|
Post by WildKnight on Mar 28, 2011 16:12:04 GMT -5
Er, I wasn't implying that Judi Dench is attractive by any means LOL (Helen Mirren has a nice rack for a lady her age, but enough $ will do that for you)
|
|
|
Post by Hypester on Mar 28, 2011 17:01:32 GMT -5
[musing]Sigh, if I were just a few years older...[/musing]
But that aside, I think we can go ahead and chalk up the casting as pretty good. Amy Adams, Diane Lane and Kevin Costner are nothing to sneeze at. Cavil I can generally take or leave, but he seems to be generally fitting.
What's most fascinating is that, last time I checked the rumor mill, the female lead was Ursa, and Lois would be a supporting role, likely developed further in a sequel. But we shall see.
|
|
|
Post by WildKnight on Mar 28, 2011 17:06:20 GMT -5
They're not? Diane Lane and Amy Adams are both mediocre/overrated, and Kevin Costner is mediocre (but not often overrated). How does that qualify as "good" casting?
I mean, in general I don't care much about Costner and Lane, because Ma and Pa Kent should be relatively small roles anyway, but Amy Adams as Lois Lane? It's not Ryan Reynolds as Green Lantern bad, but its pretty darn bad.
Cavill, I don't know if I've seen him in anything to comment on (yes I know he was in The Tudors, I didn't see it). I like his "look" as far as being Superman though.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 28, 2011 20:09:33 GMT -5
I never seen tutors either, but I know allot of people who love it. They are all crazy because dude's playing superman. The only thing is those people aren't actually superman fans. I'll have to see the movie before I decide.
I'm not expecting any miracles though, because there hasn't been a good superman movie since the 80's, unless you count animated features.
I just don't think the casting is targeted toward comic fans. Most comic book movies aren't targeted toward comic fans.
|
|
|
Post by WildKnight on Mar 28, 2011 20:12:58 GMT -5
There's never been a good Superman movie, unless you count animated ones...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 28, 2011 20:14:08 GMT -5
Either way, odds are you'll hate the new one.
|
|
|
Post by WildKnight on Mar 28, 2011 20:23:19 GMT -5
I plan on being relatively ambivalent about it, actually. It can't be worse than Superman III and IV, or Superman Returns, or All-Star Superman...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 28, 2011 20:51:07 GMT -5
For a character as cool as superman there's been allot of bad things that revolved around him. There were a couple of things I liked about Allstar Superman, but all and all it was a bad movie. I loved the artwork for Metropolis in it. There were a couple of plot things that I thought could be built into a campaign. You know, the superman serum, and lex being able to make it. I think f I were ever to be able to run a good Justice League or Superman campaign I'd have the serum come back up. I'm not sure that it wasn't int he comics before allstar superman though. It may have been.
Also, it made me think of that version of Superman that lived in the Sun. Wasn't it Superman 1 million, or was it just Superboy prime. They might be one and the same. It's hard to fallow all the superman storylines.
If they weren't the same then I can kind of know how come he lives in the sun in that storyline.
|
|
|
Post by WildKnight on Mar 28, 2011 21:30:56 GMT -5
Yeah, you're thinking of Superman from DC One Million. All Star Superman hinted at a lot of the events of One Million.
|
|
|
Post by Hypester on Mar 29, 2011 15:37:34 GMT -5
Wait... you guys are serious.
Amy Adams has a *very* nice filmography, and the one movie I've seen her in, she did an extremely good job, imho. That said, there's reason to believe her role will be no larger than Ma and Pa Kents. Diane Lane and Kevin Costner's credentials speak for themselves. Dances with Wolves? I mean, we can talk about their missteps and irrelevance, but these people are good actors. C'mon, WK, Donner's Superman may not be comics accurate, but as a film, it was, at the very least, entertaining, if not groundbreaking.
And, F-Bomb, what exactly is 'casting geared towards fans?' Good casting is good casting. Also, I enjoyed All-Star Superman every bit as much as the other features, more than Doomsday, less than the TV movie that started the 90s series.
I hope I'm not disrepsectful, cuz I like you guys, but I'm really shocked you guys are down on some of the things you're down on.
|
|
|
Post by WildKnight on Mar 29, 2011 16:54:04 GMT -5
The Donner films are pure crap, from any perspective. Chris Reeves is a terrible Superman, utterly lacking in the kind of dominant male personality that is Supermans hallmark. Beyond that... c'mon, Lex Luthor in those movies??? He lives in a sewer and the most threatening thing he can come up with repeatedly attempting to get kryptonite. He's neither a mad scientist nor a billionaire industrialist... he's absolutely impotent as far as villainy goes. I can't think of anything remotely redeeming about those movies, aside from the score.
And Amy Adams may have been in some good movies, but that doesn't make her right to play Lois Lane. Heck, Jane Lynch has been in a bunch of great movies... let's hire her to play Lana Lang, right??? (Actually Amy Adams could have made an excellent Lana)
|
|
|
Post by takewithfood on Mar 29, 2011 17:52:08 GMT -5
I agree that the Christopher Reeves Superman was more like Clark Kent with super powers, in that his personality was much more like Kent, but I don't blame Reeves for that. That's more of a writer/director thing. I'm quite biased, though, as those movies were my introduction to the character, and to comic books in general.
~TWF
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 29, 2011 17:55:32 GMT -5
I don't know Amy Adams, but I like a couple of Kosner movies. I liked Robin Hood, and I loved 3000 miles from Graceland. Waterworld want one of his movies I liked, but as I said before having seen him in those roles made DC a nice fit for him in my humble opinion. I could see him playing Johnathan Kent for that reason alone. If he were younger I'd like to see him play a villian like deadshot maybe. He's played a broad range of characters, and character types. I could see him playing Johnathan, because he's a good actor.
Out of all of them he's really the only one I know out of the cast. Given the track record of Superman movie casting I'm pesimestic. To me "Superman," will always be George Reeve, but that could be because it's what I grew up with. The other cast members aren't the same through the different movies, but I did like seeing epic. Landmarks on the big screen. I didn't hate the movies, because how cool is it to see the fortress of solitude for the fist time that want in a comic book. The flying, and fighting scenes in the movies were the first I remember seeing that were like that.
So, Christopher Reeves introduced us to the Big Screen Superman, and I'm also a fan. Like the new adventures of superman, but not nearly as much. John Shea is a good actor, and I think he did a good job with lex. He was also good in mutant x. It's pretty cool to see the mastermind villian also play the mastermind for a team of heroes.
I hated Superman Returns with a passion. I'm still not sure that Jimmy Olsen was even in the movie. That's sad, because Jimmy is a huge part of the Superman series. Love him or hate him, you can't have Superman without Jimmy Olsen. It's just not the same. The best part about Superman Returns was Kevin Spacey. He made for a good Lex Luthor.
Smallilville is good, but too repeditive. Due to the repeditive nature of the show, and a friday night time slot I haven't seen the much of the show for the past few seasons, but I plan on getting the blue Ray collection when it comes out.
Maybe the movie will be good, maybe it'll suck. Just for nostalgic value I might wear a sleevless T Shirt to the movies to shoe my support by showing off my golden age Superman Logo tattoo, or I may just wait for it to come out on blueray. The kid in me wants to see it, but the adult in me will probably have to work the next day, or party that night instead. Either way, if Superman Returns didn't ruin he Superman Francise for me, I don't think the new movie will either.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 29, 2011 18:02:18 GMT -5
And, F-Bomb, what exactly is 'casting geared towards fans?' Good casting is good casting. Also, I enjoyed All-Star Superman every bit as much as the other features, more than Doomsday, less than the TV movie that started the 90s series. I hope I'm not disrepsectful, cuz I like you guys, but I'm really shocked you guys are down on some of the things you're down on. Casting geared toward fans is exactly that. It's taking the time to get to know the comics, and casting who would actually fit the role rather than some duche just thinking the actor is right for the part.
|
|
|
Post by Hypester on Mar 29, 2011 19:44:44 GMT -5
Well, if the role in the script isn't like the comics, then comics-geared casting becomes bad. As TWF said, often the 'trouble' is in the script. Comics-geared casting of Ra's Al Ghul for instance would have made Batman Begins a much worse movie, for instance. Sometimes departing from comics is a good thing, and it's hilarious, because when it's done right, people complain until they see the film and then the complaining becomes a comical footnote in history, but when it's done wrong, we often proclaim it should never be done.
Based on the people involved, I have a really hard time thinking that Zack Snyder and Chris Nolan's Superman will suck. Perhaps it will just be 'okay' like the careers of any of the actors involved, but the man made owls hardcore. Owls. Emily Browning is cool. The producer is hot off consecutive billion dollar movies. I'm sorry, if there's anybody to have faith in that they know what they're doing, it's those clowns. (Perhaps there's not, but if there is anybody, it's them).
I would never try and defend Superman 78 from a comic book perspective. As a superhero story, it's lacking in all the crucial points. As a story, devoid of external standard, however, it holds up very well. There's a reason it's so enduring, and it's not just the score. It worked on an emotional level and it pioneered the genre, with however many missteps. It's that widely held opinion that led Singer to believe he could just duplicate it, not realizing that those standards WK mentions, which didn't exist in 78 are very relevant to a movie's success and general audience appeal now.
|
|