Kicking Singerman while it's down (was: An Interesting Observation)

non_amos wrote:Me the 'N-word'?

Yeah, it was you. It could be argued that he meant it in a jokey way or some other manner but, um, that word only means one thing to me and to lots of other people, and that's why we won't ever say it.

Now that I think about it though, that word would get you banned from tons of other forums... but not here. I mean, I knew we were pretty fucking lax but I'd forgotten about that. My philosophy though is that if you use that word, people will know what kind of person you are. Letting someone's unedited hatred be exposed to the world does more to rebut the "point" than any administrative action I could take.

Anti-Snyder page wrote:February 23, 2011 at 6:46 PM
It won't be. Snyder is a terrible director, and Henry Cavill doesn't look the part.

Oh, and he's a british born actor who might be gay! WTF? Sorry I don't want my kids watching that movie, and thinking that's Superman.

non_amos wrote: See what I mean? The dude is a complete idiot! Cavill: too short, too skinny, too British, too gay.

Couldn't agree more. Hey, love Snyder or hate him. In some ways, I don't care. But I didn't even need to see the movie to know that Cavill was going to own the role. Anybody who says otherwise, especially without having seen the movie, has lost all credibility as far as I'm concerned.

Jesus Christ. For comparisons sake, at least that DanielCraigIsNotBond.com site has maybe a hundred followers, that can't be said for this TW4S's "movement".  

Here's something I thought of. You may need to first look at the video I posted on the previous page by a supposed 'Superman fan' to know what I'm getting at. The one that lasts nearly 10 minutes. Anyway I was thinking about the dude's comments & man! Talk about missing the boat!

Besides him talking about how much MOS sucks ad nauseum, the guy is an obvious 'Donnerite' apologist. Usually we apply the term 'apologist' to Singerman supporters but in the aftermath of MOS it's obvious that Donner has way too many followers as well.

So here's this guy trying to make comparisons between Superman films & HULK films. If you listen to his 'review' he's obviously including Ang Lee's Hulk in the mix. So he talks about the Hulk running around 'blowing things up, smashing tanks, throwing planes & picking up helicopters'. But that's OK for a Hulk film because, after all, it's the Hulk. That's what he does. And that's what said 'fan' expects out of the character. So it's all good.

But not so for his version of a Superman film. Superman films shouldn't be doing those things every 5 minutes. He expects his Superman film to be 'intelligent'. Oh, btw, he also expects it to be 'romantic' per his use of the word romance. We are talking about a Superman film here, are we not?! And he continually shows clips from the 1st 2 Reeve films to drive home his point. Now, everyone & their cousin knows about Superman's relationship with Lois Lane but gimme a break! Because MOS chose to take a different path than STM does that mean it was bad, even as far as 'Lois & Clark' goes? NO! Actually you can argue that Snyder laid a 'foundation' with this film upon which he can build for the future. Didn't Batman Begins arguably lay a foundation also? But it gets a pass & MOS doesn't? And the fact that all the dude can study for a Superman film is 'romance' makes me question just how much a fan he really is. He's no doubt like Singer was with his 'love letter to Donner'. I'll pass!

As for his critique of Michael Shannon as Zod, he doesn't deny that Shannon is a good actor but he still prefers Terrance Stamp. Not that that's necessarily a bad thing. I'm nostalgic myself for S2 but even I can see that MOS blew it out of the water! And notice how he shows portions of the Fortress showdown with Zod from S2. He obviously prefers this ending to what we got in MOS. I don't & here's why. For one thing, as much as I love those films, I've pretty much 'worn them out'. They also look 'dated' next to MOS. So no matter how nostalgic I may be I can still see MOS has a better ending & actually makes more sense.

Consider this. As good as Stamp was I've noticed some things. For one, there's times he won't even look someone in the eyes or at the camera. Ever notice that? There's also action sequences where he seemed pure lazy for want of a better term. Take the White House sequence for example. I know the deleted scenes show him gunning down soldiers but..........if you'll notice the not deleted scenes, it's like he stands back & leans up against the wall & lets Non & Ursa do the 'heavy lifting'. And I don't think that's the only time n the film either. And for that final showdown in the Fortress? They're basically out 'in the middle of nowhere' where it was safe for the public. So neat. So convenient. So 'G-rated'.

But look at Zod in MOS. You have a military leader who's lost his home planet. His followers have been sucked back into the Phantom Zone. He's all alone. He's desperate. He then throws down with Superman in a literal life & death struggle. No sissy kicks here! And he forces Superman into a life & death decision himself. Like I said, when you really think about it, MOS has the better ending & it actually makes more sense if you really consider what's at stake in these films. At least the military in MOS tried to put up a fight, unlike the almost immediate surrender of the entire world to Zod in S2. And something else. Kryptonite may not have been used in S2 but it did exist so that part has always had me wondering, what were they thinking? At least in MOS you can argue that it hasn't been discovered yet.

non_amos wrote:So here's this guy trying to make comparisons between Superman films & HULK films. If you listen to his 'review' he's obviously including Ang Lee's Hulk in the mix. So he talks about the Hulk running around 'blowing things up, smashing tanks, throwing planes & picking up helicopters'. But that's OK for a Hulk film because, after all, it's the Hulk. That's what he does. And that's what said 'fan' expects out of the character. So it's all good.

This is one aspect of MOS that isn't going to age well, I'm afraid. We appreciate the action stuff right now because so much of it is foreign to Superman films before MOS but retrospective reviews of films usually don't take things like that into consideration. For better or for worse. Hate to say it but history is on the haters side in this case.

non_amos wrote:Didn't Batman Begins arguably lay a foundation also?

One weak ass, lame foundation. Someone he treated like a friend or little sister through all of BB dies in TDK and that apparently was his one great true lost love. Ugh...

non_amos wrote:As for his critique of Michael Shannon as Zod, he doesn't deny that Shannon is a good actor but he still prefers Terrance Stamp.

This is the safe stance. I'm sorry but it's a completely pussy move. "Shannon is good, don't get me wrong, I just prefer Stamp." Fuck you, dude. You know you can't bash any aspect of Shannon's performance because he closed off any possible avenue of criticism but you have to find some way to elevate Stamp so now it's just about feeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeelings. Just say it, asshole, you know want to. "Michael Shannon sucks because he's not Terrance Stamp and that's what I wanted!" Ugh. Getting damned with faint praise like that has to be more annoying than a thousand negative reviews.

non_amos wrote:Consider this. As good as Stamp was I've noticed some things. For one, there's times he won't even look someone in the eyes or at the camera. Ever notice that? There's also action sequences where he seemed pure lazy for want of a better term. Take the White House sequence for example. I know the deleted scenes show him gunning down soldiers but..........if you'll notice the not deleted scenes, it's like he stands back & leans up against the wall & lets Non & Ursa do the 'heavy lifting'. And I don't think that's the only time n the film either. And for that final showdown in the Fortress? They're basically out 'in the middle of nowhere' where it was safe for the public. So neat. So convenient. So 'G-rated'.

I think the preference a lot of people involved with the production became Zod hanging back and letting his minions get their hands dirty. It's strictly an ego thing for him. And, whatever, I guess I'm cool with that. There's something to be said for having an interpretation of a character and that rings true of Stamp's Zod. So I let it slide. But as you yourself go on to say...

non_amos wrote:But look at Zod in MOS. You have a military leader who's lost his home planet. His followers have been sucked back into the Phantom Zone. He's all alone. He's desperate. He then throws down with Superman in a literal life & death struggle. No sissy kicks here! And he forces Superman into a life & death decision himself. Like I said, when you really think about it, MOS has the better ending & it actually makes more sense if you really consider what's at stake in these films. At least the military in MOS tried to put up a fight, unlike the almost immediate surrender of the entire world to Zod in S2. And something else. Kryptonite may not have been used in S2 but it did exist so that part has always had me wondering, what were they thinking? At least in MOS you can argue that it hasn't been discovered yet.

Precisely. This is Zod for a modern audience as much as it's Superman for a modern audience.

I grew up with Stamp's Zod. I remember being able to quote his lines when I was five years old. I love that version. But wide audiences not only need a reboot of Superman but of his foes too. Including Zod. On that basis, Michael Shannon completely destroyed as Zod. Remember, I was one of the very few people around here who was reluctant about Shannon in the role. My reservations were gone shortly after he was cast but I wasn't necessarily overjoyed at first when he was cast. Obviously I was completely wrong. There's nothing wrong with accepting a new version of Zod or acknowledging that Shannon owned the role in a way that none of us (possibly even Shannon's biggest supporters and cheerleaders) expected.

Blah blah blah, yadda yadda yadda, what I think we're really seeing here is a changing of the guard. The Donner folks are basically being forced to pass the baton to a younger generation of Superman fans and some of them aren't taking kindly to it. It's not just that Chris Reeve finally has a REAL successor; it's that those films are no longer Superman's zeitgeist. The MOS universe (hopefully) will be from now on and some people are struggling to let go.

I'd be sympathetic if they weren't raising such a stink over it and bashing on MOS, Cavill, Shannon (to a degree), Snyder and everyone else. So fuck them.

I knew if we could hang in there long enough, one of us would eventually stumble across the Apologists seriously mourning Singerman. And sure 'nuff, here it is. I've only listened to part of this (sorry but there's only so much I can take) but it sounds like it's just moments away from breaking down in paroxysms of grief and agony. Enjoy.



Also, if you open up the proper URL (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9Np8mWnu4w), take note of the release date. Big fucking coincidence, I'm sure.

thecolorsblend wrote:I knew if we could hang in there long enough, one of us would eventually stumble across the Apologists seriously mourning Singerman. And sure 'nuff, here it is. I've only listened to part of this (sorry but there's only so much I can take) but it sounds like it's just moments away from breaking down in paroxysms of grief and agony. Enjoy.



Also, if you open up the proper URL (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9Np8mWnu4w), take note of the release date. Big fucking coincidence, I'm sure.

I haven't checked this out yet. For one reason, having to work too much lately. And 2) is this sucker really over 3 hours long or am I misinterpreting that? If so, I don't know if I have the time for it either. Or the patience. Maybe I need to save it to RealPlayer. What is this anyway, duh ultimate super-duper version of Singerman Peeps?

It's a video blog or podcast or something where a group of people sit around gabbing about Singerman in retrospect. To give you an idea of the objectivity they strive for, the guests include the documentarian who did all the DVD stuff and the former owner of Blue Tights, which was later selected to host those Bryan Singer videos. Because those are the types of people who will absolutely give you a completely unbiased point of view.

http://insidemovies.ew.com/2013/10/14/superman-75-years-of-heroic-history-in-a-2-minute-animated-short-exclusive/

This is basically an animated short by Zack Snyder and Bruce Timm bashing through the high points of Superman's 75 year history.

You've got Joe Shuster, the Fleischer cartoon, Kirk Alyn, George Reeves, Wayne Boring, Curt Swan and tons of other shit getting referenced. Even Smallville got recognized as much as possible.

What's flagrantly absent? Anything related to Blandon, Singer or much of anything else related to that cinematic turd.

History has not only spoken but it's speaking less and less about Singerman all the time. Which is fine by me.

thecolorsblend wrote:http://insidemovies.ew.com/2013/10/14/superman-75-years-of-heroic-history-in-a-2-minute-animated-short-exclusive/

This is basically an animated short by Zack Snyder and Bruce Timm bashing through the high points of Superman's 75 year history.

You've got Joe Shuster, the Fleischer cartoon, Kirk Alyn, George Reeves, Wayne Boring, Curt Swan and tons of other shit getting referenced. Even Smallville got recognized as much as possible.

What's flagrantly absent? Anything related to Blandon, Singer or much of anything else related to that cinematic turd.

History has not only spoken but it's speaking less and less about Singerman all the time. Which is fine by me.

I was going to post something very similar myself.

I enjoyed the short, very well done.

thecolorsblend wrote:It's a video blog or podcast or something where a group of people sit around gabbing about Singerman in retrospect. To give you an idea of the objectivity they strive for, the guests include the documentarian who did all the DVD stuff and the former owner of Blue Tights, which was later selected to host those Bryan Singer videos. Because those are the types of people who will absolutely give you a completely unbiased point of view.

Yeah, they gushed over SR. What was surprising to me though was their positive response to MOS when they finally got around to that, most notably Robert Meyer Burnett (who did those SR documentaries) who had went on praising it on twitter, debunking whatever negativity that caught his eye. If there's anything I dislike, it's fandom feeling obligated to take sides and the folks on SR's side have been sore losers about it. However, there's something refreshing about seeing a bunch of folks who are able to enjoy both SR and MOS. That's kind of rare.

At this point, having watched MOS again on blu-ray, I gotta say I don't hate SR so much any more. To make it clear, I don't even care about it anymore. That's its rightful place, being left and forgotten as we venture onto what is supposed to be the DC Cinematic Universe. I'm very stoked to see what's brought to the table, and of course Affleck as Batman.

My girl has been catching up on Arrow so that she can better enjoy the Flash. Which means, yes, having to watch the Blandon episodes.

I've said time and again that BJ is the same boring plank of wood in everything he plays. He's moderately better as Ray Palmer. At first this confused me because everyone knows Routh is a shitty overrated actor. So why is his performance as Palmer above par for him?

And then I realized that Routh is basically doing a Downey impression in his scenes. Go back and watch any of them on YouTube. I'm sure they're up there. Routh's entire persona, presence and line-delivery are totally stolen directly from Robert Downey, Jr's take on Iron Man. It's WAY too similar to be a coincidence. His lines trail off and resume the same way Downey would do it, he's got the same bravado, all of it.

Originally I believed the Reeve thing Routh did in Singerman was due to Singer's direction. It didn't excuse his shitty version of it. I just assumed that was Singer's fault. But now I'm starting to think Routh brought that all on his own.

The guy knows he ain't foolin' anyone as far as acting abilities go. So he is going to ape other, better, more talented actors until his 15 & 1/2 minutes are up.

Apologist Puncher wrote:The guy knows he ain't foolin' anyone as far as acting abilities go. So he is going to ape other, better, more talented actors until his 15 & 1/2 minutes are up.

I'm still trying to figure out how the fucker keeps getting work.

Came across this little "gem" while searching for Batman Returns props and costumes on Google. The colors of the Singerman bikini look a hell of a lot more traditional here than in the movie itself. More of a royal blue and brighter red here than the powder blue and dull wine pleather of the actual movie bikini.

That makes me wonder that this outfit might've been created strictly for publicity purposes and was never screen-worn. It's possible some marketing wonk ordered replicas of the Singerman outfit with more better colors for the uphill battle the marketing department was going to have to fight. I should imagine it's even harder to sell Singerman merch when the bikini in question looks nothing like a conventional Superman outfit.

Another possibility here is the color balance of the picture is completely fucked up. If you look at the light fixtures, they seem off somehow. Another thing is the Singerman symbol on the toy display in the background. That version of the symbol did have more traditional coloring to it but here it looks shifted more toward orange. So that's a different issue.

Another very real possibility is the entire damn image has been Photoshopped.

Like I say, I don't know but I thought it was interesting nevertheless.

What's kind of telling about this picture though is how it unintentionally proves that the color design of the Singerman bikini is hardly the costume's only weakness. It's the most glaring weakness, perhaps, but the basic design elements were wrongheaded from the start. So how do you expect to turn that into a viable Superman suit? I don't see how it can be done.