Some on location shots of Cavill as Superman

[kingdom warrior]

There was such a big divide created when 1978's S: TMP was released...
and, yet again, when 1989's BATMAN was released, that it almost does
cram what came before it into the category of "exaggerated T.V. episodes"...
or merely "serials"... which is like movies from another planet at this point in 2011.

Really?? in Baseball the neat thing about the sport is that you can compare a modern player with one from the past you can play compare the numbers and have what if's

George Reeves was the Iconic Image of Superman from the 50's until Chris Reeves Iconic version took over the mantle in the late 70's STMP is 30 years ago. it stayed that way because no one could do a Superman for years....

The Superman character Batman, Spiderman will be like the James Bond movie actors they will always be compared to the previous actor who held the mantle.......

For many older adults when you say Superman they'll say George, younger adults will say Chris. I asked my son recently did STMP look old and he said yes, it does not look modern anymore......has a dated look to it.

Routh got shafted had that jackass Singer not been fixated with trying to do a Chris Reeve movie we would have had a pretty good Superman for this generation....

[kingdom warrior]

Oh, and I still feel those ancient Superman movies/TV shows are irrelevant.

But that's coming from a Batman fan........

[thunderbolt]

The Superman or Batman franchises would not have been what they are today without the likes of George Reeves or Adam West. Heck, DC might not even still be around without them bringing the characters to bigger audiences.

[thunderbolt]

First...bite me. 2nd the Hulk doesn't really wear a costume(purple pants...really?), wouldn't call Ironman's Armored suit a costume. And I'm not saying some Movie Superhero costumes weren't close, but they always have change them in some way. Spidey's is one the best, all though I don't why the webbing had to be sliver instead of black... I can let things like that go. But my point is they always have to change something, wether it be the material, or the shade of red on Brandon Routh's Superman Costume. So no...I don't think movies try and stay true to the Comics....I sincerely doubt that the new Superman costume has any connection to Jim Lee's new design.

As far as Alyn & George Reeves appearing in movie theaters, didn't know that...but were they full length movies, or serial shorts like a TV show? Because back then people also went to theater to watch news reels and they showed cartoons as well. But that stuff is so far back it doesn't even count in my book. I'm talking about how Superheroes are portrayed today.

Seriously you don't thing the Sam Raimi Spidey was on the money? I should have thrown Ghost Rider and the last couple punishers on that pile, too. BOth were right on the money appearance wise. IF the old stuff doesn't count to you, its your loss really missing out on a lot.

[huedell]

The Superman or Batman franchises would not have been what they are today without the likes of George Reeves or Adam West. Heck, DC might not even still be around without them bringing the characters to bigger audiences.

So noted... but that has zero to do with what I was getting at.

Essentially it was production values... it was the S:TMP slogan
"You'll believe a man can fly" to the max.

Reeves and West were WAY transparent comparitively to S:TMP
...and once BATMAN '89 came out THAT took S:TMP from 11 years earlier
and... sans digital FX brought the superhero movie genre to essentially
the same place we are today 22 years later.

That's how I'd call it... and THAT'S why I used the HUGE GULF
between 1978's Supes film combined w/89's Bats film and
what came before it (essentially the olden days
TV production level values) as a major discussion point in my stance.

Really?? in Baseball the neat thing about the sport is that you can compare a modern player with one from the past you can play compare the numbers and have what if's

George Reeves was the Iconic Image of Superman from the 50's until Chris Reeves Iconic version took over the mantle in the late 70's STMP is 30 years ago. it stayed that way because no one could do a Superman for years....

The Superman character Batman, Spiderman will be like the James Bond movie actors they will always be compared to the previous actor who held the mantle.......

For many older adults when you say Superman they'll say George, younger adults will say Chris. I asked my son recently did STMP look old and he said yes, it does not look modern anymore......has a dated look to it.

Routh got shafted had that jackass Singer not been fixated with trying to do a Chris Reeve movie we would have had a pretty good Superman for this generation....

All sincerely interesting points to read... but, again, zero to do with my point (see above).

[The Bat]

So noted... but that has zero to do with what I was getting at.

Essentially it was production values... it was the S:TMP slogan
"You'll believe a man can fly" to the max.

Reeves and West were WAY transparent comparitively to S:TMP
...and once BATMAN '89 came out THAT took S:TMP from 11 years earlier
and... sans digital FX brought the superhero movie genre to essentially
the same place we are today 22 years later.

That's how I'd call it... and THAT'S why I used the HUGE GULF
between 1978's Supes film combined w/89's Bats film and
what came before it (essentially the olden days
TV production level values) as a major discussion point in my stance.



All sincerely interesting points to read... but, again, zero to do with my point (see above).

Again, I agree with Hue and see his's point(which is mine also).

[The Bat]

Seriously you don't thing the Sam Raimi Spidey was on the money?

I said I liked the Rami Spider-suit, but would like to have had black webbing instead of silver(but that's a minor complaint). Yes...I think Sam was on the money. Probably the closest to the Comic yet(plus Ironman).

[The Bat]

IF the old stuff doesn't count to you, its your loss really missing out on a lot.

Of course I like George Reeves...I grew up on that stuff. But my point(like Hue's)was it can't be compared to 2011 movie making and more importantly, I was comparing today's Comic book Movie costumes to the past. If you put Cavill in George reeves's suit in the new movie...how well do you think it would go over?

[MIB41]

At the end of the day it's public perception, not the comic community, that films ultimately answer to. Take Batman for instance. By the time Batman '89 was going into production the studio was having to do everything to sell the idea that they were not making an Adam West film. Now you didn't have to tell the comic community the evolution of Batman since the late 60's. But the general public didn't know about the contributions of Neal Adams, Jim Aparo, and certainly not the amazing work of Frank Miller. The last time Batman was on television, the public saw Adam West. So studios had to do EVERYTHING in their ability to show the public this was not another campy portrayal in tights. Hence the reason why Batman has never looked...well... like Batman in the comics. And in many ways that paranoia remains just as strong today thanks to Batman & Robin. History has shown that Batman works best in film when he is dark and brooding... and in molded rubber. Sandy made a fantastic Batman in his film. But studios will never make that kind of movie simply because of the close association between West and Batman in "tights". Fair or not, that is how the public see's him. So Batman will likely always remain a product in rubber.

Superman however plays on an alternate universe. Most people identify Superman, in a positive way, with Christopher Reeves, animated cartoons, and the popular television shows from the past. Smallville was about the evolution of Clark Kent to Superman. The name "Superman" was not uttered until the very end of the series... And guess how he came out? Yep. The same way. So the iconic and SUCCESSFUL image of Superman remains the bright red, yellow, and blue outfit. And remember this... The general public weighs perceptions and expectations based on the last film. What was Superman's last film? Superman Returns. It failed. Why? First, Brian Singer conceptualized his look. He gave him a dirty dark red cape; an X-Men inspired logo on his chest; and a convoluted storyline that unsuccessfully tried to "update" the character while still wanting to connect with an iconic series long since gone. In short, it was a mess. The public did not get the Superman they were accustom to seeing in appearance, personality, or scope of story.

Now we have Christopher Nolan coming on board to try and "modernize" the idea of Superman. Well "modernizing" Superman WAS the problem with Singer's incarnation. And while Nolan might have been good for taking the best ideas of Batman on film and keeping the concept serious. Those were really just old lessons reapplied where previous entries had forsaken. So, quite simply, Nolan gave the public what it wanted - A dark and brooding hero. THAT however is not Superman. So this idea that Nolan has come to the "rescue" to give Superman a new dew and attitude, tells me the Studio didn't understand why the last one didn't work. Their only drifting farther away from what the public would like to see. So how this correlates with comics or not, is really of no relevance here. It's how the public sees Superman. And my fear remains strong that Warner Bros. is going to offer another Superman no one recognizes. Plain and simple.

[kingdom warrior]

If you put Cavill in George reeves's suit in the new movie...how well do you think it would go over?

Actually it would go over well if you were not doing the fabric as wool....it's pretty itchy and gets heavy when sweating in it or gets wet.........

Cavill is built like a Brick he can wear any suit and rock it......

[kingdom warrior]

At the end of the day it's public perception, not the comic community, that films ultimately answer to. Take Batman for instance. By the time Batman '89 was going into production the studio was having to do everything to sell the idea that they were not making an Adam West film. Now you didn't have to tell the comic community the evolution of Batman since the late 60's. But the general public didn't know about the contributions of Neal Adams, Jim Aparo, and certainly not the amazing work of Frank Miller. The last time Batman was on television, the public saw Adam West. So studios had to do EVERYTHING in their ability to show the public this was not another campy portrayal in tights. Hence the reason why Batman has never looked...well... like Batman in the comics. And in many ways that paranoia remains just as strong today thanks to Batman & Robin. History has shown that Batman works best in film when he is dark and brooding... and in molded rubber. Sandy made a fantastic Batman in his film. But studios will never make that kind of movie simply because of the close association between West and Batman in "tights". Fair or not, that is how the public see's him. So Batman will likely always remain a product in rubber.

Superman however plays on an alternate universe. Most people identify Superman, in a positive way, with Christopher Reeves, animated cartoons, and the popular television shows from the past. Smallville was about the evolution of Clark Kent to Superman. The name "Superman" was not uttered until the very end of the series... And guess how he came out? Yep. The same way. So the iconic and SUCCESSFUL image of Superman remains the bright red, yellow, and blue outfit. And remember this... The general public weighs perceptions and expectations based on the last film. What was Superman's last film? Superman Returns. It failed. Why? First, Brian Singer conceptualized his look. He gave him a dirty dark red cape; an X-Men inspired logo on his chest; and a convoluted storyline that unsuccessfully tried to "update" the character while still wanting to connect with an iconic series long since gone. In short, it was a mess. The public did not get the Superman they were accustom to seeing in appearance, personality, or scope of story.

Now we have Christopher Nolan coming on board to try and "modernize" the idea of Superman. Well "modernizing" Superman WAS the problem with Singer's incarnation. And while Nolan might have been good for taking the best ideas of Batman on film and keeping the concept serious. Those were really just old lessons reapplied where previous entries had forsaken. So, quite simply, Nolan gave the public what it wanted - A dark and brooding hero. THAT however is not Superman. So this idea that Nolan has come to the "rescue" to give Superman a new dew and attitude, tells me the Studio didn't understand why the last one didn't work. Their only drifting farther away from what the public would like to see. So how this correlates with comics or not, is really of no relevance here. It's how the public sees Superman. And my fear remains strong that Warner Bros. is going to offer another Superman no one recognizes. Plain and simple.

I like what you wrote haven't digested it all.......you know Had Singer just stayed away from trying to tie it in with the Reeve Superman he would have done alright shame someone couldn't stop him or the idiot producers.......

I said this before when you do superman it has to be a stand alone series with no tie ins to previous incarnations outside of a cameo here and there...

Each successful Superman has been unique to it's self......this whole concept that Singer was trying to do was going to Fail....I can get past the suits it's not the suit that makes him Super. It's the character that sells me

Plus honestly i want to see something different with Superman on screen...I have a wait and see attitude about it......

[Bruce Banner]

I accepted Singer's movie as a sort of closing chapter to the Donner Superman universe. Superman III and IV were massive let downs after I and II, so Superman Returns kind of gave us closure to that particular interpretation of the character.

I agree with those who have posted their concerns that if the new movie gives us a Superman that's too far removed from the essence of our beloved comic book icon, it will alienate existing fans and most probably fail to captivate new ones.

As for Batman, I guess I'm in the minority in that I've never been overly impressed with any of the movie versions of Batman, either Burton's or Nolan's.
They, to me, weren't the Batman I truly wanted to see on the screen.
Don't get me wrong, Nolan's Batman movies have had some great moments, and there's a lot to praise in them, but I still believe the definitive Batman movie has yet to be made.

As a major Batman fan, Burton's Batman was one of the biggest cinematic disappointments ever. I still can barely bring myself to watch that movie, apart from to admire the impressive production design.

Raimi's first two Spider-Man movies were good, and managed to reflect a large part of the essence of the character, even though they had some fundamental flaws.
But again, the definitive Spidey movie is still out there waiting to be made. And I don't think it's going to be the one out next year.

[Hector]

I like what you wrote haven't digested it all.......you know Had Singer just stayed away from trying to tie it in with the Reeve Superman he would have done alright shame someone couldn't stop him or the idiot producers.......

I said this before when you do superman it has to be a stand alone series with no tie ins to previous incarnations outside of a cameo here and there...

Each successful Superman has been unique to it's self......this whole concept that Singer was trying to do was going to Fail....I can get past the suits it's not the suit that makes him Super. It's the character that sells me

Plus honestly i want to see something different with Superman on screen...I have a wait and see attitude about it......

You hit the nail on the head.

As much as I love...and will always love the original Supes...I'm all for a new look Superman on the silver screen.

What's the point of making another same old Superman movie?

If you are going forward, and in another direction...then by all means...let's go all out...why the heck not. Time for something fresh for the new Supes...

...as long as he kicks major arse...

[MIB41]

I think what has hurt Superman theatrically has been the same tired story over and over again. If Batman only fought the Joker, no one would care about those films either. Rebooting Superman means you've got to let Lex Luthor go for a spell. Does Superman have no one else to fight? I think story and new villains are the real key here.

[Mikey]

Most Supes badguys are pretty boring and/or lousy.

I guess it's the nature of the game when you have an immovable object as the hero.