'Man Of Steel' Predictions

webhead2006 wrote: I still don't think goyar and nolan had much to do with the actual shooting and all that.

Yeah, I really don't think so either, but from some of Snyder's comments it seems that he ´´consulted`` on a lot of stuff with Nolan in the pre-production process, however it seemed to be more filmmaker to filmmaker type talk, if I was getting Snyder's vibe correctly. Seems Snyder respects Nolan a lot and his opinion. I also don't think Snyder has as much control over MOS as he did with his previous projects, because the film/possible franchise is too big for that. However, I suspect Snyder probably amped up the action aspects of the movie with his rewrittes and maybe even increased the presence of various comic book elements in the movie, even though I would kind of trust Goyer's script to be faithful on that already. But this is all (wild) speculation so far, because as you said, we have seen nothing of the movie yet. I too hope all the wanted things you listed do happen.

And I predict this topic will get a lot more fun after we see the teaser.

Ya if that the case I would be fine. Like I said I just want good use of comic nods/refrences/plots. Characters used in right ways and good action and story and I be happy. But ya once we get some footage we can dysect it more and see where synder is going.

Hard to make predictions. I knew before SR was coming out, beyond all the supergeeks there was only a "meh, looks okay" by folks in general. If MOS doesn't manage to make a bigger impression than SR's marketing, well maybe Supes is passe. But we'll see. I know I'm looking forward to it.

Once promotion wing starts up. I hope they have learned from sr failure and look at films that done better promotion and model it after that. They definately need to show fans and the general audiences this is a differentm better superman film. And sr and this are not assoicated.

SR was actually well marketed from what I remember, it's just that nobody got excited for it. Actually, the anticipation was about as big as it was for BATMAN BEGINS. But unlike that film, SUPERMAN RETURNS didn't make much of an impression. That's ultimately what determines the success and failure. SUPERMAN RETURNS grossed the same amount as BATMAN BEGINS at the box office, but didn't survive beyond that when it entered the home video media cuz by that point nobody gave a shit.

Stockslivevan wrote:SR was actually well marketed from what I remember, it's just that nobody got excited for it.

Apologists LOVE to blame the films tanking on "marketing". But pre-June, 2006, Singerman shit was EVERYWHERE. On TV. Posters. 7-11. Sobe Singerman Peeps Energy Drink. Everywhere.

So yes, it WAS well marketed.

Actually, the anticipation was about as big as it was for BATMAN BEGINS. But unlike that film, SUPERMAN RETURNS didn't make much of an impression. That's ultimately what determines the success and failure. SUPERMAN RETURNS grossed the same amount as BATMAN BEGINS at the box office, but didn't survive beyond that when it entered the home video media cuz by that point nobody gave a shit.

Don't forget, Singerman had a "bump" from it's quasi-3-D showings too. You know, where there was like 30 minutes of TOTAL 3-D, but they charged full 3-D prices for it?

Apologist Puncher wrote:Apologists LOVE to blame the films tanking on "marketing". But pre-June, 2006, Singerman shit was EVERYWHERE. On TV. Posters. 7-11. Sobe Singerman Peeps Energy Drink. Everywhere.

So yes, it WAS well marketed.

No doubt about it. My contention is that whatever else the opening weekend figure might've been, that's owed entirely to the film's marketing department. Once word of mouth took over, you'll notice the steep decline. Singerman never really recovered after that. Unless you count...

Apologist Puncher wrote:Don't forget, Singerman had a "bump" from it's quasi-3-D showings too. You know, where there was like 30 minutes of TOTAL 3-D, but they charged full 3-D prices for it?

Yes, let's talk about that, shall we? Because Apologists also love to talk about the bump in numbers without attributing it to the 3D release. "See? It got an extra bump because people fell in love with it!" But the 3D thing must be taken into account. Novelty and nothing else.

But then, that's only the part of the story, now isn't it? 3D conversions (even half-ass partial conversions like Singerman) ain't done for free. There's the conversion process itself and then distributing the partial 3D cut to exhibitors. All of that shit adds up. How much did it cost to get a partial 3D Singerman into theaters? I have no idea. But (A) I'd be fucking amazed if it could've been done for less than $5 million and (B) when you take those additional costs into account over and against the "bump" the 3D release gave and (C) when you incorporate all of that into the larger mosaic of Singerman's domestic box office run, the numbers only look even worse.

With the numbers being what they were, I'm still shocked that WB didn't cancel the 3D release. Allz I can come up with is that it was a combination of wanting to get something back for all the money they'd spent and a desire to save face... neither of which would be accomplished by cancelling the 3D release.

Any way you look at it though, the 3D release is a microcosm of the boondoggle that was Singerman.

Wasn't that only for IMAX screens? I didn't even bother with it. I never understood why movies in the mid-2000s went through that phase showing only few sequences in 3D.

BATMAN BEGINS went through IMAX too, though it wasn't 3D, nor was it real IMAX, just a blow out. I wonder how much went into that.

Superman wrote:Reshoots to film more fun scenes to make MOS more like the Avengers?? This kind of reminds me when the TDK came out, ´´everybody`` was saying all future comic book movies should be like that. Now, while I loved Avengers and agree there should be some amount of ´´fun`` in a Superman movie (but it isn't mandatory, there are plenty of storylines I like from the S comics that feature zero fun) I don't think every future comic book movie should just blindly try and replicate what Avengers had. And im sure WB is the last studio on earth that would do that, they always seem to whistle to their own tune (but it's often out of tune).

Ahhh, but they DID try to copy what Marvel had done.

They tried to make 'Green Lantern' their 'Iron Man'. And they failed colossally.

They thought that hiring RDJ-light Ryan Reynolds, and having him be sarcastic for 2 hours would rake in the dough. But they forgot to make the story NOT BORING. And they also decided to waste millions of dollars by CGI-ing everyone's suits. Even RDJ wore actual Iron Man suits in HIS film.

So there is precedence in WB copying what was successful for Marvel. Unfortunately, the precedence is failure at this point....

I liked the idea of GREEN LANTERN being WB's response to IRON MAN.... But man. Seemed everything went wrong.

Hey Web, what happened to your post? I was gonna try to respond & it's gone! If I deleted it, then I don't know how I did. I was trying to quote.

Idk man and ya like I said just sucks they blew it and it probably killed any serrious development for other characters. If gl had work we probably would have seen some projects move out of developmental hell.

I took a picture of a scene from the Comic Con footage, not the best but it is what it is, and I think this scene:



Is going to be a "nightmare" that Kal-El has, similar to what 'Smallville' did in the episode where the old blind lady read Clark's future. Something he fears might happen if he fails, and in some cases is unavoidable no matter WHAT he does.

What do you think?

It's fuzzy but do you have any idea what that is all around his head? And yeah, I think they're borrowing more from Smallville than they'd lead you to believe. Even David Goyer's initial 'pitch' sounds like it was ripped off, er.....I mean, 'inspired' by SV.

non_amos wrote:It's fuzzy but do you have any idea what that is all around his head? And yeah, I think they're borrowing more from Smallville than they'd lead you to believe. Even David Goyer's initial 'pitch' sounds like it was ripped off, er.....I mean, 'inspired' by SV.

Skulls.

non_amos wrote:It's fuzzy but do you have any idea what that is all around his head? And yeah, I think they're borrowing more from Smallville than they'd lead you to believe. Even David Goyer's initial 'pitch' sounds like it was ripped off, er.....I mean, 'inspired' by SV.

Of all people, obviously I'm okay with that. I just don't want to not see Superman doing his thing until the last five or ten minutes of the movie. The halfway point would be the better move, if you ask me.

Solid idea therre ap and would be a cool idea for clark to have a drrug of failing or if it isn't a dream a vision jorel/fos shows him.