421 replies to this topic

[Eric Stromberg]

Good find!  Just sampled the soundtrack over at Amazon.com and it sounds like they mainly used the big drum ensemble for the oil rig sequence.  Sounds pretty badass and Sheila E, baby!  Who would've thought...

[S K Y F A L L]

Mark Strong Wanted as Lex Luthor in Man of Steel 2!

 

Man of Steel is a genuine box office hit for Warner Bros., with the studio announcing last week that Man of Steel 2 is already in development and director Zack Snyder will return to helm. Today, insiders close to the production are claiming that Mark Strong is wanted by both Zack Snyder and Warner Bros. as Lex Luthor for this sequel.

 

It isn't known if the studio has made an offer to Mark Strong just yet, nor has it been confirmed that Lex Luthor will even be the primary villain in this follow-up. However, eagle-eyed viewers who saw Man of Steel in theaters over the past two weeks may have noticed the LexCorp logo on a truck towards the end of the film. Henry Cavill and Amy Adams are expected to return as Superman/Clark Kent and Lois Lane.

 

David S. Goyer is currently working on the first draft of the Man of Steel 2 screenplay, with producer Christopher Nolan overseeing the story development. However, a report from last week has revealed that Christopher Nolan's involvement may not be as "full blown" in terms of this sequel, as he focuses his directorial eye on the sci-fi thriller Interstellar.

 

An unidentified source close to the studio confirms that pre-production will get started between October and December of this year, with principal photography to start in early 2014. This seems to contradict another report from last week, which claimed that Warner Bros. wants to release this sequel in 2014. Could they shoot in January in time to have the movie in theaters by Christmas 2014?

 

Mark Strong is no stranger to the DC Comics superhero world, having played the villainous Sinestro in 2011's Green Lantern.

Man of Steel was released June 14th, 2013 and stars Henry Cavill, Amy Adams, Michael Shannon, Diane Lane, Russell Crowe, Antje Traue, Harry Lennix, Richard Schiff. The film is directed by Zack Snyder.

Man of Steel 2 comes to theaters in 2015 and stars Henry Cavill, Amy Adams. The film is directed by Zack Snyder.

 

 

http://www.movieweb....n=zergnet_69413

[thecasinoroyale]

Sounds good to me...and with Chris Nolan not as involved, should be a better direction now the 'Dark Knight' vibe has been done.

[Iceskater101]

Yeah I could see him as Lex.

[thecasinoroyale]

I'm not saying it was obvious, but I saw this the first time I watched 'Man Of Steel' and felt it was uncanny how similar Cavill looked to Reeve in the power flight moment against Zod's war machine....and turns out it was an easter egg indeed!

 

He is considered by many to be the finest actor to have ever portrayed Superman on the big screen. Now reports have emerged that the late Christopher Reeve made a posthumous appearance in the new Superman movie Man of Steel in a blink-and-you'll-miss-it scene. The late actor’s face is said to be visible for a split second in the movie, as an image is digitally superimposed over Henry Cavill’s face.

 

 

 

 

 

Rumours suggest that Zack Snyder sneaked the scene into the movie in a tribute to the actor. Christopher died in 2004 of heart failure nearly a decade after being paralysed from the shoulders down in a horse riding accident. He became an advocate for spinal cord research and earned the respect of millions as he coped with his condition. While there is no confirmation that it is authentic, there were  rumours back in January that Christopher would make a CGI appearance in the Man of Steel and now fans are certain that his image appears.

 

The retelling of Superman's origins leaped over box office expectations and hauled in $125 million in its opening weekend at US theatres. The movie features Cavill as Clark Kent/Superman and Russell Crowe as his biological father Jor-El of doomed planet Krypton.  It also includes Amy Adams who portrays reporter Lois Lane of the Daily Planet news organization and love interest of Superman. Man of Steel smashed the record for the biggest opening in June previously held by the Disney-Pixar film Toy Story 3 that earned $110 million when it opened in 2010. The previous Superman film that starred Brandon Routh as the superhero earned a respectable $52.5 million when it opened in 2006.

 

Meanwhile it has been reported that Mark Strong is reportedly being considered to play Lex Luthor in Man of Steel 2. The Kick-Ass actor is said to be director Zack Snyder's favourite choice for the iconic role of Superman's arch nemesis in a follow-up to the comic book movie, according to CosmicBookNews.com.

 

Additionally, it's reported that pre-production on the new film will begin later this year and the highly anticipated sequel will begin filming next year. In the Superman comic books, Lex Luthor is considered to be the superhuman hero's most feared rival, who takes advantage of his weakness to Kryptonite - a fragment of poisonous rock from Superman's home planet of Krypton.

 

 

 

[x007AceOfSpades]

That was extremely unnecessary to put in...

[SecretAgentFan]

True. But a nice tribute nevertheless.

[thecasinoroyale]

I enjoyed it, thinking if had seen right or not. The legend of Superman lives on.

[Mr Teddy Bear]

Seeing it at the time, I noticed the exact same thing. I didn't suspect any digital trickery though.

 

Very cool.

[The Shark]

Saw this today. Wonderful. Walked out of the cinema feeling three feet taller.

[Iceskater101]

That was extremely unnecessary to put in...

 

I agree because even with that clip that was posted I still don't see it. Personally I think nothing should have been done or if anything just put it at the end of the movie and say something in reminder to Christopher Reeves the true superman or something..

 

Saw this today. Wonderful. Walked out of the cinema feeling three feet taller.

 

Haha yeah I liked it too! I couldn't stop talking about it, me and my brother had a huge discussion about the movie once it was over.

[tdalton]

But a nice tribute nevertheless.

 

Agreed.  Judging by the GIF above, it's very quick and really only noticeable if you're looking for it, so it's not something that's going to be a distraction while watching the film, which is how it should be with in-film tributes.

[thecasinoroyale]

I agree - in a way, Snyder will probably never admit because if the WANT is there, you will see it. If not, you won't, and that's best for a sweet tribute to the man who brought Superman into modern popular culture, Christoher Reeve. 

[Professor Pi]

I saw MoS for the third time yesterday, taking a friend to the giant full fledged IMAX 3D version before it bows out.  While I still like the movie and am aware of its faults, I discovered some new criticisms this time:

 

How did Jonathan Kent move a 17,000 pound space ship into his barn basement?  It's too big to fit onto his pickup truck.

 

For all the talk about the destruction Superman allows to happen, it is the military that causes most of it.  They are the first to fire on the Kryptonians in Smallville.  While Colonel Hardy says he's seen the aliens first hand, they haven't caused any destruction or death yet.  In addition, they shoot Superman in the head, and yet he still sides with humanity over his own people.  Talk about turning the other cheek!  At this point, his parents, Lois, and Pete Ross from the school bus appear to be his only friends.  Of course, Zod's speech to Kal explaining his plan, in which Superman drowns in human skulls, isn't exactly a great sales pitch to rejoin the Kryptonians.

 

When the Kryptonians start terraforming, their anti-gravity World Machine appears not to affect human beings.  Cars and concrete jump up and smash down, but none of this affects the people.  I assume this was the filmmakers way to avoid showing innocent people dying in a Superman movie.  As for the countless skyscrapers falling, most of that is due to the missiles fired which lose course and end up taking out the buildings' foundations.  During this time Zod is pre-occupied with securing the genesis pod on a Kryptonian ship.  Is that the same ship Kal discovered?  18000 years old and it still powers up, has viable embryos and uses the same technology as Krypton's latest crypto-keys! 

 

Finally, it is Superman who inadvertently informs Zod how to use super powers on Earth.  "My parents taught me to hone my skills."  Then Zod realizes his is a 'temporary weakness'.  Also, he doesn't know he's got heat vision until he sees Superman use it to crash land the Krypton ship.  Then he uses it to attempt killing the family at the end.  Basically, all the death and destruction brought to Earth via Zod and his crew was inadvertently brought about through Superman's actions.  Indeed, his activation of the ship alerted Zod to his presence and Earth's location.

 

And of course, how does he shave? 

 

Still, each of the three crowds I saw it with applauded at the end.

Edited by Professor Pi, 07 July 2013 - 07:15 PM.

[Iceskater101]

Maybe he cut up part of the ship and put it on his car or got a UHaul or something lol I have no idea. I usually don't think of things like that when I watch movies just because all movies have things like that. How did Batman get to Gotham in TDKR because he is fucking Batman that's why. I mean that's a HUGE plot hole but I don't look at it like that.

[S K Y F A L L]

I wonder is Russel Crow or Kevin Costner will return briefly in whatever they decide to name Man Of Steel 2. 

 

 

 

 

Russell Crowe Interested in a Man of Steel Prequel

Man of Steel star Russell Crowe took to his Twitter account this weekend to address the possibility of a Superman prequel. Take a look at what he had to say, then read on for more information.

 

 

"A lot of you are asking about a KRYPTON prequel, if that's something you feel strongly about let @Legendary pictures know your thoughts. Just getting sick of reading the same question mate, however, if it came up, i'd give the tights another go."

http://www.movieweb....n=zergnet_72083

[Professor Pi]

Maybe he cut up part of the ship and put it on his car or got a UHaul or something lol I have no idea. I usually don't think of things like that when I watch movies just because all movies have things like that. How did Batman get to Gotham in TDKR because he is fucking Batman that's why. I mean that's a HUGE plot hole but I don't look at it like that.

 

That plot hole doesn't bother me that much as Wayne probably has access to various accounts and it's unclear how many days have passed.  But yeah, TDKR has similar plot holes.

 

 

 

I wonder is Russel Crow or Kevin Costner will return briefly in whatever they decide to name Man Of Steel 2. 

 

Russell Crowe Interested in a Man of Steel Prequel

 

 

That surprises me that Russel Crow would be interested in a prequel, and openly lobby Legendary Pictures for it.  But he was well cast and did a great job!  Still, I don't think he or Costner, who gave one of the better performances of his career here, would be back for a second helping.  It'd have to be flashbacks in any case which would be trolling too many times into the well.  Better to go all out on casting Lex Luthor, perhaps with Bryan Cranston.

[x007AceOfSpades]

The amount of plot holes in both films are ridiculous.

[The Shark]

Plot holes shmot holes. 

[thecasinoroyale]

There are plenty of plot holes in the Bond films too, it's a matter whether people want to bother picking them up to question their enjoyment or not.

[Dustin]

Actually I just wondered: is a plot hole in a film about an alien who defeats gravity and pretty much every other law of physics because he stems from a system with a red sun really an issue?

One might argue it comes with the design, doesn't it?

Edited by Dustin, 08 July 2013 - 08:51 PM.

[lechero]

I don't care if they are plot holes in a superhero film, but MOS sure could have used some heart, some humour. The drab visuals and the overlong, mind-numbingly boring action sequences don't help this mess of a film either.

[The Shark]

There's not much humour, granted, but there's plenty of heart. I also found the action sequences to be very engaging and well choreographed. Snyder has a great kinetic eye.

[Eric Stromberg]

Bullseye, Sharky.  I know a couple of reviews early on claimed this film had no heart so I was concerned about that.  For me it had plenty of heart.  Doesn't wear it on its sleeve like the previous movies.  For me that meant a Supes film experience that was inspirational but not hokey.  That's new to me and I look forward to more in MOS 2: Balls of Steel.

Edited by Eric Stromberg, 08 July 2013 - 11:12 PM.

[thecasinoroyale]

My main concern is that too many people were comparing it to the Reeve films, which are totally different takes on the character, but both equally brilliant and memorable.

 

Oh, Reeve and Donner had the more iconic themes first, especially the use of SFX and the soundtrack, but I feel 'Man Of Steel' is far more faithful to the comic book character's universe than 'Superman: The Movie', and so it probably is alien to most viewers unaware of the comics and his personna in them.

[SecretAgentFan]

Actually I just wondered: is a plot hole in a film about an alien who defeats gravity and pretty much every other law of physics because he stems from a system with a red sun really an issue?

One might argue it comes with the design, doesn't it?

 

Plot holes (or better: so called plot holes) are my pet peeve.  Lazy critics who do not want to think about plots too long or do not want to give even improbable but plausible explanations (as in real life) the benefit of the doubt, have been penetrating the readership of their reviews with these shout-outs "PLOT HOLE", mostly because it is an easy way to show themselves intellectually superior.  Unfortunately, many people have taken this up and call a plot riddled with holes whenever they do not understand it or are too lazy to give it some thought first.

 

Of course, there are plot holes.  Some are due to editing (explanatory sequences), some are happening because the filmmakers ignore them (Hey, if you really stop and think about how Batman can get into Gotham City after the bridges have been destroyed or closed, then the whole film does not work.)

 

But I would urge viewers to be not so quick with calling something a "plot hole" and take their time to think about it.  Watching a movie is about suspension of disbelief.  If you´re only watching it to detect plot holes or continuity mistakes (yep, I know people who just crave for them, instead of enjoying the story), then maybe you should ask yourself why you´re depriving yourself of the movie going experience.

Edited by SecretAgentFan, 09 July 2013 - 08:58 AM.

[Professor Pi]

Discussing plot holes isn't necessarily a bad thing, in fact, I find it rather fun as it ironically adds to my enjoyment of the film instead of detracting from it.  After all, I did go see Man of Steel three times and will still buy the Bluray when it comes out.  Acknowledging some of the weaknesses makes me focus more on why I still have positive impressions of a movie.  It answers why I want to like certain movies and forgive their faults.

 

Actually I just wondered: is a plot hole in a film about an alien who defeats gravity and pretty much every other law of physics because he stems from a system with a red sun really an issue?

One might argue it comes with the design, doesn't it?

 

True.  For example, you can't really argue plot holes with Star Trek because the instant you bought the ticket, you're accepting the transporter beam, a construct held over from solving a 60s TV budget issue over showing a starship landing.  It's the most physically impossible thing in Star Trek.

 

 

My main concern is that too many people were comparing it to the Reeve films, which are totally different takes on the character, but both equally brilliant and memorable.

 

Oh, Reeve and Donner had the more iconic themes first, especially the use of SFX and the soundtrack, but I feel 'Man Of Steel' is far more faithful to the comic book character's universe than 'Superman: The Movie', and it probably is alien to most viewers unaware of the comics and his personna in them.

 

True.  The innocence of the first two would play off as hokey today.  As another reviewer commented on MoS, "it may not be the Superman we want, but it's the Superman we deserve."  That being said, I picked up a lot of plot holes in Superman I and II that I missed as a kid--I mean, shouldn't Supes now always just spin the Earth backward to solve everything?

 

There's not much humour, granted, but there's plenty of heart. I also found the action sequences to be very engaging and well choreographed. Snyder has a great kinetic eye.

 

It took three viewings for me to really appreciate the 'heart' as it's subtle between Lois and Clark but really obvious with his mother, Martha.  Snyder exposits Kal El's struggle with this in the church scene where he's still not sure he can trust people, given the trucker, his high school bullies, the crab captain, etc.  Even most of the military 'allies' are kind of dicks to him.  Hardy's the only one to really trust Superman, and that's after he attacks Supes and Zod's people in Smallville.

 

 

There are plenty of plot holes in the Bond films too, it's a matter whether people want to bother picking them up to question their enjoyment or not.

 

That's why I like Goldfinger, I think its plot devices hold up pretty well, even as the film becomes dated.  Also, why John Glen's films age petty well, in particular FYEO and LTK.  Among the latest Bonds, I find Skyfall to have more plot holes than Craig's other two, but I still enjoy it more than QoS, despite it having the fewest plot holes of the three in my mind.

 

 

But I would urge viewers to be not so quick with calling something a "plot hole" and take their time to think about it.  Watching a movie is about suspension of disbelief.  If you´re only watching it to detect plot holes or continuity mistakes (yep, I know people who just crave for them, instead of enjoying the story), then maybe you should ask yourself why you´re depriving yourself of the movie going experience.

 

This is the difference between those two Youtube series, "How It Should Have Ended" and "Everything Wrong with (movie) in x minutes..."  The creators at HISHE clearly enjoy the movies and are having fun, while the latter group are guilty of exactly your point.

Edited by Professor Pi, 09 July 2013 - 05:04 PM.

[Professor Pi]

Now that I've rewatched the Superman franchise, here's how they rank:

 

The Super

 

#1 Superman II -- One of the few sequels to equal, if not surpass, its predecessor, this entry set the bar so high its influence can be seen in nearly every film in the genre, whether in Marvel's Cinematic Universe or DC's ongoing efforts to recapture their glory to varying degrees of success.  Its special effects have dated this movie, but its script is still mined even by the most recent entry, Man of Steel.

 

#2 Superman: The Movie -- Arguably the most iconic superhero movie of all time, Richard Donner's cinematic incarnation of the Big Blue Boy Scout became the template for the genre for the next 30 years.  Featuring science fiction, car chases, and a Lex Luthor plot worthy of a James Bond villain (so much so that A View to A Kill later ripped it off), it had something for everyone.  Time has exposed its plot holes and unfortunate stereotypes, taking it down a notch.

 

The Good

 

#3 Man of Steel -- Rebooted for the 21st Century, this frenetic kinetic re-interpretation is a remake of the first two movies, arguably improving on components such as Zod and the bullying trucker, but awfully reminiscent of nearly every movie the franchise had inspired.  It's awkwardly juxtaposed against the shadow of The Dark Knight trilogy's superhero deconstruction, by taking some controversial liberties with its own mythos as well, but has nonetheless reinvigorated the property by setting the table for The Justice League to compete with the mighty Marvel.

 

#4  Superman Returns -- This homage to the Donner films is as close to a concluding chapter to the the first two movies as we get.  Bryan Singer's contribution, while profitable, is undeservedly derided for failing to re-ignite the franchise as it pales to even his own X-Men movies.  It mines so much of the same material as Superman: The Movie it could be called "Superman Revisited."

 

The Bad

 

#5 Superman IV:  The Quest for Peace -- Quest for cash is more like it.  It's cheap and cheesy, but not totally devoid of charm.  It is short, after all.

 

The Terrible

 

#6 Superman III -- How not to make a movie.  Any movie.  Even Spiderman 3...oh, too late.  A waste of Richard Pryor. A textbook example of Hollywood script writers knowing nothing about computers.  The first of many failed attempts to complete a trilogy successfully.  A movie that nearly killed off the franchise, if not the genre.  It's a bird, it's a plane, ... no wait...that's what birds do to cars.

[Iceskater101]

There are plenty of plot holes in the Bond films too, it's a matter whether people want to bother picking them up to question their enjoyment or not.

 

Yeah same. I mean if you literally focus on all the plot holes in every film you watch, I think it will ruin every film for you. Granted though there are some films where there are so many plot holes that it's ridiculous.. which you can argue about with the TDKR for sure. I still don't mind watching it though.

[SecretAgentFan]

Now that I've rewatched the Superman franchise, here's how they rank:

 

The Super

 

#1 Superman II -- One of the few sequels to equal, if not surpass, its predecessor, this entry set the bar so high its influence can be seen in nearly every film in the genre, whether in Marvel's Cinematic Universe or DC's ongoing efforts to recapture their glory to varying degrees of success.  Its special effects have dated this movie, but its script is still mined even by the most recent entry, Man of Steel.

 

#2 Superman: The Movie -- Arguably the most iconic superhero movie of all time, Richard Donner's cinematic incarnation of the Big Blue Boy Scout became the template for the genre for the next 30 years.  Featuring science fiction, car chases, and a Lex Luthor plot worthy of a James Bond villain (so much so that A View to A Kill later ripped it off), it had something for everyone.  Time has exposed its plot holes and unfortunate stereotypes, taking it down a notch.

 

The Good

 

#3 Man of Steel -- Rebooted for the 21st Century, this frenetic kinetic re-interpretation is a remake of the first two movies, arguably improving on components such as Zod and the bullying trucker, but awfully reminiscent of nearly every movie the franchise had inspired.  It's awkwardly juxtaposed against the shadow of The Dark Knight trilogy's superhero deconstruction, by taking some controversial liberties with its own mythos as well, but has nonetheless reinvigorated the property by setting the table for The Justice League to compete with the mighty Marvel.

 

#4  Superman Returns -- This homage to the Donner films is as close to a concluding chapter to the the first two movies as we get.  Bryan Singer's contribution, while profitable, is undeservedly derided for failing to re-ignite the franchise as it pales to even his own X-Men movies.  It mines so much of the same material as Superman: The Movie it could be called "Superman Revisited."

 

The Bad

 

#5 Superman IV:  The Quest for Peace -- Quest for cash is more like it.  It's cheap and cheesy, but not totally devoid of charm.  It is short, after all.

 

The Terrible

 

#6 Superman III -- How not to make a movie.  Any movie.  Even Spiderman 3...oh, too late.  A waste of Richard Pryor. A textbook example of Hollywood script writers knowing nothing about computers.  The first of many failed attempts to complete a trilogy successfully.  A movie that nearly killed off the franchise, if not the genre.  It's a bird, it's a plane, ... no wait...that's what birds do to cars.

 

Interesting.  You prefer IV to III?  

 

I always thought that parts of IV showed huge promise but was let down by the incredibly cheap and bad effects and one of the most laughable villains of film histoy. III had the Lana arc and the split Superman persona, almost bizarro-like, which saved the film for me, despite its many shortcomings.