RKMBs Forums .::Robegories::. Media Superman's a Brit!!!

http://www.newsarama.com/film/superman-henry-cavill-110130.html
I've never seen an episode of The Tudors,so I don't really have an idea as to how this guy's acting is.

Me neither. He was in "Stardust," albeit in a minor role, but didn't make an impression on me one way or another.



As noted in the article, they've been floating this guy as Superman for years now.

In fact, he's also auditioned for both Batman and Bond.

No idea if he can act but, based on the pic posted at the source, sans three-day beard he looks the part.

Tom Welling is either going to commit suicide or go postal at the WB offices.

If Welling wanted to play Superman he could have by now. He's an executive producer on Smallville and nothing was stopping him from putting on the tights and the cape and moving that damn show to a story point it should have been at about five years ago.

I'm disappointed by the lack of pointless outrage in this thread. Fuck you both.

That translates into billions of dollars at the box office.

They are rumoring Olivia Wilde as Lois Lane.

Really? Last I heard it the front runners were Jessica Biel, Rachel McAdams and Malin Akerman. Wilde wasn't even mentioned.

But she's insanely hot and, given that Thirteen on House has the right mix of smarts and snark, I think it could work. In fact, it's probably one of the best choices I've heard so far.

Wilde's getting popular in Hollywood. She was in Tron and in the upcoming Cowboys and Aliens. Again, it's just rumor; but one of the best so far.

Interestingly enough, Wilde's parents and most of her relatives are journalists. At least according to wikipedia.

That's not interesting at all...

That's like the opposite of interesting.

it's gnitseretni!

Rumors are that Kevin Costner is being approached for a role. Speculation is for Pa Kent.

Will he have a baseball diamond in his corn field?

He's going to play the Guardian.

This sounds more and more like another damn origin story.

Yes, imagine how horrible it's going to be for them to create the foundation for their interpretation of the character by familiarizing new fans with Superman's origins. Didn't they see how terrible that was for Batman Begins? I don't know as I never watched the movie. I just read a review online.

It sounds more like an origin story because they cast someone to play Clarks mom?

The record will reflect that TDK was a bigger hit that BB, meaning that many more people saw it. This indicates that people were able to enjoy a Batman film without having seen the rebooted origin.

Furthermore, Superman's origin, or at least enough of it to make a good movie, is sufficiently familiar to moviegoers. If there's a good story people can jump in the middle without knowing everything about a character's past and let the back story unfold later (see, eg, Raiders, etc.). In fact, sometimes dredging up the origin actually hurts a series (see, eg, SW prequels and Vader).

As for this movie, maybe they'll do a good job with the origin. Maybe they won't. All I know is that, given the choice, I'd rather see an entertaining movie that concentrates on something other than an origin that I've seen done to death.



Have you seen Diane Lane?



Maybe I'm wrong (that's why I said "it sounds like") but she's awfully hot to be playing Ma to a full grown Clark.

Yeah, it's technically possible but typically Ma and Pa are older people when Clark first puts on the cape.

So either they're going with a bold new MILFy direction where Ma and Pa found the rocket when she was in her late teens/early twenties or they cast young so she can realistically age her with makeup from the beginning to the end of the film.

And if its the latter that points to another origin.

And, hey, again, I'm fully prepared to be wrong on this but given how Snyder handled Silk Spectre I in Watchmen (cast middle aged but still hot Carla Gugino to play her in an age range from her twenties to her sixties) my instinct tells me its the same thing here.

You, sir, are retarded. Could the success of TDK not owe a bit to Batman Begins's success? I remember several people on this board being excited to see the film just after it had been announced thanks to how much we loved the first. TDK success in no way proves that people hadn't seen Begins. I know several people, both comic and non-comic fans, who'd seen BB and went and saw TDK several times in the theater. Some on opening weekend. You're drawing conclusions with no actual facts to back them up.



I'll just use some quotes from a previous discussion about this very topic to further my point.







So, in summation, it's selfish of the people who want to exclude Superman's origins from a rebooted movie franchise just because they already know it. The movies aren't just made for comic book nerds. They're made for the entire money spending public.



Or they're using her in flashbacks.

Indiana Jones. Huge hit. No origin movie.
the Incredibles. Huge hit. No origin movie.
James Bond series. Huge hit, beg. with Dr. No. No origin movie until Casino Royale.

A good movie, even a good fantasy-action movie, doesn't need an origin to suck people in.

And lots of people become "new fans" of superheroes without the origin being the first thing they see or read. You may have not known about Superman until you saw the Donner movie, but a lot of other people got into Superman because of picking a random, non-origin, issue of the comic book. Or by watching a random, non-origin, episode of the George Reeves series. Or watching a random, non-origin, version of Super Friends.

Also, forget the movies for a second and look at the Batman TV series. Campy or not, it was one of--if not the--most successful adaptations of a comic book superhero of all time. Hell, people still quote the "biff pow zap" stuff and imitate Adam West. It was a huge hit upon its premiere. It made an entire generation of kids into Batman fans.

And there was no origin episode. No Thomas and Martha Wayne. No Joe Chill. No Crime Alley. No bat through the window after twenty years of training. Nothing. All you had was Bruce Wayne making a brief mention to the Wayne foundation board that he was funding an anti-crime initiative because his parents had been murdered. Then it was to the batcave, roll credits and kick the Riddler's ass. The producers knew that all you needed was a brief snippet of back story and then instant action.

Furthermore, at the time the series aired, Batman wasn't even that popular. The book was almost canceled. And the origin was only mentioned in the comics once every five or six years (if that).

Therefore, you can't argue that the millions of new fans that show created already knew the origin. Or that they needed the origin to enjoy the show.

If Batman can be successfully adapted once (and, using the terminology of today, "rebooted" from the movie serials) without retelling the origin, I think the same could be said for Superman.

So, really, it's just a matter of personal preference. You'd like to see another origin. I'd prefer something else. Beyond that, we're both speculating on the need (or lack of thereof) for an origin movie and how successful it might be.

you have the advantage of being thousands of years old! franchises need "kicks in the butt" every now and then. it's unfair to think "it's out there already" is a good enough reason not to retell it. beyond the group of those too young to know it, and beyond the group of those outside of the comics circle, there's even the benefit that, shit, they could do it better this time, impressing even us super nerds. i think batman begins is a great testament to that.

while i agree, i personally would prefer a new story, there's certainly no harm in reworking an origin -- especially if there's a new take on it. and all that, of course, is assuming this is an origin story, at all.

i do think it's a little conflicting to have so recently had a superfilm that is now (presumably) unrelated. i thought the same for the hulks, and for the upcoming spidey franchise. i can see how those conflicts could cause a bit of confusion to some of the groups i mentioned, above. but, a story is a story. origin or new, if it's good, that's all that matters.

The court ruled against you the moment you submitted an Adam West video...

That's a huge leap there. BB had a smaller box office gat than TDK but that doesn't indicate viewers. How many watched DVD, HBO, Netfliz ect BB and decided to see TDK in theaters? You can't possibly quantify that.

I would imagine there were many people sickened by the ending of the last Batman franchise who did not see BB in theaters and maybe tried it in a cheaper venue and enjoyed it enough to try the sequel in the theater.

Please post the picture of Diane Lane again. I'm not yet done.

I'm done.

http://www.mania.com/costner-confirmed-for-superman_article_129063.html

It's all over the internet, including AICN:

Meh...

Has the "Pariah Seal of Disapproval" ever been officially updated to reflect the change of ownership to Pro? If not, its probably time to do so.

She looks younger than she is, right? First photo in G-Man's post make her look like a teenager; the other photos of her make her look like she's about 20-25.

Meh. Too Old.

- Wonderboy

Heh. I've just never been impressed with her acting. She's not really that hot or anything. I'd have gone with the chick from TRON LEGACY if anyone...