Zack Snyder to direct next Superman film
 

http://heatvision.hollywoodreporter....medium=twitter

Nolan and Zack Snyder, definitely an interesting team. There are already rumors now that Zod is going to be the villain.

I have to say I'm excited that it "appears" they aren't going to go totally out of left field and do something stupid and out of character for Superman.

I wish Affleck would have taken the gig but he declined.

I'm not a fan of Snyder's films.

Watchmen SUCKED. 300 is a fun movie, but only because it's so utterly ridiculous. Hopefully Nolan can keep it all in check.

I enjoyed Watchmen. I have zero knowledge of the comic series though.

I guess I have been surprised by the negative reaction online. A lot of "slow mo Superman" jokes. But I don't think he'll do this movie exactly like 300. We'll see. I just want someone to do it right. Don't get cute and change everything to be gritty or emo, don't cop out and say he's too much of a boy scout... take something that resembles the Superman character of the last 70+ years and make a great film. It can be done.

I loved Watchmen.

How's that?

You didn't like the random tits and awkward eff scene in a giant owl ship?

I'm a huge fan of the Watchmen comic, and I can't get through the movie. I've tried to sit and watch it numerous times, but I just can't get through it. It's too long, too boring. There's little to no real character development, focuses way too much on visuals instead of storyline, and has really terrible acting.

Yuck.

I'm a huge fan of the comic, too. There was no way that the film could do what the comic did. There's no room for all the metatextual elements. As is, the film was pretty darn long and covered the plot of the comic. All the little bits of artistry had to be shelved.

Even still, the Watchmen film is the best comic book movie yet made, IMO. As for acting: Malin Akerman wasn't good, and Matthew Goode wasn't believable as a physical presence. The other performances, however, were quite good. Patrick Wilson & Jeffrey Dean Morgan totally got their characters, and Billy Crudup & Jackie Earl Haley totally knocked their performances out of the park.

I thought Haley and Morgan were great, Crudup was good, but I wasn't a fan of anyone else.

And it's not so much the length that I had a problem with, but the way the scenes seemed to drag on or not add to the storyline.

OMG! Nolan, Snyder AND General Zod is the villain! I can hardly contain my enthusiasm over this! Effing FANTASTIC!

I live Snyder's films I enjoy them alot I am a huge fan of the watchmen comic & the film. I hope there is a atleast a comedian or a rorschach movie in the future

OK, who is going to be Zod?

Funny stuff

Not sure how i feel about it yet. Snyder has talent, but IMO has turned into a CGI bore. General Zod as a villian is an interesting choice. Why couldnt they try a villian who hasnt been done before on the big screen like Bizzaro or Brainiac?

wait wtf are you saying that Watchmen is better then the dark knight?

Yeah.

Who is going to be Superman?!?

:facepalm:

****. I'm agreeing with Reaper on something. While The Crow will always be my sentimental favorite, I thought Watchmen was amazing. Dark Knight isn't even in the same ballpark. Frankly, I don't think Dark Knight was as good as Batman Begins or either of the Keaton Batman movies.

I don't like it. Snyder is all style over substance. 300 and Watchmen are both soulless eye-candy. Off of the list from the end of September, he was the guy I wanted the least. Although maybe if it ends up with a melding of the heart and emotion of Nolan's films with Snyder's artistic style and eye for action, then maybe it will be worth it. Otherwise we're going to end up with a long, pretty Superman movie that under the shiny plastic surface is cold and dull.

It is not possible for me to disagree more with this.

**** Dark Knight. Bale's acting was awful, the plot was ridiculously convoluted, the ending sucked, and Maggie Gyllenhaal is uglier than a bulldog's asshole. And Ledger's Joker did nothing for me. And NO, I don't give a **** that he drugged himself to death, nor do I think he deserved an Oscar because of it. My apologies to all of you out there who keep candlelit shrines to the guy in your closets.

I loved Ledger's joker. About a trillion times better than Nicholson's.





:Poke:

Bale's acting is awful, but Michael Keaton was . . . Better? Please.

The ending was true to the spirit of Batman. I disagree re: convolution of plot, especially when you compare it to Watchmen.

Maggie Gyllenhaal's looks are irrelevant to the actual film. Ledger's joker was gritty and realistic within the context of the universe. Sorry you don't agree, because it was really quite good.

Ask yourself how a complete psychopath who kills off his own men with reckless abandon would be able to accomplish the complex things he pulls off with absolute, perfect precision? I mean, you never see him planning anything - it all just happens. How? It didn't make any sense at all.

Indeed.

Thanks for pouncing on my typo, Nancy.

I thought it was more of a freudian slip, timmay.

No, just a typo. Again, **** that movie. And I hate it just a little bit more every time somebody attempts to convince me how wonderful and visionary it is.

Watchmen, while well made is a dour, depressing and too drawn out flick. But thats more the source material than Snyder.

Ironically, it reminded me of Singers Superman a little.....too depressing.

That about sums up my own feelings on 300 and Watchmen. It's like I'm supposed to love them because I'm a geek. But at the end of the day they're just not very good.

I knew nothing about Watchmen the first time I saw it. I was expecting some cheesy mindless action film and was amazed by how dark, twisted and involved it was. Perhaps that's why I liked it so much.

As for Singer's SUperman - I still can't believe how bad it was, considering the level of talent involved. What a horrible story.

300 was silly and stupid, but fun. But I'd much rather see a well-made film adaptation of Pressfield's Gates of Fire.

As for Watchmen, it is just inconceivable to me that you don't like it.

I disagree with you on your thoughts about the movie, but that's just differing opinions.

However, I 100% agree with your take on Maggie Gyllenhaal. Good god she is a hideous creature. :Lin:

I think pretty much all of us can agree on that. Apparently they tried to get the ugliest actress in Hollywood, and since Sarah Jessica Parker wasn't available, the settled on Gyllenhaal.

It just left me feeling flat. Stylistically I loved the way it looked, but I just didn't get anything out of the movie itself. I've never even felt the desire to see it a second time, which for me is as much of a sign that I don't like something as there is. Movies I like I'll watch over and over (in the theater with some, I'm not even talking about at home). Dark Knight I saw four times on the big screen. Ditto for Batman Begins. I think I saw Avatar five times. I'm not really moved by reviews (although I read them) or by popular opinion, either. I'm not going to go see something a bunch because somebody else likes it...

As far as Dark Knight goes, I just like the movie, although I don't think it's some kind of religious experience or high point in cinema. I just enjoyed the sum of the parts. Everything worked for me and I'm enthusiastic to see the final act of the trilogy.

I loved Watchmen. I loved The Dark Knight more. I have confidence in Snyder. I have complete, total, ****ing, undying faith in Nolan. I don't give a shit about Superman.

Heh. I've watched Watchmen like seven times.

Err, good for you. I guess...?

i like Snyders Dawn of the Dead remake and 300. Havent seen Owls of Gahooh....or whatever its called.....Sucker Punch looks interesting.

Don't even get me started on Dances With Blue Aliens. :grr:

Perhaps I'll watch it again tonight, just to piss you off. :)

Ill go watch my 4 hour cut of Dune. : )

:cuss:

LMAO

blasphemy

In what way is Watchmen better then TDK

TDK

Has betting Acting better directing a more coherent storyline it even has production values.

Dear god why would you want to torture your self like that.

They better not **** this up again, because Supes is the only Superhero that makes feel like a little kid rooting for his icon.

I'll be very excited to see if anyone is able to make Superman relavent and/or even interesting again. He's a product of such a specific time and place.

Its becuase he basically has no weakness.

People have a hardtime rooting for a character when he will just throw stuff out in to space at the end of every movie or turn back time by spining aounrd the planet.

That's definately part of it.

But I also think the focus has always been on the wrong aspects of the character and his impact on the world around him. When those issues have been bridged in the past, it's been fairly superficial; quickly giving way to spectical.

I think that the material is better, that's all. I think there's much more psychological complexity to the characters. I think it is brilliant commentary on the entire genre of superhero movie (whereas the source material is commentary on comics, specifically). Don't get me wrong - I love The Dark Knight too. TDK has the edge for me in directing and has a transcendent performance in Ledger's Joker. Your other categories are a wash for me.

http://www.countingdown.com/movies/3...ewpost=4114271

these geeks have their nerd-boners going about the news

How is it that the TV show has lasted 10 years then? Surely a fresh take that people would enjoy can be done somehow?

smallvilles ratings have been abysmall god only know's why the CW keeps that POS aournd it went to crap to total worthless crap as soon as the actor who played lex left the show.

Doesn't bother me a bit that you like it, and by all means watch it to your heart's content. :thumb:

I just wasn't sure why he was trying to get into a dick-measuring contest over how many times he's seen watchmen... :shrug:

I've seen Dark Knight 4 times!
Yeah, well, I've seen Watchmen 327.6 times!!eleven

Okay dude, whatever makes you happy. LMAO

I'm pissed that I actually bought Dark Knight on blu ray. I'll never watch it again.

Batman Begins > The Dark Knight > Watchmen > 300

The TV show has done as well as it has for exactly that reason. Because it found a fresh angle. The show focused on Clark Kent as a young man learning how to become Superman. But it's not fresh anymore, and it's hardly Superman. A film is going to have a difficult time overcoming the inherent flaws in the character. Smallville side-stepped those flaws by showing us how he became a superhero. I suspect this new film will not take that same path.

I don't think it's impossible to find an innovative take on the character. But it'll be difficult. There's a reason why Singer's vision wasn't well recieved. Especially over-seas.

FYP

Jesus. Is that what you think that post was? :shake: You talked about how many times you rewatched certain tangentially related movies and never rewatched Watchmen; I found it funny that I, compared to you, had rewatched Watchmen many times. All that post does is point out a humorous difference between our likes and dislikes.

Actually, that is even closer to how I feel about the last two films.

He tried to be different, but ended up with a downbeat depressing Supes. Nobody wants to see that. Plus, he didnt have enough action IMO.

Cassel > Watchmen

Personally, the only misstep Singer had in his rendition was the Superman-has-a-kid story arc. Lameola.

I don't need to see the planning. I didn't expect the movie to be the A-Team :)

I don't think it was wonderful or visionary. It was just a great take on the Batman universe. Made for a damn good superhero flick.

Well, I'll phrase it differently than frazod.

My problem has been that the whole movie tells you that the Joker is, in fact, anarchy. He is the king of it. He just "does". Just goes with the flow.

Yet, if you look at the anarchy he creates, it's all expertly planned and executed. If it's planned, it isn't anarchy.

Right.

Tell me what the tone of this post is.

Honestly, that's how I saw it. :shrug:

I left it intentionally vague because I'm bored to death at work. LMAO

Curses. Foiled again.

I look at it as planned in order to create anarchy. But even still, there is anarchy within the plan.

Plus . . . it's a movie. I'm not sitting there breaking down Dr. Manhattan because it's not a feasible scenario.

Sure, but Nolan isn't. Which is why it's the perfect pairing for Superman.

I liked The Dark Knight over Watchman, because the Dark Knight required more creativity than Watchmen did. I mean, I love both movies, but Watchmen was basically a frame for frame rendition of the comic (for the most part), whereas the Dark Knight was a modern reinvention which set a new bar for the genre.

I don't know how anybody can't appreciate Ledger's joker. My appreciation for it has nothing to do with his death, but for my take on superhero films. What makes or breaks superhero films are the villains. There's a fine line between being over the top and unbelievable and being over the top while still maintining the audiences suspension of disbelief. I think Ledger (with help from Nolan) stayed on the correct side of that line.

Nicholson's joker was fine for the 80. But let's face it - that was a Tim Burton movie. F*** Tim Burton.

Fair point. The Watchmen film does do some reimagining of the source material - costume changes, new ending, the SOUNDTRACK - to better suit the film as commentary of superhero films, but that is sort of beside your point.

Don't forget the porn.

That was a little excessive.

Yeah, but she has a great bod!