Friday, September 15, 2006

Pirates Scribe and Singerman VFX Coordinator Poke Holes in the Film and the Crew

Thanks to all the readers who pointed this piece out to us. We waited to post it for a while because we wanted to verify that the two individuals were who they say they were. After a bit of checking, we've found that this is in fact legit.

Recently on his own Wordplayer website, Hollywood scribe Terry Rosio, gave his thoughts, from a writer's standpoint, on Singerman. Who is Terry Rosio? And why should we care what he thinks, you ask? Well Terry's written a few "somewhat successful" films like Pirates of the Caribbean 1 & 2, and this film called Shrek, that we heard made a few dollars. So whenever a guy who's written a film that's made over a BILLION dollars worldwide speaks up, it's probably a good idea to listen.
Terry takes the writing in Singerman to task in a number of areas including a few that we've been hammering at for months. He also provides some great insight in a number of other areas like this:

From what I could see, there were two ideas presented in the film -- 1.) hey Superman, guess what, while you were away, turns out you've made a kid. And 2.) Lex Luthor is free because you didn't show up to court.

So what is Superman's position on these topics? Wish I knew, because here's a surprise -- neither of these issues is discussed in the film either.

Superman does not say a word -- and I'm serious, this is a true statement -- Superman does not say a word about having a son. (Well, unless you count the deadbeat dad response, "I'll be around." Yikes!)

And Superman does not say a word about the issue of being responsible for Lex Luther being free. He does not defend his action, he does not regret it, he does not discuss it. At all.

Okay, okay ... let's cast around for something. The film has to explore some kind of topic, right? Yes! They DO talk, a little bit, about this issue: Does the World Need Superman?

With nothing else going on, that's the subject of Lois' essay. That's the purpose of the flight up into the sky. So there should be some juicy stuff there, right?

Okay, let's lay out the arguments.

YES, the world need Superman because he resuces Space Shuttles and saves people from explosions and there is a lot of human pain and suffering out there.

NO, the world doens't need Superman because ... because ...

Guess what, filmmakers. You picked an issue that has only one side. Poor Lois was assigned the position -- via an insert shot -- that the world does not need Superman. Why? We don't know, and we can never know, because ... there isn't anything you can put on the other side of the argument.

There you go. Right from the mouth of someone who writes for a living. Like we've been saying all along Singerman presents a myriad of ideas but fails to explore any of them effectively. I HIGHLY recommend reading the entirety of Terry's post. It's long but his insight into the topic is fantastic.

What became even more interesting was that later on in that very same thread, one of the VFX Production Coordinators, from SINGERMAN chimed in on the topic, and his revelations about Singer and Co. are unbelievable:

It was one of the most educational experiences of my life. Seriously. I could see from their very inception, the birth of countless bad ideas...and the murder of good ones. I witnessed the endless creative battles and the cowardly finger pointing. Honestly, if this is how movies of this size usually get made -- I'm amazed they get made at all....

Bryan Singer has an issue with never doing test screenings...and has the juice to enforce it. Instead, he has what he calls "Friends and Family" screenings. This is where the crew and executives can invite a limited number of -- well – “Friends and Family” to see a rough cut of the movie. So, as it turns out, this version of the movie clocks in at well over three hours. The cards come back from the audience and, lo and behold, most of them say it's too long.

After a lot of tense meetings and heated arguments with the execs, the decision was made to cut several sequences. Several WHOLE sequences. Yes, there were trims made within the rest of the movie -- but they were minimal. The majority of the cuts include several scenes that I believe, by and large, were necessary for the story. Not only that, but several sequences that survived should have easily ended up in the Avid trash bin -- but remained in for the very reason you stated, "Because they looked cool."

WOW! So apparently there may have been a little more meat to the film but Singer would rather cut things that were integral to the story instead of things that were "cool looking." Ah, but the plot thickens:
You know, I can safely say that there wasn't one moment that I was really connected with these characters. They just seemed like blanks, hoping that the audience would imbue them with some sort of malevolence. They were as dumb as a box of rocks and their master plan was moronic. I laugh every time somebody says that Lex's whole scheme is a stupid real estate grab. I mean, who the hell does he think would ever want to live on that disgusting piece of crap?
Keep in mind this is someone from the FILM CREW saying this! Another great read, and it actually explains how some of the film actually had parts that were necessary to the plot left on the cutting room floor because Singer doesn't know how to edit a film properly and his ego is too big to allow a proper test screening for anyone who's not a lackey of his. I highly recommend spending the time to read it all. It shows just how this cast and crew was seemingly flying by the seat of their pants while ruining Superman in the process.


Anonymous said...

who the hell does he think would ever want to live on that disgusting piece of crap?

if there was a choice of dying because the continet was takin up the space where u were living or live on new krypton what would you pick? and your film made a billion $ and it was abosolute fookin shit. u had a good actor in the name of johnny depp to draw many female fans to see your movie so what does that say about your script?

Anonymous said...

You guys are pathetic. Enough said.

Anonymous said...

iv being a member of b.thigths network since last year and i was so hapy to be part of something rely cool as the superman expierence, and i was so anxious to see singer´s superman version, but what we got was a usless disapontin piece of craap, i hope this queer never get to put a hand on this franchise any more, WB weake up and hire some one to direct the sequel, with some respect for the fans

Anonymous said...

fuck you Brian synger , you piece of queer bastard for ruining the superman experience for this generation

Big Supes said...

While i am not in love with S.R, I have to say that all of Terry's gripes i cannot see what all the fuss is about?? I don't want Superman speaking out like he's on the Letterman show.....i mean for him to visit his son and give the same speach Joe-el did to him, well that carrys a thousand words in that 30 second scene itself.

Also, CK confirms to Jimmy that yes 'Superman is pissed' about Luthor getting out. I mean of course he is?? What does this guy want??....a in depth statement about how pissed Superman is?? Please...

Terry talks about how Superman should of justified why the world needs him up on their trip into the clouds.....ayy?? WHile i respect this Terry guy he clearly doesn't know a great deal about the charcter of Superman. Superman wouldn't challenge someone by handing back what he's done 'unconditionally' in an attempt to win some kind of respect. Instead he told Lois that he hears everything and he answers them calls. The 20 seconds in the scene where he apologises to her is breathtaking.

And to finish up....Lois showed her personal upset and bitter feelings towards Superman after he said 'why did you write it'. She said 'how could you leave us like that??' . Her story was more of 'Why i dont need Superman' as apposed to the original title.

S.S.S. said...

all comments from the past 2 weeks have now been posted, sorry we just got a bit busy. So whether you said we were the best, or called me a pastey basement-dweller, they're now up.

Anonymous said...

Superman was definitely alot more Homosexual then I expected.

Why no Return Krypton scene you fucking asshole?

Singer deserves to get sodomized... with a loaded shotgun.

Anonymous said...

SR. Is a movie about Bryan Singers dream boyfriend.. The special effect didn’t look real. It had that modern Star Wars feel, you know, the only things real are the actors. Lois Lane is a Bitch and is manipulating and lying to her current boyfriend and son. Superman looks....beautiful? Like my wife beautiful. I mean Reeve wasn’t a mound of muscles either. But at least he wore red and had a giant S, letting everybody know he was the Man of Steele. Didn’t it bother anybody that superman is wearing a raspberry fruit roll-up colored cape and boots. Bottom line, the movie has a “super”dumb plot, not enough action. Superman has a very feminine feel. It was a soupy drama making light of the greatest, stud in the history of comicdom.

Anonymous said...

Can we get a petition going to make sure BS does not get to direct the 2nd part? I really dont understand all those guys at they all love the movie, I really think most of them are chicks. But maybe they are just gay guys that like BS and Brandon. Becuase all the true Superman fans hate the movie. After all BS did admit on Larry King Live that it was a chick flick. He sucks, I didnt mind him b4 but I really dont like him at all.

Anonymous said...

Judging by most of the comments on here and their references to Bryan Singer being gay, I can only assume that those that wrote these comments are the average age of about 9.

Bryan Singer did an excellent job and I hope he makes the next Superman film. The film was critically acclaimed and for once I agree with the critics.

Incidentally, when I watched the second Pirates of The Caribbean I fell asleep – if any film is too long I’m afraid Dead Mans Chest is, I thought it would never end. It dragged on about 45 minutes longer than it needed to. I still found it funny in places but I wouldn't go as far as saying that the story/writing was outstanding - it's hardly intelligent stuff is it? Superman Returns was far more interesting.

Anonymous said...

If you think Singer did an "excellent job" with Superman Returns then you obviously dont know a fucking thing about the character of Superman. Either that or your some lackey from, who decided months ago that this movie was going to be good, and was just happy to have any crap that Singer gave them. Wake up.

Anonymous said...

And what makes you such an expert on the character of Superman then? Please enlighten us with your superior knowledge. Clearly you are one of those “fan boys” that hated the film before you even saw it. I bet you nit-picked every tiny detail whenever an image was released. I'm willing to lay money on the fact that you probably looked through every frame of each trailer hunting for errors. Were you one of those idiots that kicked up a stink because his cape was the wrong shade of red? Get over it. For the record, I’m not some “lackey” from I’m just a Superman fan that thinks that some of the comments on here, including yours, stink of shit.

Anonymous said...

how about 25 fucking years of reading the comics? That good enough for you to make me an "expert" on the character? Then again, I guess if you enjoyed Singer's dreck, the comics wouldn't mean shit to you. I didn't sweat the small details like the costume or even the effiminate looking Superman, it was the major character assassination that was most appalling.
I applaud the people who run this blog, and people who actually speak their mind as opposed to the pathetic suck-ups at some of the online "Superman" sites where most fans know nothing of the character past the Donner movies or Smallville.

Anonymous said...

Fuck you. Period.

Anonymous said...

You take this stuff way too seriously and I think you need to chill.

At the end of the day, regardless of how good a film is, it will always have its critics and will always be the subject of much debate. I thought it was a good film, you think it’s bad film. Mainly because it doesn’t relate to the comics. Ok, that’s fair enough but maybe (and I’m not saying this to wind you up) you are so in to the Superman comics that it has ruined the ability for you to watch the Superman movies without over analysing them? Did you like the first two Superman movies?

Anonymous said...

Hate the film, fine, but can we please act like adults and not attack a mans sexuality. Honestly if you have a genuine beef you only make yourself sound like 10 yr old kid. I'm willing to bet that your 25 yrs of comic book reading was with the lights out in the bedroom while you jerked off to Lois Lane under the covers. I mean if you are such a smart Superman fan, then surely you realize how pathetic you sound when you attack BS for being gay and anyone who enjoyed the film. I'm sorry but I don't need my Superman to be exactly the same as he is in the comics. Most hard core comic book geeks are just upset because they got picked on in high school and can only get laid by the fat girls.

Anonymous said...

where was anyone in this thread or on this guy's blog for that matter "attacking" Singer for being gay??

Anonymous said...

Any more comic book stereotypes you care to throw out there at this guy while you're at it? I think you were supposed to say something about his parent's basement and eating cheetohs. You try to come off as being better than him, but yet you're posting on the internet about comicbook movies which is eqaully as geeky.

And we dont need the movie to be exactly like the comics, however I want to see the heart of the characters from the comics in the film. Not characters based off of Superman from 30 years ago, that's a mopey whiner, who comes off like a creepy stalker. Superman:TAS wasnt exactly like the comics, yet it GOT the characters and who they were supposed to be. Singer didn't have a clue about the current identities of the characters b/c of his preoccupation with the Donner film, and he didnt even manage to capture the spirit of those fulms.

Anonymous said...

Quote 1-"fuck you Brian synger , you piece of queer bastard for ruining the superman experience for this generation "

Quote 2-"Singer deserves to get sodomized... with a loaded shotgun"

Quote 3-" Is a movie about Bryan Singers dream boyfriend"

Quote 4-"I really dont understand all those guys at they all love the movie, I really think most of them are chicks. But maybe they are just gay guys that like BS and Brandon. "

That's 4 quotes just on this comment page. I'm sure I could go on through the site and the comments and find more. My whole point is that I don't care if you hate the movie, but attacking someone for their sexuality is very childish and it damages your credibility.

Every hard core comic book fan that I have seen that didn't like the movie has responded with this type of childish behaviour. I would have much more respect for those that post their dissatisfaction with the movie if they didn't stoop to 3rd grade behaviour when talking about the director and the star.

Anonymous said...

yeah some of those reader comments are a little much, however I dont see the blog writers making comments like that, that's why I tend to give it a bit more credibility

Anonymous said...

Yeah but posting the GAY superman returns IMBD page does nothing to stop the attacks. Maybe the administrators of this site should delete any viscious attacks on Bryan Singers sexuality. That would make them seem a bit more credible.

Anonymous said...

Why would deleting someone’s opinion make this blog more credible? Oh let me guess, your one of those guys that saw the film, applauded when White said “truth justice, and ALL THAT OTHER STUFF” freedom of speech, or opinion is what makes this blog great. SR was a strange almost offensive view of an American Icon. Superman came off as being week, he had kind a strange girly feel. The plot was week; the acting was poor, Its not impossible to make a great superman movie, its been done twice. Hopefully in the future, someone with an understanding of who superman is and more importantly who he isn’t. Will be able to bring the story to the big screen “red cape” and all.

Bushtastic said...

Look the reason people site BS sexuality is that it comes through in his films. Say for example if chris nolan had made this film the main focus would not be making superman look pretty it would be to understand what goes on in his head, the battles he faces and a challenge to overcome.

Unfortunately singer is not concerned with any of these issues. Similarly Singer has admitted to have never read the comics, also the writers of this farce have admitted to not reading the comics. Now lovers of the film can call us fan boy geeks all they want but think about it logically. Its a film based on superman, therfore it should be about superman, and hey gues what there are thousands of stories and years of lore to draw from.

Nolan had the humility and the foresight to see that he was not the authority on Batman so he dived into the subject matter, reading the key comics, he surrounded himself with people who understood the character, he basically forced Goyer to work on the project as he was man enough to admit he needed his input.

Singer chose to go it alone and use outdated and flawed films as his only research and he has paid the price for his arrogance.

Anonymous said...

"Look the reason people site BS sexuality is that it comes through in his films."

How? Because he got a good looking guy to play Superman?

"Why would deleting someone’s opinion make this blog more credible? Oh let me guess, your one of those guys that saw the film, applauded when White said “truth justice, and ALL THAT OTHER STUFF” freedom of speech, or opinion is what makes this blog great."

First, deleting the offensive comments will make it easier to have an intelligent conversation without resorting to childish name calling. Second, No I'm not one of those guys. That actually bothered me a bit. I liked the movie. Yes it has it's flaws and I readily admit them, but I'm not going to attack a man personally to help prove my point.

Finally, why does every person who hated the film say that the people who liked it are delusional? What, are we not entitled to our opinion? What makes the haters opinions better? And I hate to say this but the general public didn't hate the movie. I've noticed that whenever someone who hates the movie says they saw it, they say they saw it in a half empty theatre opening night, that nobody reacted blah blah blah...Yet everyone that I know that doesn't go online to bitch about every little thing with the movie saw it with in packed houses and everyone reacted when and where they should have when watching. Superman Returns was a good film. It wasn't a comic book reproduction like Batman, and that's probably one of it's biggest mistakes. Because I highly doubt that if they had followed one of the comic book stories and it was still only received to the tune of 390 million WW then you guys wouldn't be attacking it or BS.

Anonymous said...

Ahhh, labeling people who don't like the movie "haters" REALLY bolsters your whining about people "attacking" BS sexuality. I mean, attacking the people who don't like the movie for "attacking" BS is the best route, right?

And no, this is not a "good" film. It is mediocre at best. The problem with you and people like you, is you somehow think you are BETTER than the people who don't like this travesty. The people here attack the FILM and it's CREW. YOU and your ilk attack Joe Average. THAT is pathetic.

Anonymous said...

"The people here attack the FILM and it's CREW. YOU and your ilk attack Joe Average. THAT is pathetic.
Actually no, you are pathetic. I'm attacking children that are all upset because SR wasn't an exact duplication of the comics that they jerk off to late at night. And the only arguement I've seen is because BS is gay. And you guys wonder why hardcore comic book fans get a bad rap.

Anonymous said...

"Actually no, you are pathetic. I'm attacking children that are all upset because SR wasn't an exact duplication of the comics that they jerk off to late at night. And the only arguement I've seen is because BS is gay. And you guys wonder why hardcore comic book fans get a bad rap."

Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the DEFINITION of ignorant.

Take a bow, Gump.

Anonymous said...

"fuck you Brian synger , you piece of queer bastard for ruining the superman experience for this generation "

Actually this is the definition of ignorant.

Anonymous said...

POTC sucked ass. It didnt make over a billion dollars. Johnny Depp did. Without him, that movie wouldnt make crap. It's true. If you deny it, well... you're wrong. Superman Returns was written great. Just because it wasnt filled with pointless action like most movies are nowadays. Doesnt make it not good. Great movie.

Anonymous said...

Superman Returns has a lot of problems but none of them can be attributed to Singer's sexual inclination. Please grow up.

My main gripe with the director and his team is their lack of direction (no pun intended) and it shows in the final product. I know its normal for any movie to edit scenes out but this movie had insane amounts of cuts. Couldn't they have sat down and penned a tight script then started filming? That I'm sure would've reduced the incredible budget and improved the movies prospects at the box-office.

Instead we have people calling it the "Hulk of 2006".

And I agree with the character assassination bit someone mentioned. How could they pen Superman/Clark Kent to be such a dim wit?

Let me recap - Kal-El is well aware that all electrical devices across the easter seaboard were knocked out for a brief period of time. What does he do? Swoon over Lois and do little else.

Later he finds his crystals missing in the FOS. What does he do? He flies right out of the FOS with an angry expression and...and heads to The Daily Clark Kent.


Besides his strength and otherworldly powers isn't Superman supposed to be smart? He knows Lex is out of jail and he now knows the Kryptonian crystal technology is missing. Can't he put 1 and 1 together? Dim wit.

The third act falters and kills the movie. It's very similar to the experience of watching the last act of "Superman: The Movie" except when that movie ended you have a nice (albeit temporary) resolution.

Something this movie fails to deliver.


Anonymous said...

Oh, but according to "people" like the poster above, movie-goers shouldn't go to the theater to be entertained, but for GOOD WRITING.

What's sad is, the writing is some of the WORST ever for a superhero movie. The WRITING created plot-holes, the WRITING gave us a weepy, stalking Singerman, the WRITING gave us a lame-brained "land scheme" by Lex Luthor, and it was the WRITING that gave us "Super Bastard".

No one ever accused these "Apologists" of having taste though, did they?

harold said...

Wow its reallyy painful reading comment after comment by "Anonymous" insulting each other.
"Fuck you. Period" Uh, fuck who?
Secondly all posts about Singer being gay and people who read comics living in their mothers basements etc are a waste of space.
Thirdly how ridiculous is it for the guy who wrote Pirates II to be criticising another film for poor writing? Whats next the writers of Mission Impossible II complaining about SR? If you read all his comments he is obviously pretty bitter that SR was critically well recieved and Pirates wasn't.
And all his criticisms - Superman never had to make any life-changing decisions etc sound like the sort of thing that the writing guru from Adaptation would say:
"And God help you if you ever use Voice Over!"
But it explains why when people aren't running away from special effectsa Pirates II is so dredges out the Han Solo "journey from self-interested loner to hero" plot.

Anonymous said...

LOL. God, you people are s.a.d.

You use "critically well-recieved" as some sort of insult against POTC2. Want a hint? The critics DO NOT MATTER TO THE STUDIOS. The ONLY thing that matters is the all-mighty dollar. And THERE, POTC2 is "well received". Singerman Peeps? Not even in the same country, let alone ballpark.

Anonymous said...

I hate Superman Returns and i am the biggest superman fan on the planet! Bryan Singer made the worst superman movie ever. Please quit now and save your dignity. You should also return to film school and learn how to adapt beloved pieces of fiction from one medium to the big screen. Had singer not stuck with what he likes about superman (i.e everything prior to 1986)and he gone with a vision more in line with the current comics, Superman Returns couldve been a success. Instead Bryan has failed and come full circle. with X-Men he made comic book movies great again, with Singerman he ruined them. Warners and other studios should take note, never let someone who is a fan of a specific period/part of your biggest franchise, who doesnt have an understanding/liking of all the source material take control! That way you might actually make a decent movie aswell as some money.