DC Universe
- AV Founder
- Posts: 25726
- Joined: October 22nd, 2004
- Location: London, UK
Yeah, and that's the problem.
Why is Richard Pryor in a Superman movie? Because he was, at the time, a big, big star and could get anything he wanted made.
When WB (who have since taken distribution ownership of the film back) failed to stump up the cash for Supes III, the Salkinds financed it elsewhere (a lot of the dough came from England, from the same group that subsequently financed Supergirl and Santa Clause, hence why WB does not own those movies) base on having Pryor on board.
Apparently he was on some talk show and said he "loved the Superman movies", so the next thing is they called him up and asked if he was interested, which helped them in turn to finance the movie.
BTW, by contrast, Lois Lane's small role in Supes III is down to Margot Kidder being a Donner supporter through the Supes II trouble, so the Salkings (and Lester) punished her by writing her outta the script!
While Supes IV is a disaster which doesn't really tie in with the other films stylisitically or thematically, there are still some nice touches (the early return to the farm scenes for instance), and the original 130 minute rough cut is WAAAAAAAAAAAY better than anything that ended up on screen.
Trouble was that the film had its budget cut in post-prod and half the film was cut out! We should have gotten a rather moving scene with Supes' Mom visiting him in the barn again, and a deeper story that really played on whether Superman should just "take over and make things right" all the time.
One of the most potential-ready franchises, and the most botched after part one, let's hope Singer can get things back on track.
Why is Richard Pryor in a Superman movie? Because he was, at the time, a big, big star and could get anything he wanted made.
When WB (who have since taken distribution ownership of the film back) failed to stump up the cash for Supes III, the Salkinds financed it elsewhere (a lot of the dough came from England, from the same group that subsequently financed Supergirl and Santa Clause, hence why WB does not own those movies) base on having Pryor on board.
Apparently he was on some talk show and said he "loved the Superman movies", so the next thing is they called him up and asked if he was interested, which helped them in turn to finance the movie.
BTW, by contrast, Lois Lane's small role in Supes III is down to Margot Kidder being a Donner supporter through the Supes II trouble, so the Salkings (and Lester) punished her by writing her outta the script!
While Supes IV is a disaster which doesn't really tie in with the other films stylisitically or thematically, there are still some nice touches (the early return to the farm scenes for instance), and the original 130 minute rough cut is WAAAAAAAAAAAY better than anything that ended up on screen.
Trouble was that the film had its budget cut in post-prod and half the film was cut out! We should have gotten a rather moving scene with Supes' Mom visiting him in the barn again, and a deeper story that really played on whether Superman should just "take over and make things right" all the time.
One of the most potential-ready franchises, and the most botched after part one, let's hope Singer can get things back on track.
- AV Forum Member
- Posts: 9095
- Joined: October 25th, 2004
- Location: Binghamton, NY
Wasn't Tim Burton supposed to direct Supes at one point? What happened?
I think this film has been in development for like what, seven years or something? I think at one point they were going to have it about the death of Supes and then it was going to be called "Superman Returns"?
Well, all I can say is I'm just really, REALLY glad they Nicolas Cage isn't going to do this one. What were the thinking??
Also, what is the official title anyway?
Wow, was that a long time ago, I think in the early 80's? His humor is kind of dated now....
I think this film has been in development for like what, seven years or something? I think at one point they were going to have it about the death of Supes and then it was going to be called "Superman Returns"?
Well, all I can say is I'm just really, REALLY glad they Nicolas Cage isn't going to do this one. What were the thinking??
Also, what is the official title anyway?
Why is Richard Pryor in a Superman movie? Because he was, at the time, a big, big star and could get anything he wanted made.
Wow, was that a long time ago, I think in the early 80's? His humor is kind of dated now....
You can’t just have your characters announce how they feel! That makes me feel angry!
- AV Founder
- Posts: 25726
- Joined: October 22nd, 2004
- Location: London, UK
- AV Forum Member
- Posts: 22
- Joined: July 24th, 2005
- Contact:
I never really thought about it until just now, but you're right. The first two chapters of Superman were the only ones that really had any sort of storyline connection going on. It's like they made the last two chapters simply for the sake of making more Superman films. The fourth one was ok because it had a supervillian with actual super powers that could stand up to Superman's. But what the %#@! was up with Superman III? I'd have to say that was by far the worst installment of the four. They even put a Lex Luthor wanna-be villian as the main enemy. Guess Superman wasn't the only one who was in a slump back then.Ben wrote: You really should see Superman and Superman II, Vi. Not only are they great films (well, Superman and half of Supes II are), but the new film is going to springboard off the back of them in terms of picking up the story.
Don't bother with Supes III or IV. The new movie isn't.
What concerns me now more than anything (since they obviously screwed it up in Batman and Robin) is the potential of bringing in new actors that will even come close to measuring up to the old ones. Christopher Reeve is a tough act to follow. We'll see what happens with this new guy. After seeing Batman Begins, I have come to the conclusion that almost anything can be redeemed.
- AV Founder
- Posts: 25726
- Joined: October 22nd, 2004
- Location: London, UK
The good/bad Superman fight from III was the best bit, because they played it darker and it was an interesting theme.
The only bits of IV that I really enjoyed were the return to Smallville, for all the emotional resonance that caused, and Hackman, of course, though bizarrely with a bald spot, as if they couldn't be bothered to make him bald or fit him with a wig! Some of the fight stuff was well conceived, but poorly executed.
Still...better than SuperGirl...
The only bits of IV that I really enjoyed were the return to Smallville, for all the emotional resonance that caused, and Hackman, of course, though bizarrely with a bald spot, as if they couldn't be bothered to make him bald or fit him with a wig! Some of the fight stuff was well conceived, but poorly executed.
Still...better than SuperGirl...
- AV Forum Member
- Posts: 9095
- Joined: October 25th, 2004
- Location: Binghamton, NY
- AV Forum Member
- Posts: 9095
- Joined: October 25th, 2004
- Location: Binghamton, NY
Yeah...I'm only just now getting REALLY interested in this film.
James Marsden was an awesome Cyclops. I never liked Cyclops much at all in the comics, (or the cartoon.) He was dull as dishwater and you never even knew what he was thinking because you couldn't see his eyes. But Marsden added extra dimension to the character, made him kind of a super-good-guy who's kind of on edge all the time because he's the leader of the group. Or something like that. And to do that with half his face covered is a real achievement.
I hope Kate Bosworth is a better Lois than Teri Hatcher!
James Marsden was an awesome Cyclops. I never liked Cyclops much at all in the comics, (or the cartoon.) He was dull as dishwater and you never even knew what he was thinking because you couldn't see his eyes. But Marsden added extra dimension to the character, made him kind of a super-good-guy who's kind of on edge all the time because he's the leader of the group. Or something like that. And to do that with half his face covered is a real achievement.
I hope Kate Bosworth is a better Lois than Teri Hatcher!
You can’t just have your characters announce how they feel! That makes me feel angry!