Thursday, July 19, 2007

Grab Your Pens and Paper!

Over the past few weeks, as rumors of Singerman's demise or a potential sequel have been going back and forth like some ritalin-induced game of Pong, we've spoken to a number of concerned individuals who have been looking for a way to make their voices heard by the guys who hold the purse strings up at Warner Brothers regarding their views on the Singerman franchise and how they should proceed handling the actual Superman.

In the past we've supported that notion although we've deferred this type of thing to other websites who were solely focused on doing just that, but I'm not sure how far things ever actually got there? As a decision about Singer's future on this franchise seems to be looming in the next few months, there seems to be a renewed interest in voicing our collective disdain with said franchise's direction. Since this site has been the "flag-bearer for the cause" (your words, not ours) over the past 13 months, we thought we'd get the info out to the people once again, and focus some of our efforts on making sure you know who and where to direct your fervor. After conferring with some of our "moles" on the "inside" about what gets read and what gets deleted by people at the Studios, we've decided that the best way to go about this is a two-pronged attack.

First and most important, real letters need to be sent. A stack of letters on someone's desk has much more of a visual impact than a full email inbox. A physical letter also says that you really care, and took the time to write it, print it, and mail it. They're tangible and an executive can literally hold your disappointment in his hands, as opposed to it floating out in cyberspace. While sending an email can't hurt, I'd say do that as a follow-up to writing your real letter. Below I've put together a bit of an FAQ about the letter writing campaign. If you still have other questions, list them in the comments section.

1. What do I write?
You've got to voice your displeasure but you've got to say it in terms that relate to the Studio execs. The Studio head most likely doesn't care that we think giving Superman a bastard kid was a horrible creative decision that goes against the spirit of the character. What he does care about is how some of Singer's decisions may have alienated various parts of the potential audience and how it adversely affected the box office results, or how poor word of mouth led to the film being the slowest ever to reach the $200 million mark, while similar recent big budget films are doing that kind of business in 1 week. Let them know why you care about the character but don't go overboard in that regard either. Focus more on how Singer is wrong for the franchise, and how a better-suited director could make the franchise more successful.

Just as important as what you write is the tone of how you say it. If you bring up good points but come across like you're yelling at the execs, they'll tune you out and chalk you up to being some crazed fanboy. Your letters should have a reasonable and even tone to them. You should sound sympathetic to the studio's financial goals, and be constructive in your criticisms about why Singer blew it. Brevity is also a bonus. Say what you have to say on 1 or 2 pages and then be done with it. These people read enough scripts as it is, dont send them something of a similar size.

If you've already written a letter and think others could use it as a template for their own, send it into us here, and we'll post it up. We're putting together a few generic ones of our own that we'll post up shortly that people can change as they see fit.


2. Who do I send them to?
These letters should be targeted at the guys who write the checks and have final say on any films. Warner Bros. Entertainment President and C.O.O., Alan Horn and Warner Bros. Pictures President of Production Jeff Robinov.

3. Where do I send them?
Send all letters and emails to either:

Mr. Alan Horn
President and C.O.O. Warner Brothers Entertainment
4000 Warner Blvd.
Burbank, Ca. 91522
alan.horn@warnerbros.com

Mr. Jeff Robinov
President of Production Warner Brothers
4000 Warner Blvd.
Burbank, Ca. 91522
jeff.robinov@warnerbros.com


The other prong of the attack involves getting the word out and getting as many people as possible to send letters. This site gets a sizeable amount of hits a day but thats not going to be enough, its still going to be up to you to spread the good word. Print out letters for your friends and family to sign. Link to this post on the various internet message boards you frequent, link it to your website or blog, make a Youtube video, etc. Do whatever you can regardless of what the small minority of vocal aplogist sheep think. Granted the studios pay people to scour the internet to gauge the public's opinions on things, but a proactive campaign like this does get noticed. Just ask the fans of the TV show Jericho

170 comments:

Anonymous said...

Let me tell ya something...

I really think it's KARMA hitting Singer and his crowd in the ass, with all the problems he's been having on Valkyrie, the rumored (though it may only be rumor) delay of Trick or Treat, the general nonchalant-mood from Mr. Horn regarding a proposed "sequel."

It really feels to me like Singer and his so-called "writers" bit off more than they can chew, and are now swimming frantically, trying to remain on top of the water -- let alone, in the competition...

And as for the official campaign, let's get writing, boys!

Anonymous said...

"Do whatever you can regardless of what the small minority of vocal aplogist sheep think. Granted the studios pay people to scour the internet to gauge the public's opinions on things, but a proactive campaign like this does get noticed. Just ask the fans of the TV show Jericho"

The letters are a good idea guys send them out like crazy i know i have written one already to Horn a while ago. I doubt WB will gauge the internet opinion too much about SR because there is no consensus there. Blue Tights obviously is 95% SR lovers. From what i can tell over at SHH from the polls and such they are split right down the middle about SR between the lovers and the haters. Of course you have places like The Superman Homepage where they all gush over it as well. I would just write a lot of letters and not worry about the internet opinion. The sad truth is most studios know that for a comic movie like this internet fanboys have problems with it that most fans usually don't.

Anonymous said...

From his latest comments, I do think Mr Horn is very aware of the disaster that was Singerman Returns.

It was supposed to be the big movie of '06, yet finished at best fifth, and if you add in the receipts of all the movies released in '06, that spilled into '07, something like tenth.

He must be aware that the only interesting scenes in the movie were taken almost verbatem from the Abrams script, and the the casting was wrong, for both Routh and KB.

But in the end a letter writing campaign can't hurt, because I don't really want to see a stalkerish supes, played by a two bit actor, with a spoiled obnoxious son, and the only heroic character, Richard White, being destoyed.

I say, write until your hands bleed.

Anonymous said...

"for both Routh and KB."

No you are wrong about Routh. Kate yes she was bad and i did not love SR but Routh was well received. Look at the reviews and listen to what most people thought of the movie Routh was not disliked as Superman i am sorry he was just not. SR was bad because Singer was all about making a Donner homage and not his own film like he did with X-Men. Routh was not the problem. You could put Welling or whoever you want in that movie as it is and the result would have been the same.

Anonymous said...

for every review I read where someone liked Routh I've seen one that refers to him as "aping Reeve," "balsa wood," "milk toast," "uninspiringly bland" etc. etc.

Anonymous said...

"for every review I read where someone liked Routh I've seen one that refers to him as "aping Reeve," "balsa wood," "milk toast," "uninspiringly bland" etc. etc."

That isn't true just go to RT and read the great reviews it got most really liked him. The problem with SR was the material itself. Even if i agreed with you that most people thought Routh was bad there are tons of examples of actors starring in blockbusters that sucked in their roles. Hello Hayden Christiansan in Star Wars anyone. Chris Reeve was the perfect Superman and yet Superman 3 was a joke WHY? Because you had a shitty script and a director who had no fucking idea how to make a good Superman movie. The sad thing about Singer is the guy is a really good director his resume speaks for itself. However he was too in love with Donner's Superman to see the big picture. SR starring whoever is a mediocre film that is not a huge hit because of the material itself.

Anonymous said...

WOW!!!This site is getting desparate. Asking people to write in. I guess SSS know as well as I that the nego. are on and that this project is a sure thing. This is SSS last attempt to foil the plans of a sequel, but it will fail. With Returns being as successful as it was it assures that...........................

Sequel is fine for 2009!

Restart

Trust me if SSS wasnt worried he wouldn't have posted this stuff. Guess you "denialists" are wetting your beds now.

Anonymous said...

"....but Routh was well received"

Where, in your homo dreams perhaps?

Jeez, are you Routh?? Nobody even remembers the guy yet you keep talking as if he's a real person.

It's like this:Supes3-crap but Reeve-good

Supes Returns-crap but Routh-crap

Anonymous said...

"Even if i agreed with you that most people thought Routh was bad there are tons of examples of actors starring in blockbusters that sucked in their roles."

Yeah, so what? They're not playing Superman are they? Just because George Lucas lost the plot when it comes to casting doesn't justify the abysmal casting in Returns. Donner got it right, Raimi seems to have.....You seem to think good casting is "magic" as opposed to it being due to the talent of the director.

Routh bears some of the blame for the disappointment

Again, drag everything down to Singer's level......yawn

Anonymous said...

That isn't true just go to RT and read the great reviews it got most really liked him.

yes it is true you clown. there are links on this site to all of those reviews. Go back and read the year end posts, theyre all in there. Routh was terrible. He did nothing with the character. He was a faded and vastly inferior version of Christopher Reeve.

colors said...

I fired off my letter to Alan Horn last night. I kept it professional (no moaning and whining about MIA Welling or any of that junk) and stressed that "good, traditional Superman film = happy moviegoers = big bucks for WB".

To me, the most likely outcome here is that the film franchise goes on hiatus for several years. We may succeed in ousting Singer but I have my doubts that WB will greenlight a new Superman film anytime within the next five years.

But I'd love to be wrong (whether it's with Welling or an unknown in a brand new franchise, I just want a good Post-Crisis Superman film).

S.S.S. said...

WOW!!!This site is getting desparate. Asking people to write in. I guess SSS know as well as I that the nego. are on and that this project is a sure thing. This is SSS last attempt to foil the plans of a sequel, but it will fail. With Returns being as successful as it was it assures that...........................

Sequel is fine for 2009!

Restart


oh you poor misguided fool. If I thought the project was moving ahead, why would I even bother advocating the resumption of a letter-writing campaign (this is nothing new BTW) which would be completely futile at that point? After about the 40th email I received looking for this information, I decided to post it.
The only person who seems to think a sequel is a sure thing, is you, who ignores the Studio head saying "IF we do a Superman sequel" and then posts a link from 4 months ago a evidence to the contrary. You're exactly the mindless sheep I was referring to.

voice_of_reason said...

BOOT SINGER, REBOOT SUPERMAN!!!

Anonymous said...

"yes it is true you clown. there are links on this site to all of those reviews. Go back and read the year end posts, theyre all in there. Routh was terrible. He did nothing with the character. He was a faded and vastly inferior version of Christopher Reeve."

No there are links to this site that cherry pick the reviews that suit the agenda of the blogger. I am no fan of SR but Routh is not the reason it was not a hit. My Superman 3 post was spot on. Reeve was the greatest casting ever for Superman. 3 sucked and was a bomb because of the director and the material, period. Reeve himself starring in SR would have made no difference because Singer blew it with the tone and the kind of film he was trying to make.

DBSS80 said...

"oh you poor misguided fool. If I thought the project was moving ahead, why would I even bother advocating the resumption of a letter-writing campaign (this is nothing new BTW"

You definately know though that the sequel has a good shot of happening or you would not have bothered. This film is a year old, most people that were upset wrote their letters in ages ago and have since moved on and don't care anymore. No last minute campaign is likely to change WB mind at this point only a bad screenplay from Singer would probably do that.

Anonymous said...

"I am no fan of SR but Routh is not the reason it was not a hit. "

Dream on. He was as much as the reason for the films disappointment as any other. He is a "jobbing" actor though

Superman Three:Crap but Reeve:Great
Superman Returns:Crap but Routh:Crap

Anonymous said...

"Dream on. He was as much as the reason for the films disappointment as any other. He is a "jobbing" actor though

Superman Three:Crap but Reeve:Great
Superman Returns:Crap but Routh:Crap"

You just helped to prove my point.

Reeve being great did not save the film. He was great in 4 and that could not have been a bigger bomb than it was. All i am saying is if you think the consensus was that Routh sucked in SR, you are wrong. Bosworth yes most agree she sucked but not Routh and as i have demonstrated even if that is what most thought of him it would not have mattered because the material itself was bad.

Anonymous said...

^^

Agreed bad direction lousy script, the entire STM cast could have starred in SR and it would have still sucked shit.

Anonymous said...

SSS Only time will tell how miss guided I am. My question to you is how you will feel if the sequel moves forward? All indications (save for Horn wanting to see the script first) that this project is a go. Making me believe that.

Superman is on for 2009!

Restart

But if singer pulls out I will be the first one to say i was wrong and post my sincere apologies to anyone I offended. I just know that isn't going to happen.

Anonymous said...

"You just helped to prove my point"

Perhaps. No matter who starred in Returns would hardly save it, but that doesn't detract from the fact that Routh was lousy.

Routh was lousy. Again, Routh was lousy. I'll say it one more time because we know how much it hurts you...Routh WAS LOUSY.

We know you love the guy, but come on. If he was any good his career would be assured, it's not because he WAS LOUSY...and wooden....and unconvincing as Superman and/or Clark Kent.


Did I say he was lousy?

Anonymous said...

"....the entire STM cast could have starred in SR and it would have still sucked shit"

Like that would ever happen. The cast of STM were heterosexual which automatically rules them out of appearing in a Bryan Singer movie.

S.S.S. said...

You definately know though that the sequel has a good shot of happening or you would not have bothered. This film is a year old, most people that were upset wrote their letters in ages ago and have since moved on and don't care anymore. No last minute campaign is likely to change WB mind at this point only a bad screenplay from Singer would probably do that.

I know no such thing. The first film fell $100 million short of studio expectations, and we've gotten no definitive word from the studio about it much less a greenlight. (as a frame of reference The Dark Knight was already green lit by this amount time after Batman Begins.)
I'm a firm believer in hammering the point home so I dont think this hurts. I'll say again though, I posted this out of OVERWHELMING request from the fans. I fired off letters back in January after I posted about the initial letter drive but after about the 40th email in my bin about this I realized there are a lot of people that want to vent, now that it seems like Alan Horn and co are really going to decide if they want Singer back or not.
Does the sequel have a shot at happening? Sure, I guess. I have a shot at winning the Powerball drawing tonight too. Does the sequel have a "good shot" at happening? I wouldnt bet my mortgage on it. Every successful Superhero film franchise (Spider-man, X-Men, Batman Begins) had the sequel go ahead before 13 months after it's theatrical release. Singerman doesnt. That should tell, that AT BEST, this thing is 50/50. Horn saying he "needs to see a script" before he does anything else isnt exactly a ringing endorsement for the 2nd film in a franchise. I know the head of Sony wasnt talking about Spiderman 2 in those terms.

Anonymous said...

"Does the sequel have a shot at happening? Sure, I guess. I have a shot at winning the Powerball drawing tonight too. Does the sequel have a "good shot" at happening? I wouldnt bet my mortgage on it."

Any and all respect i had for you which wasn't much to begin with just went out the window. This BLOG does not exist anymore if you were not doing all you can to see to it the sequel does not happen. If you thought the sequel was a longshot what is the point of the BLOG? The film is over a year old the only thing for people to debate is the possibility of a sequel. This letter writing campaign is a last ditch effort by you to let your voice be heard. Every major site from SHH to variety reported Singer's trip to NY to meet with Spacey and his upcoming pictch to WB as news but you did not because it does not fit your agenda. Take a look at those sites. They are operating under the assumption that the sequel is more than likely. Hell even SHH ran a poll asking the fans what they thought of Lex being in another Superman movie as if it was a done deal. You are pathetic beyond belief that you can't even admit that the sequel has a very good shot of happening.

Anonymous said...

"You are pathetic beyond belief that you can't even admit that the sequel has a very good shot of happening."

And right on cue ladies and gentleman I give you the ramblings of a Younis sheep.

Get it through your tiny head fuckwit, if you want general Superman news or puff pieces about Singer and his band of "merry" men, yes go the fuck elsewhere, like those Singersites you mention. You want to voice your disappointment with others about Singerman.....

Get it moron?? What are you 12 or are you actually Steve Younis on here again?

Anonymous said...

"Any and all respect i had for you which wasn't much to begin with just went out the window....yada yada yada....."

...or in short "I still don't understand what this site's about and I'm such a fuckwit I'll put it in writing for all to see"

What a fuckin idiot!

Fuckwits like that take the cake,
Father Finian Egan

Anonymous said...

See my followers are growing. Showing that the people are behind the sequel and only a few mad individuals (AP/Father/Terminal/SSS yes I know that these are only 2 people at most) will push their idealistic crusade until the end. But we all know.......................

Superman flies into theaters in 2009!

Restart

You can not stop the truth from coming or the sequel from happening.

Anonymous said...

"See my followers are growing. "

No, actually it's the other way around you delusional fuckwit

Anonymous said...

"Take a look at those sites. They are operating under the assumption that the sequel is more than likely. Hell even SHH ran a poll asking the fans what they thought of Lex being in another Superman movie as if it was a done deal."

"Assumption" is the key word. None of these sites can confirm that a sequel has been greenlit, because it hasn't. SHH can assume whatever they want, it doesn't change the fact that the prospects for a sequel don't look too good right now.

Which is a good thing, because Singer's Superman Sucks!

Anonymous said...

"SHH can assume whatever they want, it doesn't change the fact that the prospects for a sequel don't look too good right now."

Spin, Spin and more spin. Why are those sights not reporting that the sequel is in trouble. When they reported the news about Spacey coming back and Singer getting ready to make his pitch it was reported as positive towards the sequel happening. That is why SSS did not post it because it goes against his agenda. He instead just posted Horn's comments about wanting to see a screenplay first and the budget and spun that into his take the sequel is still a long shot. Sites like SHH can make assumptions because they have credibility SSS and this BLOG have NONE.

Anonymous said...

Because, regardless of what Singer and Spacey do, Horn is ultimately the one who will make the decision, and he sounds less than enthusiastic.

Honestly, I think it could go either way. We may get a Singer sequel, we may not. But it's definitely not a sure thing like the other sites make it sound.

Anonymous said...

If [Routh] was any good his career would be assured..

...just like the post-Superman careers of Reeves, Reeve, Newton, Gerard, and Cain. Wait.

Anonymous said...

"...just like the post-Superman careers of Reeves..."

Surely you don't want your loverboy Routh to follow in the footsteps of George Reeves!

You deliberately neglect to mention that people actually REMEMBER Reeves, Reeve & Cain for playing Superman...what the fuck is a Routh?????

You think you're being clever putting your pretty boy idol, Routh in the company of others who played Superman...heck he's not even in Kirk Alyn's league.

Anonymous said...

Dear Alan Horn,

Singer is a FAG and Superman Returns was gay.

Anonymous said...

Sites like SHH can make assumptions because they have credibility SSS and this BLOG have NONE.

SSS can do whatever the hell he wants. The Horn interview most likely happened AFTER the alleged Spacey "visit" anyway since the Horn interview was posted June 10th and althought the Spacey news went up on SHH on June 11th it was talking about the previous week when it happened.
And BTW if this blog doesn't have any "credibility" than why waste your time here trying to pathetically refute every word of it? Clown.

Anonymous said...

Christ, the Spacey visit hardly qualifies as news anyway. It was clearly nothing more than a puff piece to show that Spacey is still acting in films, or intends to.

Anonymous said...

I'm totally behind the effort to oust Singer.
I'm sharing the link to Singer's Superman Sucks with as many people as possible.

Below is an edited copy of what I said in an email to a friend of mine regarding the letter campaign.

http://singerssupermansucks.blogspot.com/

Please share this with as many folks you know who were as dissatisfied with Returns as you were.
Please read his outline for writing Warner Bros., as its sensible and contains good tips.

I'm at least hopeful now that more voices will be heard.

You and I both know, Singer's the wrong man for Superman.
I want to see a Superman film that humanizes him,... Puts him on an emotional and human level we can relate to, someone you can identify with as well as admire.
I want a script, story content, on a level that doesn't insult your intelligence or is dated. (As Singer's Superman does, and IS)
I want believable character interactions and relationships. I want real drama and story substance as strong as all the eye candy/special effects.

Bryan Singer isn't capable of delivering Superman in an original and fresh fashion.
In fact, now he's locked him in the "Donner box" as far as the current franchise goes.

Remember how much of a bang you got out of reading "IT'S SUPERMAN" by Tom De Haven?
It was absorbing, original, and a wholly fresh and new take on the character delivered within the realm and settings of his 1930's beginnings, when Siegle and Shuster conceived the character.
My allegory isn't that I think IT'S SUPERMAN! should be the film..(Audiences go into seeing Super Hero films with the prejudiced assumption they're going to see a lot of slam bang action and effects. De Haven's book ain't your typical Super Hero fodder.
Its a journey, with only a small dab of "slam bang" thrown in here and there.)

My point is, the right Director can take Superman to film, and not do what Singer did.

Basically, what Bryan Singer did in selling his "Donner-themed" Superman to Warner Bros., is equivalent to a used car salesman slapping fresh paint on an old car with a Helluva lot of mileage on it, and refers to it as "Previously owned", with a lot of life left in it.

There's not a single hint of originality to be found or expressed in Superman Returns.

The right director can put Superman on the big screen, and give us cinematically something exciting and fresh. Something that when you leave the theater, you are as much blown away by the story as you were the action. You leave knowing you FELT for, and cared about the characters. They were real people to you.
(Singer's are cardboard cut-outs.)

Those are the movies you want to see a second or third time. That you talk about with friends and family. They make a mark. They're ORIGINAL. They make you feel good when you exit the theater.
You replay scenes and go over plot elements in your mind. You re-experience emotions you were moved to feel while watching.

Everyone enjoys a damned good story that has REAL substance.

Those kinds of films make you glad you put down the money to see them.

Superman Returns has none of those elements, its too shallow and on the emotional level, pretentious...And look at the money that was invested, the special effects.

To what end? What was the purpose? It was a waste.

So yeah, no matter the outcome, I'm ALL for a letter campaign to Warner Bros. to oust Singer.

Anonymous said...

Dear Mr Horn, no doubt you have seen "Transformers"? Even as a production can anyone honestly suggest that filmgoers or Time Warner shareholders received value for money from the investment in Bryan Singer's flawed vision of Superman? Seven seasons of "Smallville" would suggest there's certainly a market for the franchise if made for today's audiences.

Please Sir, I beg you to save the franchise. At the very least Superman, what he stands for and embodies, his legacy and his fans deserve better

Yours faithfully
Steve Younis

Anonymous said...

..oh and Mr Horn, if you get a letter from a guy called Restart, ignore it. The guy's a fuckwit who thinks he knows the inner workings of Warner Brothers

Anonymous said...

Anon
But I do know the inner workings. Since even SSS has admitted my information is better then his. I have posted more factual information then anyone. Trust me when this sequel really gets moving I will be the first post it here that......................

Superman returns in 2009!

Restart

I dont need to send Horn a letter I can talk to him dirrectly.

Anonymous said...

Since even SSS has admitted my information is better then his.

LOL where was that admission??

dbss80 said...

"Christ, the Spacey visit hardly qualifies as news anyway. It was clearly nothing more than a puff piece to show that Spacey is still acting in films, or intends to."

LOL it qualifies as NEWS to places like Variety, SHH and countless others but not here on this BLOG. It was not posted because it shaped the sequel in a positive light and that does not suit SSS's agenda period.

Anonymous said...

If places like BT and SMHP that are allegedlye news sites dont post most the negative news bits, why should SSS who runs a blog with a stated stance on the situation and not a news site be required to post some inane comment from Kevin "too gay to function" Spacey that he'd come back for a sequel? Hell Routh has been begging to do the sequel at every turn. How is that news?

dbss80 said...

"If places like BT and SMHP that are allegedlye news sites dont post most the negative news bits, why should SSS who runs a blog with a stated stance on the situation and not a news site be required to"

I don't know about SMHP, but BT has posted everything good and bad. Just go to the main page click through the headlines it is all there. The rumors about the delays and the rumors about it going ahead they did not omit that stuff. SHH same thing it is news they post it they don't cherry pick stuff to make things appear one way or another. He is not required to do anything but you come off pretty ill informed on the subject when you do not provide your reader's with all the facts. His stance can remain the same on the film while still posting all that is relevant to the potential sequel, not just the stuff that on it's own seems to agree with him.

Anonymous said...

what dont you get about the concept of a blog? Considering the Horn news pretty much trumps the under-whelming piece about Spacey doing a sequel IF it happens. I dont see the issue here? The Horn interview still stands, it happened after Singer allegedley went to see Spacey. It's funny how you apologist clowns were on here a few months back when Variety came out with the report about the possibility Singerman 2 would be shelved for the JLa film, and you were all callimng Variuety into question. Now all of a suddent they're reliable to you again. Keep grasping at those straws my friend, they're quickly slipping through your fingers.

voice_of_reason said...

BT posted everything good and bad??? What acrock of bullshit. Besides the fact that they're a shill for Singer and supported by WB, BlowTights doesnt mention nary a negative word about the film. they called the film flawless in their site "review." They've ignored every article online about delays or cancellation for a JLA movie until the recent Harvey Milk stuff. If you think that site of all places is giving you a fair picture of the situation, then your too dumb and easily led to converse with any further.

dbss80 said...

"It's funny how you apologist clowns were on here a few months back when Variety came out with the report about the possibility Singerman 2 would be shelved for the JLa film, and you were all callimng Variuety into question. Now all of a suddent they're reliable to you again. Keep grasping at those straws my friend, they're quickly slipping through your fingers."

Attempting to lump me into the same category with other people that you have discussed things with on here as a means of dismissing what i am saying is not making a very strong case at all. The Horn interview people read based on how they feel about the film. The SR lovers see it as "Well they want another SR film but it has to be for 175 film". The SR haters see it as "Horn does not want to do it all he is just he is laying the groundwork to pull the plug" There is noting factual in his statement that any objective person can read one way or another in regards to what will happen next. It is all very much up in the air right now.

dbss80 said...

"BT posted everything good and bad??? What acrock of bullshit. Besides the fact that they're a shill for Singer and supported by WB, BlowTights doesnt mention nary a negative word about the film. they called the film flawless in their site "review." They've ignored every article online about delays or cancellation for a JLA movie until the recent Harvey Milk stuff. If you think that site of all places is giving you a fair picture of the situation, then your too dumb and easily led to converse with any further."

WRONG, WRONG and wrong again. They cited all that stuff about the delayes just go to the headlines at BT and see for yourself. They even discuss the JLA films and how it may delay Superman in one of their podcasts.

Anonymous said...

"I dont need to send Horn a letter I can talk to him dirrectly."Retard

When you shine his shoes?

It's been said before but you come off like a real fuckwit. You know nothing and are continually wrong woth your predictions.

You are a fuckin moron, nothing more

Anonymous said...

their podcasts?? oh hell folks, we've got another clown from BlowTights thats wandered over to our corner of the internet. Look out!!

I went back to that vile shill of a site and looked at their headlines for the last 5 months. The only thing they have even marginally negative, is the stuff about the Harvey Milk and WW2 films, like I said, which is quickly "refuted" by some other lame posting a few days later that they take as gospel from any news source, like the pathetic tools over at IESB, who have been proven already to be full of shit.

Anonymous said...

"LOL it qualifies as NEWS to places like Variety, SHH and countless others"

Fuckin hell, IT WAS A PUFF PIECE about an actor, the type you'd expect to see in Variety, hardly "news" of any sort. Did Spacey say the film was greenlit yet? No. So it's not "news"

So Spacey says if there's a sequel, he's in it. That's reported as News on Superman Homepage. Bosworth gets nominated for a Razzie and that doesn't get reported over there.....and you have the cheek to suggest that SSS has an agenda???

Fuck's sake you jerk, how would you come to the conclusion that a website called Singersupermansucks has an agenda????? What a fuckin moron. Why don't you tell us something else WE ALREADY KNOW!

I tell you the intelligence of the apologists is fuckin unbelievable. I don't know how they can type..

Father Finian

Anonymous said...

"WRONG, WRONG and wrong again. They cited all that stuff about the delayes just go to the headlines at BT and see for yourself."

No thanks, why would I want to go there? I just want to know when Singer is removed. I don't need to know what time Routh has a shit or how gay Tom Cruise looks when working with Singer.

If you like it so much on BT, what the fuck are you doing here? Are you on some commission to get folks over there??

Nevermind, don't answer that, just FUCK OFF back there or shut up.

Anonymous said...

I forgot to ask, is Robert Burnett talking to Steve Younis again yet?

You want to talk about breaking news.......

Anonymous said...

"I went back to that vile shill of a site and looked at their headlines for the last 5 months. The only thing they have even marginally negative, is the stuff about the Harvey Milk and WW2 films, like I said, which is quickly "refuted" by some other lame posting a few days later that they take as gospel from any news source, like the pathetic tools over at IESB, who have been proven already to be full of shit."

Every story about a delay was reported and every story about things being on track was reported. I love how this place is seen as gospel of credible news by many of the posters yet SSS himself says it is not a news site. You guys throw out NEWS from places like SHH and Variety and claim very often that it does not get posted here because it is not really news. I mean that is just funny.

Anonymous said...

"You guys throw out NEWS from places like SHH and Variety and claim very often that it does not get posted here because it is not really news. I mean that is just funny."

Glad you're amused. Can you not really see the point there?? What are you 12 years old?? Retarded perhaps?? Do you work for Fox News??

You must be the same fuckhead who threw a hissy fit recently and stated that Returns wasn't a gay movie because Clark loves Lois.

If you're not the same guy, you're certainly as stupid

Anonymous said...

I believe that Superman Returns did not perform due to overexposure(smallville, lois&clark,JLA). So to prove my point the Simpson movie opens this weekend. I believe it wont do as well since the Simpsons are on in reruns daily. Proving once again....

Superman in 2009!

Restart

Anon even if I did shine his shoes I get better information then this site.

will_routh_for_food said...

the clowns over at BlowTights are just getting nervous now. No sequel greenlight long after the time it took for films like Spider-man and Batman Begins sequels to be given the go ahead. Nothing about the franchise at this weekend's Comic Con. or the Chicago Wizard World after that. Stars from the film (not Routh...obviously)like Posey and Huntingdon have gotten jobs elsewhere on TV series. The head of Warners is talking in "if's" instead of "when's." Routh is collecting change in a coffee can at a stop light in L.A..... not good, not good. You can hear their collective buttcheeks tightening as they hope and pray that Singer will somehow defy the odds and penetrate them once again....

Anonymous said...

"So to prove my point the Simpson movie opens this weekend. I believe it wont do as well since the Simpsons are on in reruns daily" Retard

This could be good after the last time when you stated that Spiderman 3 would fail in the wake of Returns!!!

You clearly are fuckin retarded and offer nothing but fantasies of your own deluded mind as "news"...fuck off retard

Anonymous said...

Comparing quality Anon Superman Returns did kick Spiderman 3 butt.
I would love to hear you say you love Spiderman 3, dance scene and all. We will see what the Simpson movie does but I am figuring only $120 tops. I have been wrong once or twice but I wont be wrong with.

Man of Steel filming next year!

Restart

Amazing Anon at least i post my name to my post. You have no courage to do the same. As much as I disagree with AP/terminal/sss/father at least they have balls to post a name. Something which you are lacking. YOu just got owned again boy!

Anonymous said...

At this rate with all the delays; Singer working on the Cruise film and then his own producers confirming after that he�ll be doing the Brokeback Politician film next. If Horn does approve Singer�s next Queer of Steel script, the film probably won�t see the light of day until the same summer Spiderman 4 comes out.

It�ll be great to see Singerman kneel before Spidey at the box office.

Anonymous said...

" On July 10, 2007, Variety reported Kevin Spacey will return for the sequel. They also referred to the sequel as Man of Steel and reported Singer was about to pitch the sequel to Warner Bros. with Michael Dougherty now writing the screenplay. He plans to start production next year for a 2009 release."......Once again showing that.

Superman's greatest challenge awaits in 2009!

Restart

Love to see someone pick that apart.

inthebutt said...

so your proving us with wrong with two week old news thats already been refuted countless times by things like Alan Horn interview and the harvey Milk project??

Yeah you really "got" us....

For someone who's an insider I thought you'd have a better grasp on the situation. Apparently the only thing you have a grasp on is your own pud which you keep pulling incessantly in anticiaption of seeing Routh in a tight rubber suit.

colors said...

"Superman's greatest challenge awaits in 2009!"

And his name is Bryan Singer.

Superman programming of some kind has been appearing non-stop on TV for the past 20 years, but somehow the public ONLY got tired of it when Singerman came out.

*crickets chirping*

Yeah, that's what I thought.

Anonymous said...

Retard, it your quote SAYS RIGHT THERE that Singer was about to pitch the sequel, you fuckin idiot. And as a film Spidey3 was more entertaining than Returns.

"I have been wrong once or twice but I wont be wrong with..."

Now there's the biggest understatement I've ever heard.

What is amusing is how much of a fuckhead Restart looks time and time again. Why would anyone be so naive to keep coming back and making himself look like such a retard??

You have to be REALLY stupid to go to such lengths to defend the piece of shit that is Returns...

Anonymous said...

Anyone putting faith in Dougherty is a fool. The best elements of Singerman, the plance catch scene, the DP roof scene, were stolen from Abrams script.

The dude is a loser, and what he brought to the screen, an emo Kent/Superman, the disasterous kid, a lame Lois Lane, tell us what he is capapable of, crap on a stick.

Added to that Singer's penchant for casting bad actors, and we got, Crap on a Stick.

Dear Mr. Horn, let us all start again.

Considering even those a SH hype a trying to recast any future movies, tells, let Singerman Return, rest in peace.

Anonymous said...

"Considering even those a SH hype a trying to recast any future movies, tells, let Singerman Return, rest in peace."

I see someone over there reckons he's going to mail the forum logs to Alan Horn. Certainly gives you a pretty balanced idea of what people think of Singerman, being not fucking much!

Anonymous said...

BOOT SINGER, REBOOT SUPERMAN!!

S.S.S. said...

for those who care, the Brandon Routh link in the Birthday post is now working again....

Anonymous said...

Wow look at all the venom from my last post. Truth hurts don't it. Well just like I posted above the sequel moving forward. Call me what you will but fact is fact. Funny the Horn comment and the H. Milk Biop has already been showned not to be a roadblock. But I guess some people want to grasp at straw that this project is DOA. Honestly you liked Spkderman 3 dancing?!?! Well each to his own and you call Returns gay. I will wait fot the reciepts to the simpson movie for support that overexposure hurt Superman Returns box office...........giving more support that.............

Superman goes all Wrath of Khan in 2009!

Restart

SSS thanks for updating the birthday link looks like your good at something other then posting rumors.

DBSS80 said...

"SSS thanks for updating the birthday link looks like your good at something other then posting rumors."

No he isn't.

Anonymous said...

At this point in time a Smallville TV spinoff for Kara/Supergirl has a better chance of coming to fruit (no pun intented) than Singer doing another Supes film.

Joel1245 said...

To me, it doesn't matter whether Singer makes another Superman movie. I'm not going to argue whether it'll happen or not. I sort of think that's pointless. I just know that it's, more than likely, going to be another ho-hum movie. After that, Warners will feel like they did their part and after that will probably be the question as to whether there will be another one, to which everyone, having walked away from the second film also disappointed, will know in their hearts there won't be.

So I say -

Superman's greatest challenge awaits in 2009! So what? If his greatest challenge ends up not being a great one in most other people's opinion (as with SR), then does it really count?

Anonymous said...

I think it is just a matter of risk/reward for WB right now. As much as some people here like to pretend that SR did not make WB any money once you add up all the licensing together, DVD, merchandicse, TV rights, ETC it definately made WB money there is no doubt. No before everyone jumps all over me i am not saying they were happy with the film because they were not. SR was supposed to be on of the biggest hits of the year and it fell way short of that. So it comes down to whether or not WB feels they made enough money to risk another big budget Superman movie. Personally i think that if Singer can do it for 175 mil they will probably say yes but given all the money he wasted on SR they may not believe he can do it for that price.

voice_of_reason said...

SSS thanks for updating the birthday link looks like your good at something other then posting rumors.

How is he posting rumors? Everything is linked to some other source? And thinking the Simpson's movie will have any bearing on Singerman is one of the most mornic things I've ever read from you, and that's saying a lot.

No, he isn't.
well for once thing, he seems to be good at attracting moronic apologists (redundant I know)to the blog.

Anonymous said...

"How is he posting rumors? Everything is linked to some other source?"

He is posting links to rumors is more accurate.

Anonymous said...

"And thinking the Simpson's movie will have any bearing on Singerman is one of the most mornic things I've ever read from you, and that's saying a lot."

He is only trying to demonstrate how much of a fuckwit he is. Something he does real well.

Anonymous said...

That link to the pink clad dancing Routh is pretty funny, but he still doesn't look as much of a fag as he did in Returns

Anonymous said...

"Call me what you will but fact is fact" Restart

Thanks, you're a fag fuckhead. Fact

Anonymous said...

I see that there are at least two new threads at SH hype asking who people would want as the new Superman. OUCH.

As for those who support a Singerman 2, be careful what you wish for, you may get it.

Anonymous said...

I guess I win again......That just shows how desperite people on SHh are for Singer to return becase.......


Superman flies into theaters in 2009!

Restart

You can not stop the truth from coming. Im not a fuckhead

Anonymous said...

wait, how do you "win" again? This isnt the Special Olympics

Anonymous said...

Wow people must really hate me from the above post. Nice hatchet job Anon (since you are too cowardly to post your name), but its the grammer I screw up not spelling, but i guess stupid is what stupid does. Other then name calling no one disputes the facts I raise on this site. But the names are getting a bit dull at least AP was colorful. (gay, fuckwitt, Retard) are these the best you got? What I have is undisputable proof............

Superman is back in 2009!

Restart

Lets count sources - Variety, SHH, Wikipedia, Aint-it-cool-news, darkhorizons....wow 5 sources that say a sequel is immenient. Lets count how many that say a sequel is dead.....hmmm zero. I so own this site.

Anonymous said...

OK genius show me the article where they say a sequel is "immenient"

ReTard (as if that's YOUR real name) you have nothing other than other websites posting rumors of a potential sequel. NOTHING HAS BEEN CONFIRMED YOU MORONIC FUCKWIT! A week ago the head of fucking Warner Bros said "IF we do a sequel". How much more evidence do you need fuckwit? Oh well Wiki-fucking-pedia and Dark Horizons said it, so I'm sure they would know better than the head of WB, right? Please go away. Go to BT where you and all of the other deluded mnetal midgets can whack off onto your pictures of Routh's chicken chest.

Anonymous said...

!" A week ago the head of fucking Warner Bros said "IF we do a sequel". How much more evidence do you need fuckwit? Oh well Wiki-fucking-pedia and Dark Horizons said it, so I'm sure they would know better than the head of WB, right?"

Evidence of what? So are you taking those comments as proof that the sequel is not happening? Sounds to me like they are scripting right now anmd if Horn likes the script then he will approve a budget of around 175 mil. If you take what he said at face value and are not assuming otherwise.

ApologistPuncher said...

*YAWN*

Is REtard still continuing his charge to prove how fucking stupid he is? That he ISN'T a fuckhead "ladyboy"? This shithead OBVIOUSLY has some sort of mental retardation, and needs to be institutionalized before he can harm someone for REAL.

Not just give them headaches with his bullshit.....

Anonymous said...

Evidence of what? So are you taking those comments as proof that the sequel is not happening? Sounds to me like they are scripting right now anmd if Horn likes the script then he will approve a budget of around 175 mil. If you take what he said at face value and are not assuming otherwise.

no you reading comprehension challenged fool, I'm using it as evidence that nothing is confirmed or 'imminent" for any sequel. And please stop with this apologist crap of "theyre probably scripting it and trying to get to that bidget of $175 million). If the film was that sure of a thing Horn wouldnt be saying "If's" to the media. he'd be saying that "they're working on it" or are "planning to do one."

Anonymous said...

"but its the grammer I screw up not spelling.."Retard

WHAT A FUCKHEAD...GRAMMER!!!

Man, you're so FUCKIN STUPID that you don't even realise YOU CAN'T SPELL EITHER!!!!

What a fuckin jackass, and ReTard we knew it couldn't be you because that guy stated that he's not a "fuckhead" whereas you clearly are.

Anonymous said...

Hi, I'm Restart, Doug Restart....




Don't whine about other people not posting their names, you fuckhead

DBSS80 said...

"And please stop with this apologist crap of "theyre probably scripting it and trying to get to that bidget of $175 million)."

They are not probably scripting anything they are writing the screenplay right now that has been confirmed a million times. If Superman Returns made money for WB which altogether it did it even says so in the last article SSS put up and Horn likes the screenplay then in all likelihood he will greenlight the sequel and they will have a budget of about 175 mil.

Anonymous said...

you're a complete an utter fool if you believe Singer can do a Superman film for $175 million. He had $209 million and couldnt pull it off. What's he going to do for $175 million? Have Superman drinking tea and playing shuffleboard? I'm sorry you dont "up the ante" and go "all wrath of khan" when you have almost $35 million less of a budget. You clowns are kidding yourselves.

Anonymous said...

doug/anon
Oh thats right because Singer did pull off a superhero movie on a shoestring budget its called Xmen fool. At least the name calling got better. I was getting bored with just fuckwitt now we added Jackass. And AP you show your face after i owned your ass so many times it hurts. Amazing.....Just like......

The Sequel in 2009!

Restart

But just in case you still are deluded enought to think WB will walk away from the superhero frachise I leave you with this.
Marvel = over $3 billion in movie tickets with characters. Thats enough to make any exec. salivate. If Horn doesnt make a sequel he should be thrown out!!!!

swright said...

" I'm sorry you dont "up the ante" and go "all wrath of khan" when you have almost $35 million less of a budget. "

They were able to do it with "Wrath of Khan." The first movie's budget was 60 million, and WOK's was about 30 to 35 I believe. It was a significant reduction, but they managed to pull off a better film with more action. A film that is STILL to this day the shining jewel of the Star Trek movies.

I'm not saying that this means Singer CAN do it, but it does show that it can be done.

Anonymous said...

actually retard, if you go out to AICN today it seems as though the JLA movie may be the one on the fast track...If that happens, bye bye Singerman

swright said...

"if you go out to AICN today it seems as though the JLA movie may be the one on the fast track"

Uh, no it doesn't. All it says is that they were reading a JLA script and they didn't know if it was animated or live action. Nobody said anything about fast tracking it.

Anonymous said...

I'm not saying that this means Singer CAN do it, but it does show that it can be done.
^^^

Transformers shows that you can have a incredible amount of action and CGI in a film that costs way less than 200 million to produce.

But in terms of action film budgets, comparing Singer to Bay is like comparing Bay to Scorsese in terms of the art of the cinema.

Anonymous said...

"Wrath of Khan" also had a different director, different writers, and a totally different creative team.

I hope the same happens with the SR sequel.

Anonymous said...

Anon/Doug and you think i make up facts. Fast track indeed. But I did say stupid is what stupid does.........................

Superman is on for 2009!

rEstart

ApologistPuncher said...

"And AP you show your face after i owned your ass so many times it hurts. Amazing.....Just like......"

I am amazing, aren't I? And quit with the come-on's, ladyboy. I ain't BS....

There WON'T be a BS sequel to his piece of shit "film", and I think it's HILARIOUS when a FUCKHEAD like REtard claims to be an "insider". Because if he WAS, he would know there ain't JACKSHIT going to happen with BS and Live Singerman or Peep Hard....

Anonymous said...

"Anon/Doug.....But I did say stupid is what stupid does"

You fuckin idiot you don't even know who you're talking too.

Anonymous said...

"It was a significant reduction, but they managed to pull off a better film with more action." swright

Oh look who is back, the crybaby. Got sick of sucking Younis's dick, have you swright?

Yes swright, it's always good to remind people of the Star Trek franchise, you fuckhead. The director of the "disappointing" first film, Robert Wise was not asked back for the sequel. Instead they went with someone who proved he had more of a feel for Trek........SOUND FAMILIAR DICKHEAD???

Anonymous said...

"All it says is that they were reading a JLA script and they didn't know if it was animated or live action." swright

Right. There does seem to be a fuckin huge amount of posters over there who are hoping like hell Warners go with the JLA film instead of another Singer gayfest.

swright, I suppose finding a gay superhero movie like Returns is pretty difficult, but us straight folk like Superman the "old fashioned way"

ie:entertaining

swright said...

"There does seem to be a fuckin huge amount of posters over there who are hoping like hell Warners go with the JLA film instead of another Singer gayfest."

Actually, you retarded fucknut, the poster wasn't talking about the fucking forums. He was saying that the site was reporting that it was on the fast track. Something that just isn't so. But way to proove your intelligence level you fucking halfwit. Typical of you though, to respond with insults when you see that somebody has proven something wrong over here.

Anonymous said...

"....the poster wasn't talking about the fucking forums" swright

Oh NO SHIT!!!! I WAS!!!

You cocksucker...I was pointing out the posters thoughts on the forum, get it?

Try to understand what's being written here before you fire back you fuckin retard. I said "Right" in response to your observation, then I pointed out the hate on the attached forum.

Congrats, you cocksucker. You've actually outdone Rtard for being this blogs biggest Fuckwit.

Now go back to sucking on Younis's cock

Terminal

Anonymous said...

he he he

Looks like swright gets his ass handed to him yet again.

To be fair though swright is a self admitted fan of Singerman Returns AND Jar Jar Binks, he he clearly can't be the "full deck"

swright said...

"There does seem to be a fuckin huge amount of posters over there who are hoping like hell Warners go with the JLA film instead of another Singer gayfest."

What the fuck do the forums have to do with somebody saying the site is reporting that the JLA movie is fast tracked?

The only reason you brought them up, was because somebody caught a hater making something up so you decided to ALTER the discussion.

You really should do something about your gay obsession with Steve Younis. It's disturbing..

Anonymous said...

and where was the Singerman presence at the Comic Con? There wasnt one fucking mention of it that piece of shit. They did have a kick ass DC Direct and Smallville panel though.

Anonymous said...

"so you decided to ALTER the discussion." swright

Fuck you dickhead. I don't need your approval to make an observation.

Who do you think you are? You're like a fuckin baby with his hands on his ears and cryin because you don't want to hear that grown up people don't like Singer's gayfest & Wouth

Anonymous said...

You really should do something about your gay obsession with Bryan Singer. It's disturbing..

Yes, I LOVE Younis as much as Singer himself......so not much. They are great figures of ridicule though. You know, like yourself.....

Anonymous said...

The only reason you brought them up, was because somebody caught a hater making something up so you decided to ALTER the discussion.


is this guy for real?

talk about desperate

Anonymous said...

"You really should do something about your gay obsession with Steve Younis. It's disturbing.."

Christ thats something coming from a guy who publically kisses Younis's ass on a regular basis.
And when Younis makes a fool of himself on other sites, swright's the first one in to defend his honor.

What a fuckin sheep
Terminal

Anonymous said...

"So to prove my point the Simpson movie opens this weekend. I believe it wont do as well since the Simpsons are on in reruns daily. Proving once again....Superman in 2009!

Restart"

The Simpsons - $71.9 million opening weekend.

"'We are ecstatic,'" said Chris Aronson, senior vice president for distribution at 20th Century Fox. 'It far exceeded even the most optimistic of expectations.'

The hand-drawn movie had the fifth best opening weekend of the year, beating such notable contenders as "Transformers," from Paramount, "Ghost Rider," from Sony Pictures and the computer-animated "Ratatouille," from The Walt Disney Co. and Pixar Animation Studios."

To me, this suggests that Superman Returns didn't disappoint at the box office because Smallville is on TV. It failed because it wasn't a very good movie. It wasn't a good movie because it was poorly written and poorly directed (among other things).

colors said...

"So to prove my point the Simpson movie opens this weekend. I believe it wont do as well since the Simpsons are on in reruns daily."

Ouch. Just ouch.

I say again, Superman has constantly been in the public eye via live action TV and animated shows for the better part of twenty years. Singerman shot itself in the foot, not the previous incarnations.

Anonymous said...

"To me, this suggests that Superman Returns didn't disappoint at the box office because Smallville is on TV. It failed because it wasn't a very good movie. It wasn't a good movie because it was poorly written and poorly directed (among other things)."

SR opening weekend has little to anything to do with the film itself. The reviews were strong and WB marketed the hell out of it. Why would anyone think when it opened that it would be bad when most of what they heard was good?? Superman as a character is not that popular anymore.

Anonymous said...

"To me, this suggests that Superman Returns didn't disappoint at the box office because Smallville is on TV. It failed because it wasn't a very good movie. It wasn't a good movie because it was poorly written and poorly directed (among other things)."

SR opening weekend has little to anything to do with the film itself. The reviews were strong and WB marketed the hell out of it. Why would anyone think when it opened that it would be bad when most of what they heard was good?? Superman as a character is not that popular anymore.

Anonymous said...

Oops sorry double post there computer is on the fritz.

Anonymous said...

"Oops sorry double post there computer is on the fritz."

Don't blame the computer.

Superman being not as popular anymore doesn't wash. Transformers weren't the flavor of the month a few weeks ago either. It's no magic formula....you need a good film to relaunch these franchises. Returns failed categoricaly.

For one thing Smallville has to be the longest running live action version of Superman. Seven years and still going. They don't keep recommissioning the show for the heck of it.

Superman may very well be not as popular at the moment, but all he needs is to be put in a movie that works and pushes all the right buttons. Had Singer pulled it off it would have been a MASSIVE hike in the Man Of Steel's profile. That never happened.

Anonymous said...

"Why would anyone think when it opened that it would be bad when most of what they heard was good??"

Maybe not so much as soon as it opened, but word of mouth KILLED it soon after.

Anonymous said...

"To me, this suggests that Superman Returns didn't disappoint at the box office because Smallville is on TV."

Don't worry, that's just RETARD proving yet again that he's fuckin stupid.

I can't wait to see when he sticks his fugly head up on here and wriggle out of that one...then claim he's owned us all again

Terminal

Anonymous said...

"They did have a kick ass DC Direct and Smallville panel though."

Can you imagine a Singerman panel??

"Ladies & Gentlemen please make welcome Brandon Routh(desultry applause)he'll be selling his autograph in the merchandise room later"

Anonymous said...

"I believe it wont do as well since the Simpsons are on in reruns daily. Proving once again....Superman in 2009!"

You must have to be pretty fucked up to think that the Simpsons has ANYTHING to do with Superman's future, unless it's proof of yet another franchise Returns failed to match

Anonymous said...

"I believe it wont do as well since the Simpsons are on in reruns daily. Proving once again....Superman in 2009!"

You must have to be pretty fucked up to think that the Simpsons has ANYTHING to do with Superman's future, unless it's proof of yet another franchise Returns failed to match

Anonymous said...

"SR opening weekend has little to anything to do with the film itself. The reviews were strong and WB marketed the hell out of it. Why would anyone think when it opened that it would be bad when most of what they heard was good?? Superman as a character is not that popular anymore."

Yeah, I was talking more about its long-term box office. The opening weekend was pretty strong, but then it crawled slowly and painfully towards the $200 million mark. Kind of like the way Superman crawled through all that mud and sludge while being assaulted by Lex's thugs. (Wow, what an ugly scene that was, in the middle of an ugly movie.) Anyway...

- CK

Anonymous said...

where is Retard? I want to hear him explain his grand old prediction about the Simpsons? Yeah the fact that the show is on TV daily TOTALLY killed their BO this weekend. Go home Retard.

Anonymous said...

Anon/All other losers

I am right. Simpsons will not finish above $160. Do not believe me lets do the numbers.
71+36+15+10+5=137million. That is how this movie will drop(not including a 23M fudge factor). Now you expect me to believe that if Simpsons were off the air the movie would do worse??!?! Of course not it would have doubled the money. So my model is proven. If media went cold turkey with Superman, Returns would have been in the 300-400 dollar mark easily. But WB would have to cut all its lisensing money on reruns(JLA, Superman(animated),L&C, Smallville, etc.) This is the same model with the X file movie. So I am proven right again. If You think the Simpsons is going over $160 your on crack. This just proves....................

Superman in 2009!

Restart

I will love the next posts they willl call me Retard and ignore my numbers and facts. This just reinforces how right I am. Making me the undisputed king of this website. Bow toward your superior!

Anonymous said...

Restart,

You never provided any figures before the Simpsons movie came out. If you had said "The Simpsons will not make $160 million" a week ago, you would have a much more convincing case.

As it is, Simpsons will be much, much, much more profitable than SR, considering that the Simpsons did not cost $250+ to produce. Relative to its budget, The Simpsons at even $130 million is a box office smash.

-CK

Anonymous said...

CK
There is only one flaw to your thinking. If the Simpson movie included all its failed production starts into its budget then it too would be in the same cat. as Returns. Also if Simpsons had about 5 iterations on TV at the sametime like superman does it would have preformed worse. Though CK you are right it will be a profitable film. Oh CK thank you for countering my arguement instead of insulting. Proves that unlike most people on this board you have a brain. OH yeah one more thing....................

Superman is back in 2009!

REstart

SSS seems unusally quiet. I will try to get some more proof a sequel is on the way to cheer him up.

Anonymous said...

Retard, your a fool who has no clue as to how to interpet box office numbers.
Simpson's doesnt have to hit $200 million to be a "success." Not sure where you get that number from? Or why it's even relevant? For an animated film that's not completely directed at children it had an outstanding first box office weekend. Not to mention when compared to what it cost to make the film which was a whopping $75 million. Check out the quote from Boxofficemojo:
The Simpsons Movie snared the biggest debut ever for a television adaptation, eclipsing Mission: Impossible II, and it more than doubled the previous top opening for a television cartoon adaptation, The SpongeBob SquarePants Movie, and will soon surpass The Rugrats Movie as that category's highest grosser. The Simpsons's start also ranks third among animation overall and fifth for the month of July.

So how again exactly was this film negatively impacted by the TV show when more people than whom watch the show on a weekly basis went to see it opening weekend?

While the television series is still a steady performer in its 18th season, it is no longer among the most popular programs. Viewership was 8.6 million on average this past season, according to Nielsen Media Research, which means that more people may have paid to see the movie over the weekend than those who watch a first run episode.

voice_of_reason said...

OWNED


although owing Retard is like shooting fish in a barrel so it's nothing you can really be proud of.

Anonymous said...

Not to mention when compared to what it cost to make the film which was a whopping $75 million.
^^^

According to Entertainment Weekly the production budget for The Simpsons movie was only 65 million dollars.

“Simply put, it [The Simpsons] was the one flick that everyone just had to see this weekend. Certainly, the movie has already gone a long way toward recouping its $65 mil production budget…”

http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20048748,00.html

Anonymous said...

You should get letters to Dan Lin at Warner Bros.

He is the one backing the Justice League flick and the reason it's in development in the first place.

If he has a bunch of letters on his desk he can turn around to Horn, Robinov etc and say "see all these letters, they don't want Singerman".

If you didn't like Singerman, then the Justice League is your best chance of seeing a decent translation of the DC/Superman mythology onto the silver screen.

Of course, JL could end being shitty also, but at least the people behind that aren't afraid to EMBRACE the character's comic book heritage. Singer throw it into the incinerator.

Anonymous said...

Retard, you have no fuckin clue

Anonymous said...

ALL
As usual you morons missed the point. I will try little words so you get it.

Superman - UP TO 5 DIFFERENT SHOWS IN RERUNS

Simpsons - ONE SHOW IN RERUNS

At $160 million final and that is generous it will rank at best 20th by the time the year is out. Not bad but not a slaughter

NOW THE CONCLUSION YOU IDIOTS.

If Simpsons was not on TV it would have made twice as much. Going by this model Returns would have been in the $400 million mark domestic if WB pulled all of their Superman reruns. And this blog would not exist

DO......I....NEED....TO....TALK...SLOWER...FOR...YOU. Or do you finally realize.............

Superman Sequel in 2009!

Restart

Man you people are so fing dumb. I can even predict what you people will say next. I will get "retard" and "that makes no sense" but no one. Not one person on this blog will dispute that if Smallville, Lois & Clark, JLA, Superboy, etc. was not out there Returns would have slaughtered all the competition. I forget predictable animals like most people on this blog will never ammount to anything.

Anonymous said...

"Not one person on this blog will dispute that if Smallville, Lois & Clark, JLA, Superboy, etc. was not out there Returns would have slaughtered all the competition."

Wrong again fuckwit, but at least you admit it was a failure now. Took you a while to see the obvious, but thanks for acknowledging that fact.

In your desperation to stay afloat on here your new theory (which is just so much bullshit anyway) now has you changing your opinion.

"If Simpsons was not on TV it would have made twice as much. Going by this model Returns would have been in the $400 million mark domestic if WB pulled all of their Superman reruns. And this blog would not exist"

That is ridiculous. You overlook the fact that Returns HAD a strong opening AND WORD OF MOUTH KILLED IT.

All your saying is that people would prefer to stay home and watch Smallville...You'd rather Warners kill off successful franchises to give the flawed Returns a boost.

No, you are without doubt the biggest FUCKHEAD here...FACT

Anonymous said...

....and by your logic, Spiderman 3 should have made how much??

Don't forget you predicted that film's failure too "in the wake of Superman Returns"

You are totally clueless

Anonymous said...

"That is ridiculous. You overlook the fact that Returns HAD a strong opening AND WORD OF MOUTH KILLED IT."

No it didn't are you kidding me?? How the hell is 52 mil in it's first weekend a strong opening for a blockbuster movie. FF 2 even made more than that. Superman as a whole is not a popular character anymore, a lot of people do not like him. SR i thought was just average but the character as a whole people are not that in love with. Do you know how many people i talked too before SR opened that told me they did not like Superman? I am not talking about regular people i mean big time comic book fans, many of them DC fans. They want darker almost anti-heroes these days.

Anonymous said...

"Do you know how many people i talked too before SR opened that told me they did not like Superman? "

No, how many? Because I'm sure your incredibly detailed research on the popularity of Superman would stand up.

Obviously Warners KEEP ON making Smallville and animated Superman features for the heck of it. Not to mention release all sorts of older Supes titles onto DVD in the last year and tons of associated merchandise.

Of course, you can pick up Returns on DVD in the bargain bin already and they give it away in HD!

This arguments as stupid as Retard's. If the movie's great, folks are likely to come. For instance, are you seriously trying to suggest that Transformers are more popular in the minds of filmgoers than Superman was?

Anonymous said...

"They want darker almost anti-heroes these days."

Yeah right, dark anti-heroes like Spiderman, Capt. Jack Sparrow, Clark Kent on Smallville, Homer Simpson.....

In fact I'd say a darker anti-hero would sum up Singer's Superman. A self-obsessed stalking emo with a rubber fetish.

Anonymous said...

"If the movie's great, folks are likely to come"

Exactly. Superman wasn't the talk of the town in 1978 until a certain film came out.

Anonymous said...

"In fact I'd say a darker anti-hero would sum up Singer's Superman. A self-obsessed stalking emo with a rubber fetish."

Exactly.

Restart, your original point about the Simpsons movie was that it would disappoint at the box office. It has surpassed all expectations, even though people can stay home and watch the TV show for free. I think you would have to admit that Returns failed, at lease in part, because it was simply not a very good movie. I don't think the number of TV shows really has anything to do with it.

I think this also explains why Superman is not a very popular character right now. Put him in a heroic role in an interesting, fun story, and I think he would be back on top. I don't think Singer and Co. are capable of making such a movie. They thought it would be a good idea to make Superman a stalking, whiney, deadbeat dad who gets dragged along the ground by his face, and who keeps dying and ending up the hospital. How thrilling!

By the way, Restart, I have nothing against you personally. I think we're all here because we love the character of Superman. I just hate what Singer and Co. did with the character.

- CK

voice_of_reason said...

If Simpsons was not on TV it would have made twice as much. Going by this model Returns would have been in the $400 million mark domestic if WB pulled all of their Superman reruns. And this blog would not exist

DO......I....NEED....TO....TALK...SLOWER...FOR...YOU. Or do you finally realize.............

Superman Sequel in 2009!

Restart


Retard, the whole reason people went to see The Simpson's in the first place was BECAUSE of the successful TV show you moron. If there was no TV show, people wouldnt have had a clue about what it was, and it wouldnt have made nearly as much money already. Most of the movie was based on "in jokes" from the TV show.

You've yet to state one valid argument about how the fact a character has a television presence negatively impacts box office. All you have is conjecture and all evidence, like the Simpson's opening weekend box office numbers that points to the exact opposite. you've provided zero factual evidence to back up your claim. Other than your delusioned belief that the Simpson's film was somehow supposed to outgross Singerman for it to be considered successful.

Put the blame of Singerman's failure where it belongs: on Singer making a shitty movie. It has nothing to do with Smallville, or STAS, or Krypto The Superdog, etc.

Anonymous said...

"This arguments as stupid as Retard's. If the movie's great, folks are likely to come. For instance, are you seriously trying to suggest that Transformers are more popular in the minds of filmgoers than Superman was?"

My argument is about the film's opening. I did not like SR that much and i do believe word of mouth hurt it. However nothing should have stopped it from opening huge. Do you remember when it was weeks from it's release? The buzz was good and so were the reviews. WB marketed the shit out of it. How many predictions from BO experts did you hear that said that SR going to open anything short of 100 mil or higher first weekend? A films opening is a massive indicator on how popular the character is. Is Superman still popular yeah he is. However he is not what WB thought he was if he was than not everyone under the sun would have got the opening weekend BO predictions wrong now would they??

ApologistPuncher said...

You know, it fills me with warmth to see my "title" of "REtard" has caught on with everyone the way it has.

I mean, the ladyboy deserves most of the credit, what with being RETARDED and all. But I "officially" titled him, and the fucking half-wit bastard can NEVER shake it now.

It's the gift that keeps on giving....

Anonymous said...

You know the shit is going to hit the FAN on this BLOG soon either way. If the sequel is canned we can all laugh at the apologists and claim victory. Unfortunately if they approve the sequel they will be here non-stop claiming victory of their own.

Anonymous said...

Actually, in that case I'm on the brink to say "I want Singer staying". Just for the fun of it. Sure he would kill Supes but his interviews about his failure would make up for anything!

Reporter: "So Bryan, why do you think your movie bombed?"
Singer: "duh...duh...duh...?...!!??...duh...whoooohhhhaaa...ttt???!??!?"
*eyes roll back and he starts drooling*
Reporter: "Bryan?...Bryan!"
*snap*
Singer: "Uh?!?...Sorry, what was your question?"

This place here would be fun from the day the production would start till the day the DVD would "hit" stores.

Speaking of failures: Oh Retard, where art thou!?

Anonymous said...

"Is Superman still popular yeah he is. However he is not what WB thought he was if he was"

errrr.......

I guess filmgoers saw the trailers and saw Routh on the cornflake boxes and thought "That's Superman???"

meh

Anonymous said...

Exactly! Even as a Superman fan I had very mixed feelings once I saw Routh in costume. Not just the suit looked horrible, Routh is so ridiculously slim, he should play Aquaman!

That and the horrible story ruined it for me and looking at the BO a not so small number of other people, too.

Anonymous said...

I think the overall dull casting and the dull digital look to the film speaks volumes about why it was a misfire. I'd hate to think how the film would've done without the benefit of ripping off the iconic Williams score.

Anonymous said...

All

One of the great reasons I think that Returns did not surpass $300 million is that the market was oversaturated with Superman. But regardless of history I look toward the future toward the....

Sequel in 2009!

REstart

If a sequel doesnt happen I will come here and post a personal apology but I know for a fact that will never happen.

Anonymous said...

"One of the great reasons I think that Returns did not surpass $300 million is that the market was oversaturated with Superman. " Retard


Still on this argument??? Pathetic

ApologistPuncher said...

"If a sequel doesnt happen I will come here and post a personal apology but I know for a fact that will never happen."

See how the fucking REtard IGNORES the people who shot his stupid ass statements to shreds? THAT is another "staple" of the Apologist.

And this is the SAME ladyboy who claimed he would LEAVE and NEVER return if proven wrong, and once he was, CONTINUED to spread his made-up bullshit...

You ain't foolin' ANYONE, shit for brains.

Evil said...

www.brandonrouthisnotsuperman.cjb.com

Nuff said!

Evil said...

Brandon was the problem period!
If you don't believe that the guy playing Superman is Superman it doesn't work!
The Donner movies have TERRIBLE plots, and Terrible acting from a lot of actors.
But Chris was so perfect for the role that no matter what was going on around him he shined, and he made you believe a man could fly.
With Routh I just believed a gay closeted man could get a part by blowing a queer director, and snorting coke with him, and other homosexuals in a room in a house which was throwing a party on Halloween.

Then he cast the worst person in Hollywood for the role of Lois Lane.

Singer forgot one thing! Every generation should have it's very own Superman, and not a wannabe Superman from the guy before.

The guy who he will NEVER be able to replace! Not now, and not ever... Brandon won't ever capture the role how Chris did, how George Reeves did, and how this generations Man of Steel Tom Welling does.

He should have got Welling for the role, and if he had his movie would have made 300million domestically, and 650 million world wide easy.

Welling is on a crappy network, and he has become the face of the character for this generation, and by not casting him the WB allowed Singer to fuck this current generation out of a chance to see their Superman on the big screen with the suit on.

Singer is a hack of a director, and is someone who should never ever be allowed back into the directors chair for a Superman or hero movie.

And Brandon... Go back to behind the Bar son because you don't belong on the big screen.

www.brandonrouthisnotsuperman.cjb.com

This webpage says it all!

Anonymous said...

"Brandon was the problem period!
If you don't believe that the guy playing Superman is Superman it doesn't work!
The Donner movies have TERRIBLE plots, and Terrible acting from a lot of actors."

Singer was the main problem. STM was great it was not just Reeve. Look at Superman 3 and 4 the script and director sucked and so did the movie, Chris could not save it. Nobody playing Superman would have saved SR nobody. The material was awful and there is no coming back from that. Even academy award winning actors have starred in flops. I am not pimping Routh here because i thought he was OK at best. However SR as it was was going to make a fool out of anyone who put on the costume.

Anonymous said...

This webpage says it all!


Which I'm willing to bet is your webpage.

swright said...

From Superherohype..

"I've also heard from sources that the "Justice League" film is more of a priority for WB than the sequel to "Superman," so don't be surprised if you see Brandon Routh in "Justice League" before any new "Superman" film."

Looks like you may be shit out of luck there evil.

ApologistPuncher said...

"Looks like you may be shit out of luck there evil."

Wasn't SHH ALSO invited on the tour of the Singerman set?

And if memory serves, they have a similar "no negativity = perks from WB" deal in place, like your hero Younis.

Lana2k7 said...

Evil said...
Brandon was the problem period!
If you don't believe that the guy playing Superman is Superman it doesn't work!
The Donner movies have TERRIBLE plots, and Terrible acting from a lot of actors.
But Chris was so perfect for the role that no matter what was going on around him he shined, and he made you believe a man could fly.
With Routh I just believed a gay closeted man could get a part by blowing a queer director, and snorting coke with him, and other homosexuals in a room in a house which was throwing a party on Halloween.

Then he cast the worst person in Hollywood for the role of Lois Lane.

Singer forgot one thing! Every generation should have it's very own Superman, and not a wannabe Superman from the guy before.

The guy who he will NEVER be able to replace! Not now, and not ever... Brandon won't ever capture the role how Chris did, how George Reeves did, and how this generations Man of Steel Tom Welling does.

He should have got Welling for the role, and if he had his movie would have made 300million domestically, and 650 million world wide easy.

Welling is on a crappy network, and he has become the face of the character for this generation, and by not casting him the WB allowed Singer to fuck this current generation out of a chance to see their Superman on the big screen with the suit on.

Singer is a hack of a director, and is someone who should never ever be allowed back into the directors chair for a Superman or hero movie.

And Brandon... Go back to behind the Bar son because you don't belong on the big screen.

This webpage says it all!

How superficial can you people get? Pretty pathetic, if you ask me.

Last time I checked, Tom Welling isn't Superman. (Yet. Unless I've missed a year of my life and it's actually 2008.) Have you heard the latest cop-out from AlMiles? Something like "we don't have to worry" about the hundreds of loose ends that the show has?

ApologistPuncher said...

"How superficial can you people get? Pretty pathetic, if you ask me."

No one DID, you Apologist twat.

Don't you love the incoherrent ramblings of a sissy-boy Apologist? The stupid fucker ACTUALLY thought this shit MADE SENSE!

Anonymous said...

"No one DID, you Apologist twat.

Don't you love the incoherrent ramblings of a sissy-boy Apologist? The stupid fucker ACTUALLY thought this shit MADE SENSE!"

Nothing you say ever makes sense. All you ever say to people is i fucked your mom.

ApologistPuncher said...

"Nothing you say ever makes sense. All you ever say to people is i fucked your mom."

Had to fall-back on "I know you are, but what am I", nut-muncher? How fucking PATHETIC. Learn to use your OWN insults, sissy.

This asshair still ives with his parents, NO DOUBT about THAT.

Anonymous said...

"Had to fall-back on "I know you are, but what am I", nut-muncher? How fucking PATHETIC. Learn to use your OWN insults, sissy."

I don't tell people i fuck their mothers. I leave that to rapist ass loonies like yourself. My mother is 67 years old you are awful desperate if the best you can do is hitting on an almost 70 year old woman. You must just rape the younger ones since you repulse them.

ApologistPuncher said...

"I don't tell people i fuck their mothers. I leave that to rapist ass loonies like yourself. My mother is 67 years old you are awful desperate if the best you can do is hitting on an almost 70 year old woman. You must just rape the younger ones since you repulse them."

Hey, the fat old bitch LOVES a REAL MAN'S cock up inside her dusty nether-regions. She told me she's NEVER had a REAL man come IN or OUT of her "blackhole" until I came along....

You must look in the mirror and feel ashamed you are sooo fucking LAME sissy-boy. If that's the best you can do, you OBVIOSULY get your ass kicked there in junior high a lot.

Anonymous said...

"You must look in the mirror and feel ashamed you are sooo fucking LAME sissy-boy. If that's the best you can do, you OBVIOSULY get your ass kicked there in junior high a lot."

The tougher you talk the bigger pussy i know you are. I am betting you are about 5'5, 120 pds and 16 years old bitch. Half the woman you hit on probably beat you up.

Anonymous said...

"And as for the official campaign, let's get writing, boys!"

Well this *fangirl* is going to get writing ASAP, because Bryan Singer (on Larry King Live) said he made Superman Returns "for girls," --- and Singer must be a misogynist, because he cast the worst Lois Lane ever, co-wrote the worst characterization of Lois Lane ever, turned Superman into a deadbeat father and a stalker, and wrote a "love story" with the emotional depth of a foot --- among countless other offenses!

ApologistPuncher said...

"The tougher you talk the bigger pussy i know you are. I am betting you are about 5'5, 120 pds and 16 years old bitch. Half the woman you hit on probably beat you up."

All I have to say is: YOU "liked" Singerman Peeps, so what YOU "bet on" is based on mental retardation.

And as for what I look like, just pray you never find out, sissy.

Anonymous said...

^^

Your that fucking UGLY huh, that's alright your mother probably still loves you, unless you have raped and killed her.

ApologistPuncher said...

"Your that fucking UGLY huh, that's alright your mother probably still loves you, unless you have raped and killed her."

Well, we BOTH know YOUR mother loves me so it's all good.

She told me she hates YOU though, what with being a limp-wristed sissy and all.....

Anonymous said...

Hey Reeve's Costume in his 4 superman movies looks so cool, that red cape and suit looks very comfortable compare to Singer's costume version of Superman returns. The cape is not red, looks bulky, same as his boots. Myy goshh... why can they just use the Reeve costume and that wonderful S logo instead of the new one? The cape too doesnt have an S logo at the back? In all superman movies of reeve, the costume stays the same, why happens to Singer's movie is he changed the costume and the color red to maroon. That really sucks!!!!

Anonymous said...

FOOLS!

If anyone want reboot Superman, then they are an idiot. Superman Returns rocked hard and you all suck.

Anonymous said...

bryan singer and joel schumacher should direct a superhero film together entitled "another stupid gay superhero movie", with Ang Lee as script writer

Anthony said...

Tom Welling can do a much better job than Routh and unlike Routh, he make the character more believable and after ten years he's earned the right to be given a chance.