Is Singer taking the easy way out??

Hey. New guy here, so be gentle (Hi Z).

Well, while I'm looking forward to the new movie, I still think that Bryan Singer took the easy way out by piggybacking on the Donner films instead of rebooting the character from a fresh perspective. What makes Superman (and Batman, and Spider-Man and so many other great characters) great is that they have been kept alive by so many creative forces that weren't tied down to any one incarnation of the character. He is a legend that has to be told and re-told to subsequent generations. With Superman Returns, Singer is basically saying "I have no unique creative vision regarding the character and, like the masses, I believe the Donner films only matter and that's what I'll run with,". That is a copout. Did Donner pick up where the 50's TV show left off? Did the 50's TV show pick up where the movie serials or Fleischer cartoons left off? Why this obsession with the Donner films? I've posted this question before on another board and someone said that Singer is basically picking up where the most recognizable incarnation of the character left off. Well if you applied that theory to Batman, then the most recent movie would have had brightly colored sets, wacky camera angles, and a paunchy Dark Knight punching out bad guys with a POW! and SOCK! because, in spite of the critical and financial success of Batman Begins, the 60's TV series is still the most recognizable incarnation of the character.

As I said, I'll see the movie and I think it might be good, in spite of a few flaws (Lois with a kid??? That alone is worth a thread), but I'm still a little disappointed that a guy who kicked so much ass with the X-Films is riding the coattails of another director.

I'm sure he means well.

Welcome Blockaderunner!!!! how do you do? you are asking why people see donner's superman as the most recognizable incarnation of the character? and you also ask, why didn't they apliedd this to the batman begins film, right? Well, most reconigzable incarnation doesn't mean the best incarnation, and when you think Christopher reeve you automatically think superman, don't ask me why, i cuoldn't answer.
Anyway i also think this movie will suck big time, cuz singer has been doing a lot of stupid changes.

Yes he is taking the easy way out but I am more mad at WBros. for letting him take it.

Singer has made several good to excellent films in a row..law of averages say he's due for a misfire or stinker. The costume - that maroon red...(shudders) 😒

Originally posted by roughrider
Singer has made several good to excellent films in a row..law of averages say he's due for a misfire or stinker. The costume - that maroon red...(shudders) 😒

Don't know what's excellent for you, but even if that's right, and the law of averages.... he should have screw any other superhero, not Superman cursing

Originally posted by blockaderunner
Hey. New guy here, so be gentle (Hi Z).

Well, while I'm looking forward to the new movie, I still think that Bryan Singer took the easy way out by piggybacking on the Donner films instead of rebooting the character from a fresh perspective. What makes Superman (and Batman, and Spider-Man and so many other great characters) great is that they have been kept alive by so many creative forces that weren't tied down to any one incarnation of the character. He is a legend that has to be told and re-told to subsequent generations. With Superman Returns, Singer is basically saying "I have no unique creative vision regarding the character and, like the masses, I believe the Donner films only matter and that's what I'll run with,". That is a copout. Did Donner pick up where the 50's TV show left off? Did the 50's TV show pick up where the movie serials or Fleischer cartoons left off? Why this obsession with the Donner films? I've posted this question before on another board and someone said that Singer is basically picking up where the most recognizable incarnation of the character left off. Well if you applied that theory to Batman, then the most recent movie would have had brightly colored sets, wacky camera angles, and a paunchy Dark Knight punching out bad guys with a POW! and SOCK! because, in spite of the critical and financial success of Batman Begins, the 60's TV series is still the most recognizable incarnation of the character.

As I said, I'll see the movie and I think it might be good, in spite of a few flaws (Lois with a kid??? That alone is worth a thread), but I'm still a little disappointed that a guy who kicked so much ass with the X-Films is riding the coattails of another director.

Very well written, and welcome to kmc...

i for one agree... i'd have liked to see a more modern take on the character... even the comics have moved on...

Originally posted by roughrider
Singer has made several good to excellent films in a row..law of averages say he's due for a misfire or stinker. The costume - that maroon red...(shudders) 😒

x-men and x2 weren't anything special...

maybe he just cant do superheroes...

Originally posted by pr1983
Very well written, and welcome to kmc...

i for one agree... i'd have liked to see a more modern take on the character... even the comics have moved on...

x-men and x2 weren't anything special...

maybe he just cant do superheroes...

VERY WELL WRITTEN, REALLY

Singer stated that the reason he didn't reinvent the franchise was because there was no need. Donner did an astounding job with the origin, there was no reason to retell it, aside from the fact that everyone already knows Superman's origin, retelling it was not necessary.

He also later said that that starting the franchise over would be disgracing the Reeve films, kind of like saying they never existed (well Superman III and IV can be forgotten 😉 not to mention he got Richard Donner's approval of the film, Donner loved the story and gave him the thumbs up, Singer said if he didn't have Donner's blessings on Superman Returns, he would not have done it.

I trust Richard Donner, I trust Bryan Singer, this movie will be awesome 😎

Originally posted by Jedi Shmedi
Singer stated that the reason he didn't reinvent the franchise was because there was no need. Donner did an astounding job with the origin, there was no reason to retell it, aside from the fact that everyone already knows Superman's origin, retelling was not necessary.

But thats just it... he doesnt have to retell the origin... why cant he just come up with a new story where superman is an estanblished hero... he wouldnt have to continue from superman 2...

Originally posted by pr1983
... he wouldnt have to continue from superman 2...

But why not? Continuing from Superman II would give Superman a back story in whatever plot they had come up with, they could refer to previous events and have flash-backs (like the Jor-El flashbacks that have been confirmed to be in Superman Returns) This IS a brand-new story, I just don't see your problem with continuing off of Superman II, it's an amazing movie and a great launch pad for the new Superman films.

Everyone knows the origin story.

Doing again would be redundant.

My issues are with the costume. It looks terrible.

Originally posted by Jedi Shmedi
But why not? Continuing from Superman II would give Superman a back story in whatever plot they had come up with, they could refer to previous events and have flash-backs (like the Jor-El flashbacks that have been confirmed to be in Superman Returns) This IS a brand-new story, I just don't see your problem with continuing off of Superman II, it's an amazing movie and a great launch pad for the new Superman films.

but why does he need a backstory? i have no problem with superman 2 as a movie... i just thought singer could do something a little different...

Originally posted by Red Superfly
Everyone knows the origin story.

Doing again would be redundant.

My issues are with the costume. It looks terrible.

definately...

Originally posted by Red Superfly
Everyone knows the origin story.

Doing again would be redundant.

My issues are with the costume. It looks terrible.

i think the costume is fine and it pays homage to the original look of superman. if they had used the old suit i think it would have looked dated and cheesy. besides darkening the colors a little, singer didn't really change the suit.

Originally posted by jedi90
i think the costume is fine and it pays homage to the original look of superman.

Er....right. You obviously don't have a clue what the original look of Superman is do you?

Originally posted by Red Superfly
Er....right. You obviously don't have a clue what the original look of Superman is do you?

Hmmm......1938 Action Comics Superman:
Closed collar
small "S" in the center of the chest
smaller boots
bigger belt
deeper colors

Superman Returns:
closed collar
small "S" in the center of the chest
smaller boots
bigger belt
deeper colors

The only thing Singer "did" to the costume was add the "S" to the belt, so the colors are darker, big deal. Singer just chose to go with the version of the costume from the comics that had the slightly darker colors, people have yet to grasp that.

Originally posted by Red Superfly
Er....right. You obviously don't have a clue what the original look of Superman is do you?

errr..... let me guess, you were born after 1990? go do some research kiddo. i don't know why this generation thinks that anything before them didn't exist. here is a link to a helpful site

http://superman.ws/Costumes/S.php

more images superfly, if your interested. i know the new costume is different from what most actors have worn in the past 20 years on film (spandex, bright red, yellow, blue, and HUGE S that covers the entire torso), but i think the new costume is cool. i think you would have been really pissed if you had seen tim burton's design.

I just want the suit to be like the damn comics... its been pretty standard for years...

Originally posted by pr1983
I just want the suit to be like the damn comics... its been pretty standard for years...

so let me get this straight. what you guys are saying is that something as trivial as to the size of his "S" or how high his collar sets is gonna make or break this movie? sorry, but the only major difference i see is the darkening of the red. even in the comics his crest seems to change size depending on the artist, same thing with his cape. the superman in your sig has a crest only slightly bigger than routh's.

now to get back on topic.

no i don't think singer took the easy way out by following after supes2. superman 1 + 2 had a great story and seemed there was more to tell. hopefully superman returns will take the story into the direction it should had went.