The Hot Blog

LOL! That made my day!

I thought Mr. Hat had a beard.

..and a, you know, hat.

C'mon, Poland, you can do better than that.

Those pictures of the new Superman in EW; awful.

The best part of the Silver Age Supes article in EW; that Singer got frustrated, had to fly back to LA for 3 weeks, and Routh had no idea if they shot enough to make a movie. While, I am looking forward to this movie, that does not exactly make me do backflips. When the director and the STAR seemingly have no idea what in the heck they are shooting or even if what they are shooting will be put in the film. One would think that the film COULD suffer from such a FREAK OUT! Hopefully, the film, will not suffer from the FREAKING OUT, and be another qualitty DC film.

looks like a shot from a Smashing Pumpkins reunion video from the year 2020.

not exactly awe-inspiring.

I wonder if after this summer is over, Brett Rattner will be the hero while Singer/Dougherty/Harris wind up being the goats...

looks like a shot from a Smashing Pumpkins reunion video from the year 2020.

not exactly awe-inspiring.

I wonder if after this summer is over, Brett Rattner will be the hero while Singer/Dougherty/Harris wind up being the goats...

Considering that Brett Ratner's contribution to the series will just have been to imitate the style of the previous movies and not rock the X-boat, he probably won't get a lot of credit...but it will keep him in strippers for several more years.

Looking at those pictures up on MCN's main page...pretty boring. And I'll never understand why they thought it would be a good idea to make Superman and Lois Lane so incredibly young this time out.

I don't get the Mr. Hat reference. He was a puppet. With a tophat. What's the resemblance here? I dig the fortress look, and Lex's new do. At least he ain't wearin no wig.

"And I'll never understand why they thought it would be a good idea to make Superman and Lois Lane so incredibly young this time out."

Sequels.

Actually, I was imagining it had more to do with what Bryan Singer's interpretation of 'super man' meant.

Okay, here's what I keep wondering......

Can anyone else name a director that so blatently has to have a picture of himself - posing - in every fucking EPK for the film?

First it was the picture of him all curled up like a little baby in the Superman egg ship thing.

Now it's the one of him "framing" the train from the model. (does it look posed to anyone else?)

I am a big fan of Singer's films, but it just feels like a pretentious move from an insecure man. Very Diva for a director.

Also, it's not good when your friends in the velvet mafia, who have been on set, are even worried that Singer is making this one too "gay" (their words, not mine) No Tom DeSanto to reign the leash in on Singer (again, Velvet's take, not mine)

is this the same superman project that kevin smith comments on in an evening with kevin smith?? high freakin larious

SPOILER!

What the hell is Lex Luthor doing in Supes' Fortress of Solitude?

wait, kevin spacey is a gay puppet?

Yeah, Lex could get roughed up for being in the wrong place...maybe to cover it up he'll pretend he got mugged.

SPOILER, sort-of: Lex' plan in this Supes film is his infiltration of Supes' life. He apparently messes with the Fortress and Lois. Why, at two months out, SUPES RETURN does not have a new trailer out. Makes very little sense to me, and feeds into the whole "Oh great, Bryan is going to possibly screw it up" mentality. I am still going with X3 being the better film. Even if Ratner had no control over it. Since the trailers and TV spots represent everything I have ever wanted from an X film, that Bryan apparently could not put in there due to his sexual orientation. Not that I hate X2, but the X-Men have a lot more going on that there MUTATIONS. This film, at this early point, seems to show the other side of the X-Men story.

The Gayer, the better. I hope the dirty dancing scene between a Cod-Pieced Brandon and Close-shaven Spacey makes it into the DVD's deleted scenes.

But who's clamoring for this 'other side of the X-Men story' aside from TheManWho? (And what is this other side, anyway? I ask as someone who read all of about 5 issues in the 1980s).
There'll be a big Superman trailer in front of Poseidon...still, they need to show some more actiony stuff ASAP. To clarify, I'm of the camp that wishes that Singer had stuck with X3 because I think it'll result in two subpar superhero movies, instead of one home-run and one total disaster if, say, Singer had stayed and Michae Bay or McG had done Superman.

The other side of the X-Men story has always been the FIGHT. The fight between Mags and Xavier because of what they believe in. Singer barely hinted at this due to his love of the mutation, and the way he used it to reflect other minorities in the world. While the mutants are a minority in the comics. In the 616 universe, they are the STRONGEST characters in the universe. Which leads to FIGHTING for something more than an IDEA. The Last Stand seems to be about the FIGHT. About what the X-Men HAVE TO DO in countless issues of this comic to make sure that Mags does not get his way. No other shot in a comic book movie gets me more giddy than the shot in the trailers and TV spots of the X-MEN standing in a line awaiting the FIGHT to come. The FIGHT has always been as important as the storylines that revolve around the MUTATION. Singer never ever put this on film due to his own interpretation. At this early point, Ratner, at least seems involved in a film dealing with THE FIGHT the X-Men have to go through to save the world.

Well that all makes sense...bombastic capitalized sense, but I agree that some kind of showdown is appropriate. I just don't think Ratner should get any credit for any of this since he came in so late in the process and probably had very little script input. Plus, you can't really say the previous two films were devoid of this aspect.

I have no idea what the '616 Universe' is, or its relevance.

Tom DeSanto is the Gary Kurtz of those first two X-Men Movies.

I didn't know Willem Dafoe was recreating his role from Shadow of the Vampire in Superman Returns! That's awesome.

I'm surprised more people haven't commented on how gay and all of 14 years old "Superman" looks in the pictures that have been released so far.

Because, as a friend pointed out, Routh does not look any worse than Reeves in his outfit. An outfit, they had to tweak with lighting, to look more BLUE than GREEN. Routh, if anything, looks like SILVER AGE/MOVIE Supes. While Tom Welling represents a more MODERN day incarnation of Supes. Plus, to be all sorts of literal, how do you look gay? Let alone look 'gay' in a SUPERHERO film? Unless two nickels are bumped together to make a dime, then this outfit has just entered in the Pantheon of SUPERHERO movie outfits. It's a pantheon, and it has it's own wing of silly SUPERHERO outfits.

jeff, Ratner in PREMIERE, essentially states a similar sentiment to yours. He showed up late, and took over a runaway train. He may not get all sorts of, dare I type, DAP, from geeks around the globe. However, if LAST STAND some how excedes all of their expectations, then he did his job as conductor as well as he could. The DVD for this film, of course, will bear this all out.

THX, DeSanto is gay as well, so...

To be honest with you, even as a gay man, I don't see the gay. Is it because Spacey was cast? Is it just de rigeur to point this out because Bryan Singer is gay? The Superman outfit is not any more gay than usual. Jimmy Olson is perhaps the least attractive version yet. Hell, Daredevil was gayer than this.

Leer, all I was trying to convey was that I think it says something when a gay man who is very proud to be out (my friend that was on set) comments that he feels that what he saw during production of Superman felt too "Gay"..... I think that presents an interesting dynamic considering the source material.

(and let me clarify, this is all conjecture from my friend who got to spend some time on set and works closely in those circles, I haven't seen a frame of footage. He could be completely full of shit, or have some bug about Singer)

It's not about Singer being "Gay". It's the idea that my friend who is pretty much a queen and who is very pro gay and knows their comics - feels that Superman might be getting too "gayed out", I just thought that was an interesting take on what he got from his time on set. Considering that nothing else in his world is gay enough.

As for DeSanto, Well, we will see if he really is the Gary Kurtz or not, since this is the first film they're not working on together since X2, no?

For the record - on whether or not who is going to bring a better comic book movie - Ratner or Singer, my money is still on Singer.

I've been watching the production diaries and haven't really gotten a sense of that, but I guess we'll see. Did your friend elaborate on what it was that was "too gay"?

No unfortunately he didn't. And I haven't watched anything on this film to get a sense if he's full of it or not. I want to go into this one as spoiler free as possible.
I don't expect to see anything that would be blatent or cross any lines of internal story logic in the Superman world. Honestly, my belief is it won't be anymore than any subtextual allusions that were laid down in the X-Men films, which I felt were pretty nill.

I actually thought there was quite a bit of homoeroticism in the X-Men movies. And I thought it kind of worked given that the mutant gene could be an obvious metaphor for homosexuality. Given this, I'm also a little nervous that Superman might be a bit "too gay." It seems like Singer is getting a little megalomaniacal, which could affect the film in this way. . .

Repeatfather, THANK YOU! Megalomaniacal is the perfect word I was looking for to convey what bugs me about those pretentious EPK photos of Singer.

That's what I have a bug up my ass about, Singer's impending sense of becoming a megalomaniac. Couldn't he have waited to go all Mariah Carey after Superman?

I agree with the metaphor. At least Ian McKellan has admitted that this attracted him to the story. And the scene where the family is horrified by their son...definitely seemed to be about that.

JL - "The Production Diaries" are as real as the Fortress of Solitude.

I'm not saying that means anything regarding the level of queeniness in this movie. But those pieces are produced to create a false reality.

Well, duh.

Also, Singer has never not been megalomaniacal.

True - Hence the Gary Kurtz analogy about DeSanto.

My same source really feels DeSanto is the unsung hero on those X-Men films in keeping them pure to the comics. Who knows. I know he is loyal to Tom.

(The same way Kurtz is legend to have always told George on SW what worked and didn't which is why many say the first two films still feel "different" to this day)

From the sources I've got, I heard DeSanto had a lot less to do with X2. I'd credit Harris and Dougherty with a lot of what went on there as far as faith to the source material.

Just as on Superman, I'd indirectly credit Richard Donner, who seems to be the biggest touchstone for Singer's new version.

We should totally set our Bryan Singer sources up or something.

Have you SEEN the X-Men movies. It wouldn't surprise me if Superman is slightly homo, but yeah, the X-Men films are blatant in that regard. Not that there's anything wrong with that. As others have said, the mutant gene is a big symbol for homosexuality. "Mom, Dad... I'm a mutant and I'm proud of it"

It's easy to read it that way now, but at the time the comics started, it was a metaphor that worked for any "other" group -- race, ethnicity, gender, religion, or even just the out-group, the geeks at school, whatever. Consider the mix of mutants you can identify by sight alone (race, ethnicity, gender) vs. those you can't (religion, sexual orientation).

It's easy to see the whole thing as a gay metaphor now because the "otherness" surrounding most of those other things mentioned above has either gone away or been strongly diminished... except for the gays and the geeks. But it wasn't at the time, and I think the enduring popularity of the comic over the years has been the way so many kids have felt "othered" in some way or another growing up.

1. Why Superman "feels gay" - He's soft, bordering on teen-boy soft. He's prettier than Welling, but not handsome like Reeves. His build is that of a model who's spent a lot time in the gym to get buff.

Now compare him to Bale as Batman. Bale's handsome, but he's always looked older than he is. Bale was thick, up to 220, and looked like he could take a beating. Bale, like Jackman, come from the Gibson/Russell mold. Routh is akin to Leo as Spidey.

2. As for Desanto - the war over X2 was between him and Singer.If you liked X2, thank Tom. Singer brought his boys in to write a competing draft that was very, very AIDS metaphorical based on God Love, Man Kills. DeSanto refused to be involved, which made Berry walk away. Singer had to relent, and got his payback by signing for Supes after X3 was in development. Never heard he was gay, though.

The ending of the X franchise is becauase Ari is moving the rights to his Paramount deal. FOX had an option on Wolverine and Magneto because they were originally sold as separate properties. The Wolverine deal was also because Jackman was going to jump to Sony for Bond since Van Helsing went up in smoke.

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

URL:
Remember me? YesNo

Comments: