 2:20 p.m. CST


    by T8OO

    A 10 year engagment. Sure explains a lot about the gene pool right there Well actually his girlfriend struggled with cancer for years and this ultimately held the wedding back as I said in a previous post "more the opposite" please by all means keep going.

  • Aug. 10, 2006, 3:02 p.m. CST


    by Cult Exiter

    why u guys wave your hands in the air like ya just don&#39;t care! nobody comments about my posting way above... or is it that all of you already know this piece of scoopy doo? i agree, stop whining about the past, or about people whining about. let us discuss the future, together, the guaranteed Superman sequel that is! hawhaw...

  • Aug. 10, 2006, 4:34 p.m. CST

    Singer should remake *Zardoz*

    by lynxpro

    And then when he drags it out even longer than the original, we can tag him as Bryan "Bore-man" Singer.

  • Aug. 10, 2006, 5:08 p.m. CST

    Superman Returns sequel

    by opaden

    Hi, I want to tell you and Bryan Singer, That Superman Returns is a great outstanding movie! I&#39;d liked it alot. Even though the movie had minor flaws. My question is, is there a site that ask the public questions on who we would like to see in the upcoming superman sequel? Because superman being the first " DC Hero ", why doesn&#39;t he have more than one enemy besides a formidable foe like " Lex Luther" ? In the original superman films, Lex Luther was in the first and general Zod was in the second film. I see that pattern with superman returns and this upcoming sequel, that Jude Law might be the new zod if that happens? Tobe honest on that idea, I think zod is boring. The comment Bryan Singer said, that he would get " Wrath of Kahn " on this next movie is good, but give the public a say on who we would like to see in this next sequel coming up? Don&#39;t decide just yet, hear my proposition first. Post a villan pole, asking the public which villan or villans should make an appearance in this next superman sequel? Because it breaks my heart seeing the " Man Of Steel " getting no respect from the public, because no one have the balls to mix it up with him. Marvel does with Spiderman and DC does with Batman. I want to see superman on his " A " game, taking on enemies like " Doomsday, Darkseid,Parasite or fighting another DC hero, because they have their own different methods of defending their cities and earth. You want to know why superman is losing in comic books, video games and movies? Know one is not pushing the " Man Of Steel " to his limits. He needs tobe pushed, I mean taking a real beating. From supervillans and heros alike and still able to bounce back from that beating. I also notice that " Batman " is dominating comic books , video games and movies, because directors, producers, developers and artists are pushing that character to his limits. Which makes him great. The same with Marvel&#39;s " Spiderman ". Someone have to take note on these raisng eyebrow great ideals, to make " Superman " better than what he is. posted a " Justice League Of America " tournament a couple of times, stating that Batman can take down any member if he wanted to, including " Superman ". Which I agree! But if you think superman will lose to batman in every fight, think again! Superman can take out batman if he wanted to. By me being a true fan! I know superman is holding back his true power and ability. If you watch " Justice League " and " Justice League Unlimited " ? In unlimited the last episode " Alive ". Superman made a point, that he has been holding back his true power and ability. Afraid that he might hurt or kill someone. Don&#39;t get it twisted, supes can take out any justice league member as well.

  • Aug. 10, 2006, 6:05 p.m. CST

    Superman long lasting HIT - X3 & Fantastic Four sucks

    by RenaudMan

    While Singer built some pretty solid foundations for the next Superman movie appearance, maybe in Batman & Superman or all out Justice League; Marvel Films on the other end these day is really just preying on long overdue and fans expectation, and that poor quality film making like X3 Fantastic Four 2005 and up to a point Blade 2 & 3, it&#39;s going to catch up and bit them in the... Hopefully Captain America Thor Iron Man & Avengers will be handled better more seriously and not be just more ripping of fans attempts -

  • Aug. 10, 2006, 6:24 p.m. CST

    Superman Returns sequel title suggestion

    by opaden

    A title suggestion to Bryan Singer, for superman returns sequel. Since Christian Bale thought he did something special by calling his next batman movie " The Dark Knight ". Here&#39;s a couple of titles for superman, if the creator is tired calling every movie superman. How about " The Man Of Steel: The Doomsday Sanction " or " Last Son Of Krypton: Brainiacs Revenge " or " The Man Of Steel: The Dark Ruler " aka. Darkseid.

  • Aug. 10, 2006, 6:47 p.m. CST


    by b3mike

    No one comments because they don&#39;t give a flying fuck about Singer&#39;s intentions to bring back Zod! I can&#39;t speak for everyone, but I DON&#39;T WANT A REMAKE OF SUPERMAN II! Get a clue WB, it&#39;s not too difficult to buy some originality.

  • Aug. 10, 2006, 7:05 p.m. CST


    by Aluccard

    There is a big difference between someone getting tired of all the complaining and posting about it and those who are complaining repeatedly saying the same damn thing every few minutes. Personally, I thought the movie was great (just saw in it IMAX this week), but I&#39;m not blind enough to say that it&#39;s not without some flaws. But some of you treating this movie like the new Batman & Robin are just losing all credibility. I mean, is it for shock value? To see if the people that liked the movie are going to get really upset at you? Obviously, it&#39;s working to some extent because you are getting the responses you want. But why bother? If you really do despise a film like this as much as you say, why waste so much time here continuing to post about it? What is productive about that? What is in it for you? Post that you were disappointed and go from there.

  • Aug. 10, 2006, 7:22 p.m. CST

    An airplane weighs more than an island...

    by Immortal_Fish

    ...even though Supes&#39;s been shanked with kryptonite. Think hard and long on this, people. That&#39;s not unlike, to us mere earthlings, a couch weighing more than a Buick does with a number 2 pencil shoved up your ass. Only that number 2 pencil is lined with the AIDS virus. Singer suxX0rs!!

  • Aug. 10, 2006, 8:58 p.m. CST

    the science of superman

    by zooch

    On the documentary I saw on A&E Bryan Singer explained how he used science to make the action in Superman as real as possible even for Superman. I&#39;m not saying I&#39;m a expert on physics* (damn google spelling) but I do know that stopping a falling plane *safely* would be difficult no matter how strong you are, I&#39;m not saying it&#39;s heavier than an island, I&#39;m just explaining why Superman had a difficulty stopping it safely. Lifting the island was obviously much harder for Superman, it almost killed him. Lois did removed most of the shard from Superman&#39;s side, although a tiny fragment remained, of course I knew that. Superman was able to gain enough strength to pull through the pain long enough to lift the island into space even though he knew it would have killed him. It&#39;s not impossible to imagine Superman being able to pull through such a predicament, he&#39;s SUPERMAN, have an imagination.

  • Aug. 10, 2006, 9:45 p.m. CST

    Got ya, Kai...

    by genro

    it is funny how many people buy into the "write-off development costs" line.

  • Aug. 11, 2006, 1:34 a.m. CST

    Kai_Mah&#39;gra, and his inability to grasp a brain cell.

    by T8OO

    I never used my sister in law for the argument, I just told you that 5 years isn&#39;t an amazingly long time for an enagment then you decided it was time to attack my family with petty insults because thats all your capable of doing well in this discussion. If some moron berates my family I tell that idiot the facts so hopefully he can gain some respect back by not being a twat and guess proved my point yet again, keep going...........

  • Aug. 11, 2006, 1:43 a.m. CST

    Next Villain type BRAINIAC , DARKSIED, DESPERO

    by RenaudMan

    I like Superman Return but I don&#39;t want a General Zod Superman 2 REMAKE either, I want something never seen on the movie theatres before. Suggestions have been made like BRAINIAC or DARKSIED, and any of them I would accept if Bryan Singer wants to do it, but I&#39;m not too warm at the idea of General Zod again even of Singer in behind the project. I want some super-strength villain, but I also want a being like DESPERO with the mind messing around toying with your mind ability, but DESPERO might be better left for the whole Justice League or JLA/JSA, for Superman alone he might be a bit too much

  • Aug. 11, 2006, 2:47 a.m. CST

    I don&#39;t want another sequel

    by messi

    all Singer will do is continue to ruin and already stained franchise. He gets Brainiac and Zod and just makes them terrible.

  • Aug. 11, 2006, 3:30 a.m. CST

    Kai_Mah&#39;gra AKA Jack Sparrow

    by T8OO

    I used fact to prove a point thats what people with brain cells do, not cry about not using relatives for an argument and then use them himself. I await your pointless wordy reply.........

  • Aug. 11, 2006, 4:02 a.m. CST


    by Lost Prophet

    hence the apology. I am glad that you and T800 are british. Proves we have as many idiots on this side of the Atlantic as the other.

  • Aug. 11, 2006, 4:18 a.m. CST

    Lost Prophet

    by T8OO

    Someone that loses his temper with an internet talkback has bigger issues than how many foreigners get the better of him.

  • Aug. 11, 2006, 4:28 a.m. CST


    by Lost Prophet

    I have been arguing this reasonably for a long time. I am frankly sick of the idiotic apologists saying "it&#39;s just great you just want to hate it" and with the exception of Bubba- not one of you has even attempted to respond to the various points- especially regarding the plot holes- that we make. Yes, my bad- it was a glib remark about idiots on this side of the atlantic, but the fact that you bothered to respond speaks volumes about your own insecurites. PS- I couldn&#39;t give less of a toss if someone can actually bet me in a logical argument without resorting to "WAAAH YOU JUST HATE IT" regardless of nationality

  • Aug. 11, 2006, 4:29 a.m. CST


    by Lost Prophet

    *sigh* I need an edit button, damn catnip

  • Aug. 11, 2006, 4:32 a.m. CST

    The justice league unlimited

    by RangerLee

    cartoons show how cool superman is and it whats we waant to see. superman battleing super villians but still having a good story. everything that was missing from singers superman.

  • Aug. 11, 2006, 4:47 a.m. CST

    by T8OO

    There have plenty of successful attemps to explain what you consider plot holes you must be too blind see see them. It&#39;s easy to make an opinion but really hard to change it. That&#39;s why no matter what or how something is explained to you about the subject your gonna take your ball home. I&#39;ve seen a lot of the "plot holes" sorted in the last day on here.

  • Aug. 11, 2006, 4:49 a.m. CST

    No there hasn&#39;t

    by Lost Prophet

    for example- explain the kid twatting the henchman with a piano then not even TRYING to open the ship door. That&#39;s an easy one for you to start with.

  • Aug. 11, 2006, 4:51 a.m. CST

    In fact-

    by Lost Prophet

    don&#39;t give me that about taking my ball home. Even Bubba and Brokeback admitted the whole thing was laced with holes. You have basically dismissed a valid criticism with a bullshit sweeping statement. Which is a typical apologist tactic

  • Aug. 11, 2006, 6:34 a.m. CST

    He was angry !

    by T8OO

    The child was upset when he threw the piano. He doesn&#39;t know how he did and was quite taken back by it. Which is why he couldn&#39;t just rip doors off at will. Next......

  • Aug. 11, 2006, 6:39 a.m. CST

    why at least didn&#39;t he try then?

    by Lost Prophet

    c&#39;mon- I know you are blinded by adoration for this film, but really- that is a weak justification? Don&#39;t forget I did include "try" in the question.

  • Aug. 11, 2006, 6:56 a.m. CST

    You just proved my point.

    by T8OO

    No matter how good the explanation you won&#39;t accept it. Irrelevant of him trying or not it&#39;s not a plot hole you just wanted the character to act differently. You obviously have a poor understanding on how kids can act. I could use some examples but I don&#39;t want to traumatize my family members by bringing them into an internet discussion.

  • Aug. 11, 2006, 8:04 a.m. CST


    by Kal El Vis

    So, you are trying to CONFIRM Superman has "Super Ignore" powers? Because, not 15 minutes earlier, Kryptonite made him POWERLESS. So that "tiny piece" inside him should have prevented him from taking his little 3-second "sunbath". It&#39;s funny, how people defend this portion of the film, even though it is obviously a HUGE plot-hole. Superman "pushes through the pain" to chuck NK into space, but when he&#39;s getting beat to death, he can&#39;t "push through the pain" enough to throw even 1 punch?? Lazy, lazy storytelling.

  • Aug. 11, 2006, 8:39 a.m. CST

    "It already has"?

    by minderbinder

    What a load of shit. Look at the numbers, it&#39;s a long way from being profitable. But I still think they&#39;ll probably do a sequel, they can easily make a decent profit (and keep the merchandise machine rolling) if they just make it for 160M or so.

  • Aug. 11, 2006, 8:57 a.m. CST

    The reason he was powerless on the Island

    by T8OO

    He was powerless on the Island because he was stood directly on thousands of tonnes of Kryptonite and was stabbed so it would finish him off. He was surrounded by Kryptonite in the water and had a shard imbedded in his back. They fly him away from the Island of 50% Kryptonite and remove most of it from him. This gives him the recooperation he needed to fly up to direct sunlight for a recharge, which gives him the strength to fight off the fragment left in him to lift the Island. I&#39;m happy with that and so are most people with an actual life.

  • Aug. 11, 2006, 9:06 a.m. CST


    by T8OO

    What a huge surprise, trying to insult me again, if your gonna knock em back tenfold could you make them worth reading. Quote "I&#39;ve also lost relatives to Cancer, and I don&#39;t use them, even fleetingly so, to try make points in casual conversation, or even win arguments or otherwise." Contradiction anyone ???????? I love the way you make it out that I&#39;m the one crying, look at all my posts then look at yours, theirs only one of us getting upset.

  • Aug. 11, 2006, 10:32 a.m. CST


    by Kal El Vis

    In other words: "I respect the character of Superman even LESS than Bryan Singer". Yeah, so it&#39;s not the Kryptonite that de-powers Superman, it&#39;s the AMOUNT of Kryptonite in the general vicinity. Boy, have they gotten it wrong all these years. We&#39;re lucky to have T-800 around to set things straight.

  • Aug. 11, 2006, 10:36 a.m. CST

    SR is a major flop. the Real cost of the film is

    by R.C. the "Wise"

    close to $500 million. $250 million to make the film. $100 million (Worldwide) to promote the film. Plus $150 million (Worldwide) for prints (approxiametly 8,000). There s your math.

  • Aug. 11, 2006, 11:46 a.m. CST

    It appears...

    by Bubba Gillman

    ...that relations between the warring factions have broken down in here since my last visit. I would like to clarify one thing. During my (respectful) debate with Lost Prophet, I did agree that the kid not opening the door is a flaw. Now, this can be explained in a number of ways (i.e., maybe the kid was scared of his powers, didn&#39;t mean to actually kill the guy with the piano but just reacted under pressure, didn&#39;t know how to control his powers, etc.), but I agree that the movie itself does not explain this. As I commented to Prophet, to me this was a minor flaw and while I was originally opposed to the idea of giving Supes a kid, I changed my position on this after actually seeing the movie. I don&#39;t agree that the film is laced with flaws, nor do I think that whatever flaws there are detract from what I consider the film&#39;s overall excellence. I think to a degree that some of the criticism&#39;s of the film&#39;s continuited can be leveled at any film if you try hard enough - e.g., Citizen Kane is structured around the search for the meaning of his dying word - "Rosebud." But Kane is shown dying alone in his bedroom. So who heard him say it? Ultimately, these kind of debates and disagreements are what makes being a movie fan fun, but I&#39;m kind of turned off by all the personal attacks. Not that I don&#39;t like a good snarky comment or good natured joke at someone&#39;s expense, but this talk back is overflowing with vitriol.

  • Aug. 11, 2006, 11:52 a.m. CST

    That should be...

    by Bubba Gillman

    "...criticisms of the film&#39;s continuity..." Stupid...inability to spell.

  • Aug. 11, 2006, 11:56 a.m. CST

    Sequel needs new villain!

    by flip-stick

    Much as i enjoyed superman returns there is little doubt in my mind that the low box office was the result of no new villain.If singer is allowed to continue this series I just hope he has the balls to serve up a proper brainiac or doomsday showdown.Please god let him leave Zod alone in any case.

  • Aug. 11, 2006, 1:33 p.m. CST

    How to overcome the angst and disappoinment

    by 2LeggedFreak

    For people like me who were a tad disappointed with SR.

  • Aug. 11, 2006, 10:03 p.m. CST

    Ruff ruff!

    by SoCaliCyco

    Kai barked: "Next time I suggest you try reading first before jumpiung in headfirst and making yourself look as silly as you just did." If i was so intent on looking &#39;silly&#39; i&#39;d simply bash a comic book movie over and over by posting a multitude of rambling posts online every single day. Seriously, judging from the length of some of your posts, YOU REALLY FEEL PASSIONATE ABOUT THE PICTURE. Perhaps you should mail Singer a letter thanking him for giving your life some meaning. As you like to say, &#39;toodles.&#39;

  • Aug. 11, 2006, 10:24 p.m. CST

    Kal the Hero!

    by SoCaliCyco

    Kal El said, "That suit was maroon/brown and blue." You see, this is why the world doesn&#39;t need a Superman. With people like Kal reaching out and helping their fellow neighbors, the world is a heavenly place. It was my erroneous error to state the suit was red and blue. And without Kal&#39;s quick and valiant retort I might have never discovered Supe&#39;s true colors. The world doesn&#39;t need a Superman, people, it however does require geeks examining every film with a magnifying glass.

  • Aug. 12, 2006, 12:34 p.m. CST

    singer cannot be trusted with money

    by Spacesheik

    judging by the 10 million krypton sequence he shit that ended up on the cutting room floor - btw the genesis camera is shiite - the film looked brown, grainy and muddy

  • Aug. 12, 2006, 1:38 p.m. CST

    Effects of Kryptonite.

    by T8OO

    The 50% remark was an estimate, I don&#39;t have the resourses to find out exactly how much it was. I don&#39;t know 100% of Superman lore, it is possible that a grain of Kryptonite effects him as much as a small town town worth does, it doesn&#39;t matter to me. I&#39;m fine with the fact that a large quantity affects him more than a small quantity. Starting to lift the island with 100&#39;s of feet of rock between him and the crystal/krytonite mass, gain some momentum and struggle through the last part works. You don&#39;t get it and that&#39;s fine, I do, I&#39;m happy.

  • Aug. 12, 2006, 1:41 p.m. CST

    If it&#39;s not the amount or vicinity ?

    by T8OO

    If there&#39;s Kryptonite on Earth why isn&#39;t it effecting him all the time ?

  • Aug. 12, 2006, 1:41 p.m. CST


    by T8OO

    Which ever way you dress it up you used the fact that your relatives have had Cancer.

  • Aug. 12, 2006, 2:47 p.m. CST

    Kai Kai Kai

    by SoCaliCyco

    After having read your latest novel of a post, trying to berate others with words such as &#39;nincompoop&#39; and &#39;toodles,&#39; one may begin to question your masculinity. Anyhow, sorry to hear about your relatives dying of cancer. One can only hope it&#39;s genetic. Oh, and you enjoy saying, &#39;toodles.&#39;

  • Aug. 13, 2006, 1:55 a.m. CST


    by moto

    Okay, in the back of my mind over the last three days after I posted (have not been back since until now), I kept thinking, "I bet you Kai is still preaching her words. I bet you she&#39;s posted a shitload of times refuting everyone that goes against her." The sad parts: 1)I actually thought about AICN TBers while either working or on spare time 2) I was right... Kai is still going on and on and on. To whoever refuted my post about SR&#39;s costs and profit. Well said. The fact is, and I&#39;ll admit it, all of this shit we talk about is open to interpretation. Whether the $60 million pre-prod should be counted, what the marketing cost was, if the film has made a profit yet or will make a profit, etc. We can argue and argue. But at least that person made a rantless viewpoint. But then Kai chimes in with her smoking fingers banter and the argument was once again brought to a low level. As far as numbers go? Kai, understand, I never said I had any numbers regarding what the DVD will make because IT&#39;S NOT OUT YET. If you look from a business perspective at the market trends, SR WILL draw in big numbers and will draw in some good profit. Not great but good. And I even said we were both going to have to wait and see. So where you are going with this "Moto doesn&#39;t have the numbers either" shit, I have no clue. You&#39;re right, I don&#39;t know what the marketing cost for this movie. But you and others are preaching "$80 -$100 million". My point regarding your numbers has always been that you are trying to validate your argument by whipping up some rumored or self composed figures and it makes you look like an idiot. No one will know what it truly cost. I never said that I know. I said, "Where are you getting that figure/estimation from?" What are you basing it off? Nothing. What am I basing my DVD figures on? The market. Info that is public or offered through paid subscription or studio research. And again, before you again say, "Where are your numbers then??" There are none. I&#39;ve never said I had any. I stated that if you know the DVD market trends like studios do, you&#39;ll see that SR is most likely going to net huge numbers. I gave examples of various films that have debuted on DVD and have netted big numbers. Why? To offer a point that smaller films make x amount in DVD sales and rentals, big films (i.e. King Kong) make x amount in DVD sales and rentals, so therefore, if you follow the research and figures that STUDIO ACCOUNTANTS and EXECUTIVES live by, then you will see that SR will most likely net big $$. If you refute this at all, saying that "Moto&#39;s just basing his profit numbers for SR based off of heresy", then you are saying that the studio accountants and executives that track these things and are continually right since DVD really took off... are wrong. Come on, people... do we believe Kai or do we believe people that make a living doing this shit? You&#39;re so busy fighting plotpoints and what not with people that liked the movie for whatever reason. Film excellence is mostly centered on interpretation. If you give me your top five movies, anyone would be able to rip apart any one of them if their personal likes and dislikes differ from yours. Shit, one of my favorite movies is RED DAWN. Even despite my love for that film, I know that there are many plotholes to pick apart and what not. So when you do this against any person that liked SR, you&#39;re not proving anything. They loved it. You hated it. Because you hated it, doesn&#39;t mean it&#39;s a shitty movie. I HATED BATMAN AND ROBIN, but some people had fun with it. I&#39;m not going to ever question their taste or whatever because that&#39;s just childish. Reading your posts about "How could Superman do this blah blah blah..." just makes me shake my head. You didn&#39;t like it but others did. Let it go. So many great movies have huge plotholes. It&#39;s not about that. It&#39;s about interpretation and what an individual takes from a certain movie. So feel free to continue with your intellectual "kiss my ass" statements and continue to blah blah about SRs numerous plot holes. It&#39;s all for naught. You&#39;ve made your point. You don&#39;t like the movie. That doesn&#39;t mean others can&#39;t like it. And this continued "Moto is a Singer apologetic" shit? Where does that come from? I liked the movie. I enjoyed it. I offer my viewpoint on the whole SR profits. But you put me and others that 1) liked the movie or 2) Say that it will turn a good profit into some false self composed label to "validate" your rants. Why did I like it? Who cares. You don&#39;t. I don&#39;t think it&#39;s the greatest movie out there. I just said I liked it. Big deal. --- Sorry for the long Kai-like post everyone (not sure how many people are still on this TB). Kai and I are alike in respect to overindulgence.

  • Aug. 13, 2006, 6:53 a.m. CST

    Kai moans about people flogging a dead horse, while fl

    by T8OO

    You moan about people flogging a dead horse, while your flogging a dead horse. There was a large distance between him and the Krytonite that diminished the further up he flew. When he was stood on the island he started directly on top of it and was then stabbed. Before he started to lift the island he had significantly less in him, started further away from it and had a huge recharge from the Sun which wasn&#39;t available while on the island.

  • Aug. 13, 2006, 7:59 a.m. CST


    by T8OO

    Read my last post properly.

  • Aug. 13, 2006, 4:06 p.m. CST

    Kai Kai Kai

    by SoCaliCyco

    Kai Kai said, "I&#39;m not the one that brought up the issue of my relatives dying of Cancer dimwit; nor whining or crying about them, blockhead." Whether you originated the topic(s) is of no issue to me. Hopefully this&#39;ll sink in before you regurgitate your tired lines like you do your food. In addition, your posts run on like a motherfucking marathon.

  • Aug. 13, 2006, 4:29 p.m. CST

    In Addition

    by SoCaliCyco

    Kai said, "The fact that Bryan Singer made a point of showing new veins of Kryptonite crystals growing out of the base of the continent from where Superman was holding it and towards him as he was lifting the continent into space is what makes that whole scene a big massive plothole and the reason why everyone is up in arms about it." You and a handful of geeks doesn&#39;t constitute &#39;everyone.&#39; But you&#39;re too much of a buffoon to realize it. For your idiocy, you should be hung from a helicopter via the ankle as rabid seaguls peck you to death.

  • Aug. 13, 2006, 10:27 p.m. CST


    by moto

    Keep spreading the joy! Your communication of your views is so articulate with the "kiss my ass&#39;" and the "fuck yous&#39;" and the "you have a crappy memorys" etc. etc. etc. You really can&#39;t have a multi-level discussion can you? Read your posts of late. Most filled with insults to those you are replying to over and over. Why not just say to T800 or whoever it was, "You know, actually if you look back you&#39;ll see that the Kryptonite blah blah blah..." instead of saying "See how crappy your memory is..." No, you never said "You can&#39;t like the movie" to anyone. But the way you reply to anyone that did love the movie with your long ranting posts, putting people under the lame "Singer Apologetic" label, etc. I&#39;m really sorry you didn&#39;t like it. But for God&#39;s sake, why are you so angry about it?? Why can&#39;t you discuss it without the lame childish "fuck yous" and "kiss my ass&#39;" etc.? Anyway, this is an old TB and an even older debate. Talk to you when the SR DVD comes out maybe. Best of luck in life...

  • Aug. 14, 2006, 4:54 a.m. CST

    I can&#39;t think of a film

    by Lost Prophet

    That I have hated as much as this one. I wondered if I was being a bit harsh on it, so rewatched it on DVD over the weekend. And now I hate it even more. T800- we will just have to agree to differ on this, I think it is an absolutely plot hole ridden, lazy scripted disgrace of a film, and you hold the opposite view. We will clearly never agree, so I am abandoning any attempt to argue over it, the sooner it sinks into oblivion taking Bryan singer&#39;s and Kate bosworth&#39;s careers with it the better.

  • Aug. 15, 2006, 8:23 a.m. CST

    Superman Returns was the year&#39;s best

    by Blok Narpin

    Superman Returns was easily the year&#39;s best film. It got rave reviews, critics and fans loved it and it got excellent word of mouth. WB would be foolish not to greenlight a 6th.

  • Aug. 15, 2006, 2:17 p.m. CST

    T-800, SoCali

    by Kal El Vis

    It seems to be catching, that menace known as "Super Ignore" powers. "I don&#39;t know the facts surrounding the character or Kryptonite, but I got it. You didn&#39;t". Huh? And SoCali, your still stuck in that ignorant mindset of complaining about complainers. THEN you take it a step further and act SUPERIOR to said posters. It&#39;s like complaining about the people complaining about the pain of bashing their heads on rocks, while you yourself bash your head on a boulder. My point? You are lame.

  • Aug. 16, 2006, 12:30 a.m. CST

    Quote ?

    by T8OO

    "I don&#39;t know the facts surrounding the character or Kryptonite, but I got it. You didn&#39;t" Sorry, I can&#39;t seem to find this quote in any of my posts. Editing one of my posts to make yours sound superior has the opposite effect.

  • Aug. 16, 2006, 8:52 a.m. CST


    by Kal El Vis

    Just so I get the last word, here is the EXACT statement you used: "I don&#39;t know 100% of Superman lore, it is possible that a grain of Kryptonite effects him as much as a small town town worth does, it doesn&#39;t matter to me. I&#39;m fine with the fact that a large quantity affects him more than a small quantity. Starting to lift the island with 100&#39;s of feet of rock between him and the crystal/krytonite mass, gain some momentum and struggle through the last part works. You don&#39;t get it and that&#39;s fine, I do, I&#39;m happy." Soooo, where exactly did I "mis-quote" you, genius? Oh, that&#39;s right. I didn&#39;t. You really ARE lame...

  • Aug. 16, 2006, 5:27 p.m. CST

    by T8OO

    You were implying that I said "I don&#39;t know the facts surrounding the character or Kryptonite". I said I don&#39;t know 100% of the Superman lore. A huge difference, it should be obvious even for someone like you to see. It was the "film plot" that I "got", not how many lbs of rock makes Superman unwell. Emphasizing ARE, now that is pure Genius how does your cranium hold the pressure.

  • Aug. 16, 2006, 11 p.m. CST

    T-800 lbs. Moron

    by Kal El Vis

    Yeah, I can tell who THIS film was made for. Genius-level intellects like yours. The fact that you "got" the lazy story-telling proves exactly who I&#39;m dealing with: A moron who can&#39;t spot a plot-hole as big as your over-fed stomach. How do I handle the cranium pressure? I think the better question is, how long does the echo last in that tin-can you call a head?

  • Aug. 17, 2006, 1:21 a.m. CST

    over-fed stomach ?, wtf, where did you see me ?

    by T8OO

    If they are still plot holes, please prove me wrong instead of visualizing what I look like.

  • Aug. 17, 2006, 10:51 a.m. CST

    Big C and T800

    by Lost Prophet

    there are hundreds mate, but we will never agree on them. WHat I see as holes you see as fine and me being pernickity. So, I will just agree to differ with you. Big C- you posted that deeply pompous response in the wrong talkback. I actually had to google it to find you. I am glad that you find my post to you insulting (which it wasn&#39;t) and are able to make some erroneous statements about what I do and don&#39;t know. I was referring specifically to the comments in this talkback- not in history- but you know that because you obviously read my post properly. If you are so thin-skinned may I suggest not posting here. Or maybe you should just fuck off and cry in the corner. Even Regina- a 17 year old girl shows more balls than you. Baby.

  • Aug. 17, 2006, 3:45 p.m. CST


    by SoCaliCyco

    Kal blurted" "And SoCali, your still stuck in that ignorant mindset of complaining about complainers." The only ignorance infecting these boards emanates from the drivel of your contributions. If stating &#39;move on&#39; once constitutes &#39;complaining&#39; to you, then you have the mental capacity of a lobotomized monkey.

  • Aug. 17, 2006, 3:55 p.m. CST

    by SoCaliCyco

    Kal said to another poster: "A moron who can&#39;t spot a plot-hole as big as your over-fed stomach." Whoa! Down boy! Such stinging insults; the actual nerve to explicitly state and assume he has an &#39;over-fed&#39; stomach. That wit you possess is truly marvelous. Perhaps that&#39;s why your so-called &#39;plot-holes&#39; are made up of your favorite meal: bullshit.