Superman Casting

Here, try this link, which is where duh Homopage linked from anyway:

http://splashpage.mtv.com/2010/11/01/robert-zemeckis-superman-reboot/

I actually watched that video at duh Homopage but it should work there too. To tell you the truth, Zemeckis was really a PRICK in the WAY he talked about Superman, really non-chalant! He acted like it was a joke! Just watch & read, you'll see.

I have heard good things about birthright. I wouldn't mind if it was used as a basis. Heck I still say the best thing to do is mix and match some of the best modern stories with a few stories from golden age/etcc old ages and add some new twist to some elements. And go from there. As for casting totally believe routh isn't ever going to be supes again. I doubt the execs would want to go through the mess with him again. Plus we do need every fresh and new. So then it makes it so much easier to wipe the slate clean. Then do a big media blitz so the general public know this is new and different superman. And nothing is like before. I hope once actual names are testing soon we get solid looking guys and that they have a decent enough acting background. Some film/tv/theater work what ever.

thec0l0rsblend wrote:Mmm. Yes and no. For reasons which utterly elude me, he drinks the same Blandon Routh kool-aid as everyone else but as far as Singerman itself goes, I believe he went on record bashing on it. I think he later "clarified" his thoughts but even so I think it says a lot that his first instinct was to go for the jugular like he did.

It appears he is flip-flopping on his opinion of Peeps:

http://splashpage.mtv.com/2008/08/11/how-to-reboot-the-superman-movie-franchise-comic-writers-chime-in/

Mark Waid, 08/11/08

"I so wanted that movie to work," said Mark Waid, "but every choice they made in that movie was wrong. If you're making the movie in a vacuum, and there will be no other Superman movies ever again, go ahead and give him a son. But otherwise, that's a staggeringly awful idea. What are you going to do next? Either the kid has to be a part of his life, or get superpowers, which no one wants to see. I want to go to them and say, 'What were you thinking?'"

http://www.supermanhomepage.com/news.php?readmore=8787

Mark Waid, 11/01/10

And I'm the one guy who a) likes "Superman Returns" and b) I think that history will judge it more kindly than it was judged at the time.

So which is it? EVERY decision was WRONG, or you liked it and think it will be judged "more kindly"?

Sorry, can't take him serious after this....

thec0l0rsblend wrote:Gotta say, he's more than a decent writer in my book. His Flash is my Flash. His first time out on the Flash remains one of the greatest runs any writer has ever had on any book. Ever. Period. I'll fight anybody to the death over that one. People can say whatever the hell they want about Peter David's Hulk, Frank Miller's Daredevil, James Robinson's Starman, whatever, for me Waid EASILY takes the prize with the Flash. He took Wally West and believably transitioned the guy from a complete asshole into one of DC's best characters. I defy anybody on this forum to show me a writer facing a tougher uphill battle. It just can't be done.

Still, there is a little matter of "taste".....

thec0l0rsblend wrote:As far as Birthright is concerned, if I read it just as a Superman story, it's good. I've got some quibbles with it (did we really need a vegetarian Superman? Sure, Mark "I love me some fast food" Waid justifies it but still!) but when all's said and done, it's a nice little story arc.

I actually liked Birthright. I picked up each individual issue, and that is NOT something I do. But with the exception of "Super Vegetarianism", I thought it was a very good origin story.

thec0l0rsblend wrote:Geeze, I hope you're right. At the very least, WB has taken a SERIOUS risk in hiring Nolan to produce the reboot. They then took another serious risk in hiring Snyder to direct it. This movie is one more questionable decision away from "full on panic" mode.

Don't hope. He ain't coming back.

Hopefully. But, let's face it, it's not like WB is batting a thousand with the Superman reboot.

How things really bad for this film reboot. We donthave much offical details on it. But hopefully having folks like nolan will make this film be good. Also pretty much folks from wb to dc have fliped floped over sr for yrs.

webhead2006 wrote: Also pretty much folks from wb to dc have fliped floped over sr for yrs.

Like who? Give some examples and proof too.

I did.

I don't have links on hand but I have seen comments from execs and writers from dc saying then the film was good or such and then more recently/awhile after the film saying it sucked.

webhead2006 wrote:I don't have links on hand but I have seen comments from execs and writers from dc saying then the film was good or such and then more recently/awhile after the film saying it sucked.

Then you are just talking.

If you can't back-up your claims, you can't try to "refute" the valid points I made.

Apologist Puncher wrote:It appears he is flip-flopping on his opinion of Peeps:

snip conflicting viewpoints from Mark Waid

Apologist Puncher wrote:So which is it? EVERY decision was WRONG, or you liked it and think it will be judged "more kindly"?

Sorry, can't take him serious after this....

Okay, as you say, that's not a "clarification", it's a flip flop. Pure and simple. That really sucks too because I thought he was more thoughtful than that.

Apologist Puncher wrote:I actually liked Birthright. I picked up each individual issue, and that is NOT something I do. But with the exception of "Super Vegetarianism", I thought it was a very good origin story.

Yep. "Birthright as Superman story" is quite good. It's "Birthright as retcon/continuity fixer" that sucks.

And for whatever it's worth, I've never seen a WB exec out-and-out bash on Singerman. Back in later summer/early fall 2006, Alan Horn said something like "I thought [Singerman] was a very successful movie but it should've done $500 mill worldwide." And then in 2007 or 2008, Robinov said something like "[Singerman] didn't position [the franchise] the way it should've, so we're reintroducing Superman." And keep in mind, they're the execs who greenlit that wretched thing in the first place so for them to even say what they did is pretty significant.

Other than those paraphrased quotes, I can't think of too many times WB execs have gone to bat against Singerman.

thec0l0rsblend wrote:Okay, as you say, that's not a "clarification", it's a flip flop. Pure and simple. That really sucks too because I thought he was more thoughtful than that.

Apparently not.

thec0l0rsblend wrote:Yep. "Birthright as Superman story" is quite good. It's "Birthright as retcon/continuity fixer" that sucks.

I have no idea about that. I just enjoyed it for what it was.

thec0l0rsblend wrote:And for whatever it's worth, I've never seen a WB exec out-and-out bash on Singerman. Back in later summer/early fall 2006, Alan Horn said something like "I thought [Singerman] was a very successful movie but it should've done $500 mill worldwide." And then in 2007 or 2008, Robinov said something like "[Singerman] didn't position [the franchise] the way it should've, so we're reintroducing Superman." And keep in mind, they're the execs who greenlit that wretched thing in the first place so for them to even say what they did is pretty significant.

Other than those paraphrased quotes, I can't think of too many times WB execs have gone to bat against Singerman.

Exactly. I've been in this thing since '06, and would remember any kind of flip-flopping when it came to Singerman.

Making a generalized statement about people in DC and WB doing the same thing is not only WRONG, but lazy too.

The jig was up the moment Singer started promising the next one would be better.......Talk about an admission of failure, and that was about pretty when much the film came out!

I can't recall any execs praising the film. Who would want to side with it when it became clear Warners/DC were exploring other options for Superman? By the JLA getting as far as it did, I'd guess the execs had decided Singerman was a clunker the moment they saw it.

Father Finian wrote:The jig was up the moment Singer started promising the next one would be better.......Talk about an admission of failure, and that was about pretty when much the film came out!

I can't recall any execs praising the film. Who would want to side with it when it became clear Warners/DC were exploring other options for Superman? By the JLA getting as far as it did, I'd guess the execs had decided Singerman was a clunker the moment they saw it.

The way I heard it, the execs saw an early cut of the film and their reaction was something along the lines of "that's IT?!"

So the sequence where Singerman foils a bank robbery? That came from an exec saying something like "okay, that bit where [Singerman] flies away from Lois' house up into space? Couldn't something happen there? Maybe he foils a crime or something? We need some more action scenes." So what happened? The scene was scripted and Singer came back later and shot the scene.

Since I'm on the subject, it blows my mind how many missed opportunities are in the "Metropolis chaos" stuff at the end of the movie. From memory, Singerman catches a dude, catches a billboard, melts some glass, blows out a fire and catches the Planet globe. That's IT?! Am I missing anything? You mean to tell me the quake didn't reach Metropolis? The streets weren't splintered? Buildings didn't fall over? No riots or looting occurred? The cops didn't need help with anything? The fire department? I mean, it felt like you could've made a movie unto itself out of the hero zipping around the city taking care of all that chaos. Instead, we got yawners like the above. Hell, I'd go so far as to say that STM took better advantage of the pandemonium with the school bus/bridge sequence, the train rescue, Superman catching Jimmy as he fell of the dam, etc. Better sequences, more effects (both in quality and in sheer number) and so forth.

Some movies only get better when you dig into them. But the more you dig in to Singerman, the more you realize the movie itself is one MASSIVE missed opportunity. I don't care what anybody says, that whole movie is just inexcusable.

ap i didnt have links to what i said cause i didnt know were to find them off hand. I wasnt able to go searching around the web at the time the other day. But like i said i have seen folks say one thing in the past and say something different at a later time. But i am sorry if you think i was just saying crap.

But back to casting, i hope this time they find the right folks and they have good on/off screen chemistry which each other.

Yeah, the bullet in the eye sequence had everyone trooping back at the studio's request for more action, and the multi million dollar snoozefest that saw the return to Krypton bit the dust because it was just plain, boring......How'd you'd single out that sequence from the rest of the boring film has got me.

webhead2006 wrote:ap i didnt have links to what i said cause i didnt know were to find them off hand. I wasnt able to go searching around the web at the time the other day. But like i said i have seen folks say one thing in the past and say something different at a later time. But i am sorry if you think i was just saying crap.

But in essence, that was ALL you were doing.

You have a bad habit of trying to be "counter" to things people say here. No counter-claims, no proof, you just make statements. No one has stopped you from researching and posting your "proof" but YOU.

If you don't want to annoy people here, you need to post a LOT smarter.

Father Finian wrote:Yeah, the bullet in the eye sequence had everyone trooping back at the studio's request for more action, and the multi million dollar snoozefest that saw the return to Krypton bit the dust because it was just plain, boring......How'd you'd single out that sequence from the rest of the boring film has got me.

It's not that I disagree with you (how the hell could I?), it's just that I'm mystified how that Return To Krypton sequence could've made it as far along in the pipeline as it did before getting cut. I'd like to think I've got some understanding of film editing and, from the start, the RTK scene was the definition of superfluous.

The viewer goes into the scene knowing nothing. He comes back out of the scene knowing nothing. During the scene, nothing the viewer didn't already know (ie, Krypton is so much space dust and Superman is vulnerable to Kryptonite) is revealed; those "revelations" are well covered in the rest of the film through exposition. The scene apparently drags on for ten minutes... without much in the way of dialogue.

Taken altogether, I'd argue the RTK scene borders on being a cookie cutter example of a scene you cut from a film. Hell, you cut it from a script, nevermind shooting any of it! And yet, somehow the sequence got as far as all necessary visual effects, sound effects, music, etc, being added before Singer realized how pointless it is to the narrative at hand. And how much did that sequence cost? $5 mill? $10 mill? More?

If that's his "economy" for filmmaking, it's no wonder he was invited not to come back to the "franchise".

The whole "film" reeked of someone with very LITTLE understanding of the character, and what he stands for.

Belltown213 wrote:How about this guy?

Yeah that's this generations Superman right there!!! He's the one I want to see cast in the new movie, and like I've said before Routh sucked in SR, and he should not return.... Oh, and Arm n Hammer or whatever his name is is only 6'5 for the dude who thought he was 6'9 lol The guy has a great look for "Aquaman" but not Superman... But he will deff be playing a Super hero at some point because he does have the size, and acting ability.

He just doesn't fit the Superman mold... But now Tom Welling... That dude looks the role.

thec0l0rsblend wrote:If that's his "economy" for filmmaking, it's no wonder he was invited not to come back to the "franchise".

Yeah, I think it was supposed to be $10-$15 million worth that won't see the light of day. Don't forget there was even talk of a "Director's Cut" but that obviously wasn't worth bothering about, thank god. Singerman hit the bargain bins quicker than any "blockbuster" I can recall. Christ, they gave it away with home delivered pizzas here for a while. The fast food business is still recovering. You still pay top dollar for "Iron Man"

You're all correct, the film displays a fundamental lack of understanding the characters, ESPECIALLY for something that purports to continue the Donnerverse. Everyone's motivations seemed so wrong that it is a Superman story in name only.

To give Singer some very faint praise, he did later admit he didn't get Superman. No shit. How the guy got an open cheque book to make the film to begin with is a mystery for the ages. I have sat through the incredibly amatuerish making of Singerman doco, and it would be laughable if it wasn't true. Stuff like Jon Peters raving on about how Singer "gets it" sounds so much like an admission of cluelessness one wonders who exactly thought the film was the way ahead?

TomWelling4Superman wrote:But now Tom Welling... That dude looks the role.

I think Welling did prove that he may very well have it in him to play a "traditional" Clark Kent, as the top photo shows. He certainly displayed the ability to prove that he is actually "acting" and that his Clark is somewhat naive and gormless because he PLAYS him like that.

He has had a hell of a run though. I just feel he may think that's enough.....but then again, any show that sells as well as "Smallville" and is still in itunes top ten downloads after a decade will be taken very much into account.

I hope we get some goos names testing once offical testing starts up/some names/lists pop online.

TomWelling4Superman wrote:Yeah that's this generations Superman right there!!! He's the one I want to see cast in the new movie, and like I've said before Routh sucked in SR, and he should not return.... Oh, and Arm n Hammer or whatever his name is is only 6'5 for the dude who thought he was 6'9 lol The guy has a great look for "Aquaman" but not Superman... But he will deff be playing a Super hero at some point because he does have the size, and acting ability.

He just doesn't fit the Superman mold... But now Tom Welling... That dude looks the role.

In all honesty, the guy probably has just as much chance as BJ when it comes to starring in the reboot. He has had his run, and it was VERY successful. But I think we will get a "name" or "hot" actor in the role this time.

Totally agree ap as much as i like tom and would love to see him in the role. Its still better to have a clean fresh cast. So they can make the characters their own and all that. I also agree if we dont get a total unkown i foree someone like a ryan reynolds getting cast. I cant think of any names off hand like RR but i wouldnt be surprised if casting goes like how green latern did. They went after some names like gosling who passed, then big casting search. PRobably saw alot of unknown/semi known guys. Then we get to top ten or so with a mix of known/ and unknown-semi knowns and we go from there. Hopefully nolan and snyder will find the best suited actors.

Some new casting rumors was just reading about. Thought might bring them here to see shat you guys think. First up is new news about joe manganiello as superman. His name been brought up before. He is a huge fan of the character. Personally I think he has the right build and size for the role. Also is a decent actor. I wish him the best of luck to at least get the shot to test for the role. Here is the link on the story about joe:
http://www.moviehole.net/201033202-true-bloods-manganiello-may-play-superman

Then comes some other rumors. Which I don't really believe. It comes from the examier. Here is link to there story:
http://www.examiner.com/entertainment-in-national/superman-returning-to-silver-screen-2012

I don't know how reliable there sources are. But I serious doubt the wb, zack/chris would go for the rock or john cena. I do like them both in wrestling. John is starting as an ok actor though I don't think he is there just yet. Same as the rock like his films and he has grown as a actor. But both are totally not right for clark/superman.

Looks more like a man then Brandon who looks like a backstreet boy member... But I still would rather have Tom Welling, and hope he's met with Nolan/Snyder like the post says.

"In other words, the actor has met with Snyder and Warner Bros about playing the role. That likely also means that so have a dozen or more other young bucks, including Brandon Routh (who played the role in “Superman Returns”), Tom Welling (who plays Clark Kent on “Smallville”), Scott Porter (who played Jason Street on “Friday Night Lights”), and – maybe? – Jon Hamm (“Mad Men”)."