logo Sign In

greencapt

User Group
Members
Join date
12-Mar-2005
Last activity
8-Jul-2015
Posts
1,941

Post History

Post
#228751
Topic
SUPERMAN RETURNS REVIEW
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/228751/action/topic#228751
Time
Originally posted by: Yoda Is Your FatherWhy does evryone have such a problem with Superman being upset about Lois having a kid and living with Cyclops? It's totally understandable and, as Chaltab mentionmed, when it comes to the crunch he puts his personal issues aside and saves the world.


I was actually thinking about just that today and this is what I came up with- to my mind Superman's whole pursuit of Lois in this film is astoundingly emotionally selfish. Its his OWN fault that Lois or the world for that matter (though stated but not shown in the film) has moved on- he's the one who took off without a word to anyone (with the possible exception of his mother). If the SR characterization of him was half a man or half the hero that he's supposed to be he wouldn't be shocked in the least after HE RAN AWAY for five years, no matter what his reason for doing so. If he truly needed to go to Krypton he would have/should have just told the world- and especially Lois if he really loves her- 'hey I have to do this thing... please wait for me'. But not once in the film do I remember seeing an inkling of understanding from him that this is his fault. Instead he follows Lois repeatedly trying to re-insert himself into her life... a life that has moved on. Great themes for a Lifetime network movie-of-the-week but not heroic, let alone *super* heroic.
Post
#228503
Topic
SUPERMAN RETURNS REVIEW
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/228503/action/topic#228503
Time
Really I feel the sexual orientation of a director, writer, musician, actor, etc, etc, etc doesn't mean anything at all about the quality of their work. All you can really ask yourself is- do you like what they created? Is it good, bad?

Now what I *don't* like is when a creator foists their opinion or some particular viewpoint on an audience in an unappropriate setting or in an un-announced way. By this I mean if filmmaker 'X' wants to make a statement about capital punishment they should feel free to make a film about it- and let it be known that 'this is my statement about capital punishment'. Whereas when you go to see a Batman film you expect to see a Batman film... not a film which essentially stands as a homo-erotic fetishist's showcase of rubber nipples and oiled musclemen. At this point the audience disconnects and even if they can't put their finger on it they know something is wrong.

Thus the problem I see with 'Superman Returns'- audiences expected to see Superman but instead of a heroic, honorable and (gasp) patriotic character they saw a neurotic, brooding, stalking, whining, emo character who was painted as being the second coming of Jesus. And looking at the box office results the general public had that same disconnect. Its a technically well crafted film and is not 'Batman & Robin' horrible but I'd imagine people walking out of theaters going... 'hmm... uh, ok. That wasn't any fun. What opens next week?' Bryan Singer infused his own sense of alienation (from his own adoption, orientation, etc) into the film. And that's fine- but not Superman. I do understand how he could come up this train of thought though- 'Superman was given up by his parents, so was I. Superman was adopted, so was I. I don't feel I fit in at times, so Superman must not. Lois Lane loved Superman and so do.... (er, nevermind)' So he made his idea of Superman using only 'Superman the Movie' as outside context. Like I said before- he should have made up his own super hero and made a film about it... and I bet it could have been huge and original. I sort of look at 'Alien 3' the same way- very good sci-fi film... just not a very good 'Alien' franchise film.

But very little of any of this has to do with Singer's (or anyone's) sexual orientation.
Post
#227961
Topic
Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles - Trailer
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/227961/action/topic#227961
Time
Originally posted by: Bossk
Greencapt, that shit's cool. I never realized it before, but now that I know, it all makes perfect sense.


LOL- I was a Miller 'Daredevil' junkie back in the day (who wasn't?) and TMNT came shortly thereafter. What's REALLY funny- and I'll have to do a video capture someday of it- is a videotape I have of an interview Eastman and Laird at a comic convention from around that time. TMNT had become a popular small press comic but nobody outside of the direct sales comic world had heard of them. They're quoted as saying somrthing along the lines of "Well, we were approached by an animation company about doing a cartoon... but we doubt that THAT will ever go anywhere." HAHAHA... so sayeth the soon to be millionaires! Kevin Eastman who would soon buy and become publisher of 'Heavy Metal' magazine and marry model/actress/amazon Julie Strain.

Oh and notice that the Turtles once were drawn with tails... but they were deemed too phallic to include in a kiddie show so they were removed!
Post
#227924
Topic
Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles - Trailer
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/227924/action/topic#227924
Time
Originally posted by: Mike O

How do theys share their origin with Daredevil? And where does one procure trade paperbacks of Eastman and Lairds original works? I would very, very much like to read them.


I'm not sure if the collections are still in print. Sorry.

Part of the fun of the whole TMNT series was that it was entirely based on being a parody of Daredevil, most specifically the great original Frank Miller run. Matt Murdoch (per the older origin- I don't know if its changed) was blinded as a child by an accident in which a tube of toxic thing-a-ma-bob stuff fell off a vehicle and struck him in the eyes. In TMNT the canister rolled into a storm drain and fell to the sewers and broke. The substance was then what mutated a rat and four discarded pet turtles into the characters we know. The first issue of TMNT shows the kid getting hit in the eyes.

Daredevil and Elektra were trained by Master Shaft. The rat in TMNT of course becomes Master Splinter... get it? The ninja bad-guys in Daredevil are 'The Hand'... in TMNT- 'The Foot'.

You can read the entire first issue of the original series here:

http://www.ninjaturtles.com/comics/mirage/one/pg01.htm
Post
#227900
Topic
Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles - Trailer
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/227900/action/topic#227900
Time
As a fan of the original black and white comic, when they *were* pupil-less in the masks and in fact all the masks were red, when the action was geared at older audiences and there was no 'cowabunga' etc....

I thought this trailer and style looked KICK-ASS! I really got a charge out of it- reminded me of why I liked the series in the first place.

Oh, and the Foot were actual human ninjas as well... not robots. I wonder if they'll go that route.

As a side note, do any Turtles fans know that the Turtles share their origin with Matt Murdoch... aka Daredevil?
Post
#227899
Topic
Superman Returns Discussion - SPOILERS
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/227899/action/topic#227899
Time
Originally posted by: THX
...along with why he went to Krypton (or the empty space where it once was).


Again we have to rely on Singer's backstory here, and/or stuff that was shot but didn't make it.

Per Singer, Lex (while still in prison I guess) managed to get some astronomers to claim or fake that they had found larger remains of the planet Krypton. Again, per Singer's own backstory, upon hearing the news Superman up and left Earth to find it... without telling anyone. And was gone five years because of it. This in a film that is supposedly a quasi-sequel to Superman I and II, the latter of which Superman at the end of the film tells the U.S. President that "Good afternoon, Mr. President. Sorry I've been away so long. I won't let you down again. "

Well except for the fact that I'll bugger off at the drop of a hat to find remains of a planet that my dead father told me, in no uncertain terms, had been blown to smithereens years ago. Nice.

Anyhow, you bring up one of my gripes with this 'quasi-sequel' or as Singer calls it 'vague history' approach- the audience who (gasp) might not be intimately familiar with STM and SII (after 20-30 years) are left at too many points going 'Hunh? WTF? When? How? Why?'.

I think the film's boxoffice results show this. People saw it once, liked it somewhat but not enough to recommend it to their firneds, etc.
Post
#227889
Topic
Superman Returns Discussion - SPOILERS
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/227889/action/topic#227889
Time
Originally posted by: HotRod
Ok the I have a few questions.

Fist off let me say I loved this film, so I'm not here to slag it off.

Yes, that's what *I'm* here for!

How does Supes travel to Krypton? Does he fly? How long does it take to get there? Does he hold his breath?

Spaceship, ostensibly the same one that he came in that basically looked to have been destroyed in 'Superman: The Movie'. Singer never really explains it in the film nor really much in the 'prequel' comics. There IS an extended 'return to Krypton' sequence that didn't make the final cut of the film but will be on the DVD either as extras or a director's cut.
It takes supposedly 2 1/2 years there and 2 1/2 years back.

Once there how does he survive? I mean, when he at Krypton, he's just a normal bloke right?


Yep. I dunno. The sun is gone (remember the opening bit where it novas?) so by the time he's there he should have been good and powerless. *Supposedly* this is why he's shown collapsing in Ma Kent's arms after he crashes and returns.

And where does he get that spaceship from? Did he just make it?


See above. The *important* question is... why the heck can't Kryptonian technology have invented- landing gear?!?!? I mean yeah our space program used to have re-entry capsules that crashed into the ocean but at least *we* invented the space shuttle. What a crappy ship when you have to crash-land every time.

Other than that, I think everything is quite clear


Well its something...
Post
#227576
Topic
SUPERMAN RETURNS REVIEW
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/227576/action/topic#227576
Time
Originally posted by: TheSessler
They didn't change his look, I thought it was just a part of the symbiote storyline?


Eventually it was, but at the time it was a marketing ploy to increase sales of Spidey. At first it was *only* a costume, albeit a strange one that was made from alien technology... but the writers gave themselves an 'out' by making it slightly different from the other costumes that the alien tech made (read 'Secret Wars'). Fan backlash was strong, mainly against the costume, so Marvel used the 'out' to make the suit try to take over Spider-man (and eventually become Venom). But enough fans enjoyed the costume that Marvel couldn't totally commit one way or another so for a time (circa 'Web of Spider-man #1) that Sipdey actually made a regular cloth costume that looked exactly like the black alien costume.

Confused?

You won't be after this week's episode of... Soap.

Oh wait... wrong series.
Post
#227466
Topic
SUPERMAN RETURNS REVIEW
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/227466/action/topic#227466
Time
Originally posted by: ADigitalMan
Almost completely off topic, perhaps even better suited for the Politics forum, I just had to link to this story that would make Gus Gorman, not to mention Michael Bolton (not the singer) and Samir Nagheenanajar salivate with anticipation. If you get the reference, you get an extra ten points.


Mmmmmm... yeeeah. ADM... I'm going to need you to come in to work this weekend.



And I wouldn't exactly say I've been *missing* 'Superman III' Bob.
Post
#227370
Topic
I hate M. Night Ramalamadingdong!
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/227370/action/topic#227370
Time
Oh... my... lord...

LOL

Has M. Night Shyamalan lost his goddamn mind?

That's the only logical excuse for Lady in the Water, the Philly-based writer/director/egomaniac's convulsive seizure of narcissism that's so nakedly personal—and also so unintentionally, hilariously revealing—watching the movie feels a bit like walking in on your roommate while he's masturbating … to a picture of himself.


http://www.philadelphiaweekly.com/view.php?id=12636
Post
#227317
Topic
SUPERMAN RETURNS REVIEW
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/227317/action/topic#227317
Time
Originally posted by: Mike O
At least the costume didn't have nipples.


Very true.... but did you know that the 'texture' on the blue parts of the costume are actually little laser-scribed 'S' symbols? They paid some ridiculous amount of money etching little 'S's all over the suit and of course, other than just adding a scaly look, it does nothing for the image on screen. Go figure... gotta spend that budget somehow!
Post
#227268
Topic
SUPERMAN RETURNS REVIEW
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/227268/action/topic#227268
Time
Originally posted by: HotRod
I'm with Jenny on this one...I like the new suit. They changed the suit for every other suerhero film made in the last 15 years, why not Superman?


Actually the suit didn't bother me nearly as much as I thought it would have have- in fact it fit in well with the gloomy, dark and generally un-Superman-like-ness of the rest of the film.