Superman (1 Viewer)

Espectro

The Grimreaper
Jul 12, 2002
12,546
#44
++ [ originally posted by Don Bes ] ++
not enough special effect for his choice or in other words

they dont slow down the camera when superman dodges a bullet.
Dude, in that time the special effectis were not like now, in fact, Superman movies are great in special effects if you have in account that the movie was made in the 70's (or early 80's)... I mean look how the made Superman flky in those movies, its just great!!!! not even in the new series they made the effect so real!!! thats what I love about the old Superman movies... its just classy the way the made him fly!!!:cool:
 
Jan 7, 2004
29,704
#45
++ [ originally posted by Espectro ] ++


Dude, in that time the special effectis were not like now, in fact, Superman movies are great in special effects if you have in account that the movie was made in the 70's (or early 80's)... I mean look how the made Superman flky in those movies, its just great!!!! not even in the new series they made the effect so real!!! thats what I love about the old Superman movies... its just classy the way the made him fly!!!:cool:

dode, you didnt get my drift.

dont worry, not everyone understand me.
 

mikhail

Senior Member
Jan 24, 2003
9,576
#46
++ [ originally posted by MCPIERO ] ++
This is great news. Baggio are you sure Singer wont direct X-Men 3? This is great if its true. He f'd up X-Men totally, made 2 average flicks and dint even put mon ami Gambit whos a fan favourite.
++ [ originally posted by gray ] ++
Yeah, what was with that anyway :fero:
I saw an interview with him where he explained that he couldn't fit him into the first film. He already had tonnes of charactors to introduce, and any more of them would have strangled the plot. He then decided to leave him out of the second film because he already had a mysterious loner in Wolverine, and he prefered not to bloat the cast.

I can see where he's coming from. Really, what would Gambit add to the film? He'd just be there for sentimental reasons, taking up running time that would otherwise go into plot.

I think he's done a fine job with the X-men adaption. I'm not a comics fan, so I'm not hamstrung by comparisons with them (though I watched a cartoon version as a kid). I think he made a good intro movie, and followed it up with a superior sequel.
 
OP
baggio

baggio

Senior Member
Jun 3, 2003
19,250
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread Starter #47
    Espectro i completely agree with your views above. Back in the day, the superman movies definitely seemed ahead of their time. Today, in 2004, we ought to expect more, which is what we will witness in Superman 5. Richard donner, who directed the first part has replaced the curreent production team which is good. And christopher reeve is also being offered a production role. Now, if only they pick their new superman already.

    PS: Just saw spiderman 2. Jeez, spidey had so much problem stopping the train. Supes, made it look so easy. :D
     

    MCPIERO

    Senior Member
    Jul 23, 2002
    931
    #48
    Singer did an okay job with the two films but it couldve have been a lot better. Both films are all about Wolverine. At the end of part 2 Jean turns into Phenoix so I guess thats the main focus of the 3rd one. mikhail X-Men has a huge fan base. I mean playing Magneto as an 80yr old grandad. Shit is weak:D Gambit is similar to Wolvie but hes much more of an outsider and has a love angle with rogue. He has to be in the third film but its still not offical to my knowledge.

    I agree with espectro . The effects were very good for its time. Red laser beams coming out of his eyes to fix the oil leak. Getting lil flashbacks:D I ve fogetten most of the superman series. Gonna cop it on DVD no doubt:cool:

    Baggio what about the guy who plays superman in the series not dean cain the new one.
     
    OP
    baggio

    baggio

    Senior Member
    Jun 3, 2003
    19,250
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread Starter #49
    whose the new one? dean cain ben replaced in his show? or are u talkg abt the smallville guy. dont htink ne of those fit the bill neway.
     

    gray

    Senior Member
    Moderator
    Apr 22, 2003
    30,260
    #54
    Much too young. At least Spiderman was supposed to be a geeky student; Clark Kent is meant to be a newspaper reporter
     
    OP
    baggio

    baggio

    Senior Member
    Jun 3, 2003
    19,250
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread Starter #55
    guys latest news:
    JIM CAVEIZEL WANTS TO BE SUPERMAN! NOW THAT WOULD BE AWESOME imo.
    Although he's 36 now and that could hamper his chances if WB are planning on making more than just the one movie.

    but he fits the profile well according to me.
    Jesus Christ Superman :D
     
    OP
    baggio

    baggio

    Senior Member
    Jun 3, 2003
    19,250
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread Starter #56
    Ladies and gentlemen, that is your new Superman! (Nothing official yet, but Singer has offered Welling a 2 movie deal and Welling recently announced hes been signed to a movie but sworn to secrecy so cant tell.)
     
    OP
    baggio

    baggio

    Senior Member
    Jun 3, 2003
    19,250
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread Starter #59
    Ok even more recent news, is that it may not be welling after all, theyve asked this other guy to audtion, i forgot his name, something borough
     

    Espectro

    The Grimreaper
    Jul 12, 2002
    12,546
    #60
    Yesterday I went to see King Arthur Movie and the actor that play Arthur could be a very good Superman, he even wear a red cape and look like Superman when he did... dn't remember his name...
     

    Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)