Superman Through the Ages! Forum

Whats are your thoughts and concerns about the new Superman movie in 2012? What are you most looking foward to seeing? Is it the suit? Is it Henry Cavill? Is it the way the Fortress of Solitude will look? Who would be your pick for the new Lois Lane? Talk about anything and everything having too do with the new project here . . . .


(http://img16.imageshack.us/img16/5323/supermanyb.png) (http://img16.imageshack.us/i/supermanyb.png/)

My concern, given the director's resume, is that we'll get two and a half hours of elaborate CGI with no emotional involvement.  My hope is that at the very least a film with some action in it will do a bit to salvage Superman's rep in a field crowded with "cooler" and "more exciting" rivals.

Cavill is fine with me.  I figure as far as the suit goes, I plan to follow the old maxim: "Expect the worst, and whatever else happens will be a pleasant surprise."

I will say I'm a bit baffled at the casting of Diane Lane as Martha Kent.  Since when is Martha Kent "hot"?  And so close to my age?  :o

As far as Synder. I really did'nt feel that way when I saw Watchmen ( Especially the Director's cut ) I thought it was epic and elaborate and very well done. 300 was just a razzle-dazzle battle flick, really no expectation there other than that going in back in 03 or 04, whenever that was. But I still thought it was very put together also.

My concerns are'nt so much with the story or the effects. I think with Nolan (Overseeing) and brother Nolan and Goyer writting. And then Snyder directing from that. It should be really something to see.

My concerns are with scrapping the Williams classic theme ( Madness! ) and I'm guessing scrapping the beautiful John Barry Crystal Fortess of Solitude and Krypton. With all the beauty and the holograms and such. Since they are so obsessesd with getting away from the Donner Superman in any respect.

And yeah, it is very wierd having a hot Martha Kent. Not a great move for me. I mean I love hot women as much as anybody! Hell, put'em all in the story, surounding Clark Kent, just not his mom. That's a little creepy.

If they do get rid of the crystal fortress, that alone will make me a fan.  The Fortress is supposed to be a showcase of fantastic technology, not a random jumble of uncooked spaghetti noodles.  At the very least, give the man a freaking chair to sit on!

I'm also not averse to jettisoning the Williams theme.  It's inarguably one of the greats in the history of cinema, but SR proved how hard it is for other composers to work around it, and II, III and IV gave us nothing but limp re-arrangements of the S:TM score.  Now, if Williams were to return with an all-new score, I'd be all for keeping the theme (he's still "got it"...in fact he was the only good thing about the Star Wars prequels). Otherwise, it's been 30 years so it's about time someone else had a shot at putting his/her stamp on it.  Maybe Michael Giacchino?

I didn't know they were "obsessed with getting away from the Donner Superman," but if they are, I'm more interested than I was before.  It's about time someone did something original after 30 years.  Even the comics seem unable to let the Donner stuff go.  If Donner had been as timid in 1978 as "creators" are today, we'd have gotten a continuation of the George Reeves show.  Man up, somebody!

Well I'm not sure I want Superman making me think of the Dark Emperor ( with the swivel chair ) in StarWars. But hay, thats just a prefference I guess. I'm worried about that design going from alien and abstract to something that is very dated in 5 or ten yrs. When you start to go the more grounded route with the computer screens and the buttons and the boop-boops and the switches, then that easily becomes very outdated and even hammey over time. Barry's design is just timeless. That's why the film still holds up so well today. Just my two cents.




Okay, I don't totally disagree with that. But It's Ham Zimmer this time who's doing the score, like for most Nolan Pictures. And although I love Zimmer, he's never done a score like this too my Knowledge. His soundtrack are always very dark & moody and atmospheric. The score does'nt just have to be good, it has to imbodify Superman, and be better than Williams in his prime. So good lucks Hans. But I'm sure it will work out.


(http://img716.imageshack.us/img716/6027/superman2wallpapers2546.png) (http://img716.imageshack.us/i/superman2wallpapers2546.png/)

The characters need to be bigger than the CGI.  I don't think we'll get that, but I'm hoping to be proved wrong.  I couldn't even stay awake through Watchmen.

"Blame" Smallville's Annette O'Toole.  And the younger Martha Kent in S:TAS was fetching in a '50s Lois kinda way...

The Kents often looked more like grandparents than parents before being de-aged, but I'd love to see a Ma Kent casting more in the K Callan mold.

Sorry I kind of lost track of this conversation.  Better late than never, I'll chime in again.


I don't care if they give him a bean bag, a divan or Archie Bunker's chair, just *anything* to make the space look like it's made for a human being, and serves an actual function or purpose.  The Barry fortress is certainly unique, I'll give you that, but in the end it's just a great big crystal cavern, an empty aircraft hanger of a place with no...anything.  Why bother building it all?  If all you want is a cave, surely there are plenty around already (even with Batman, Green Arrow, Zorro and the Justice League occupying many of them) without building another one.  The way it's designed, you can't put anything in it without ruining the design, so what good is it?  Are we supposed to believe Superman spends all his time in that place standing up?

I'd argue there are plenty of ways to do "alien" without doing "barren."  And anyway, how "alien" would Kryptonian architecture be?  They're still bi-peds with two arms and ten fingers; they would have buttons and levers and door handles and chairs and stairs and -- come on -- something to make a place personal and welcoming. The whole reason for the Fortress of Solitude is that it's an escape.  Not a giant sensory depravation chamber kind of escape, but a put-your-feet-up-by-the-fireside kind of escape.  Where's the Hall of Trophies? The Interplanetary Zoo?  Some would argue that stuff is corny, but it was there because every kid in the world would have wanted it in their own fort.  Adventurers have their dens with hunting trophies on the wall, or sports trophies on the shelves, or mementos of past accomplishments; why not Superman?  I want to see souvenirs of alien sojourns, stuff that makes you go "What was that weird thing I saw in the corner, there?  Where did that come from?"  You can get across the idea that Superman has seen and done things no other being has, without turning him into an ascetic monk fasting away on a barren mountain top with nothing but his navel to gaze at.

Also, I see where you're coming from with the "technology dates quickly" observation, but I'd argue the bridge of the Enterprise on the original Star Trek still looks cool and futuristic 40+ years on, even with physical push buttons where today we'd expect touch screens.  On the other hand, the "Apple Store" look of the new bridge looked old the day the movie came out, so in the end it's down to your designer.  Matt Jeffries created a look for ST:TOS that was unique and idiosyncratic and still influences real-world designers to this day.  Sir Ken Adam, too, designed "futuristic" sets for the Bond films that still look futuristic half a century later.  If you put the right guy on it, it can be done, and personally I'd like to see that "new guy" -- if he's out there -- get a chance to shine.  

Anyway, the film will still be "dated" the instant he steps out of whatever Fortress he's given.  Check out the fashions Chris Reeve and Margot Kidder wore, and their IBM Selectric typewriters.  Even the gee-whiz monitors all over Singer's Daily Planet newsroom look dated now. 

 

I'm 100 percent with Nightwing on the look of the Fortress. The one from the 70s movie puzzled me when I was a kid, and it still puzzles me now.

Why the insistence the Fortress should be "alien" and "futuristic"? Kent grew up in a house much like you and I did, and I cannot imagine the interior of his Fortress wouldn't be some sort of a nod to the interiors of the culture he was raised in. There may be a Kryptonian wing, sure, and a lab, and a computer room, OK.... But would he create this creepy, cold, alien, crystalline environment where nothing looks comfortable or warm or homey...?

Anyone who mentions "dating" of props is in la-la land because when the next revamped franchise movie comes out in 15 years, what they do now will be irrelevant.

I personally think there's a case for making a Superman film set in the 50s (with typewriters, telephones and gas-guzzling automobiles). Then everything is "dated" and yet cannot ever "date".

Well of course the short answer is, because he didn't build it, Jor-El did.  Jor-El calls the shots in the Donner films, and Kal is a little boy eager to please his daddy.  He never really comes into his own; even when he defies his Dad to turn back time, it comes off as petulant and willful; for all the affection the audience might have amassed for Lois (in my case, not much), the fact remains that Jor-El is right and Superman is wrong; interfering with the course of human events for personal, selfish reasons starts you down a slippery slope, and isn't "heroic" at all.

And yes, I know Jor was dead when the Fortress was built, but it's all magically constructed from Clark's "tube of Prell."  Jor-El packed it into the crystal like they pack those expanding washcloths into a pellet.  Kal just throws it in the snow.  If that's all it took to build a home, I'd be a leading architect by now.

Movie Superman lives in an ugly, uncomfortable alien warehouse because that's where his Daddy wants him to live.  If he was going to -- or able to --  build something of his own, who knows how it might turn out.


I kind of like the idea of an alternate reality, where it's not today, tomorrow or yesterday, but a little of each in a world that developed differently from ours.  Though I'm hesitant to offer it up as an example of how to do anything, Tim Burton's "Batman" took this tack; people use computers but still wear fedoras, and architecture is a mix of art deco and outer space.  By the time Batman shows up in a "Bat-Wing" that looks and sounds like a spaceship, almost no one is saying "that would never fly," because by now we understand this is not our world.

On the other hand, that backfired on Burton fast, by limiting all Batman's adventures to this weird, otherwordly town of Gotham.  For all the money pumped into them, the films felt claustrophobic and set-bound (the Schumacher films had a different look, but the same basic problem).

So it's hard to know which way to go, really.  But I will say Superman does have a greater sense of wonder and amazement in an era where technology isn't already wonderful and amazing.

Well, in the movie, Kent didn't build the Fortress - his father did.  Therefore it wouldn't be a reflection of Clark's culture but of Jor-El's.  So disagreeing with the look of Krypton is one thing, but as for why the Fortress should be reflective of Krypton culture, I think it makes sense within the confines of movie continuity.

Within the comic books, I'd rather see a futuristic sci-fi Fortress than a 1950's farmhouse Fortress.  Something exciting that shows the way we should be living instead of the way we already have - something that Superman (not Clark) would design.  Maybe let Grant Morrison have a go at it and use that in the new movie(s).