Thursday, July 10, 2008

Hulk Smash Bryan SInger??


Hey,

Aint It Cool News is an obvious Singer-Sucker website, but get this little tidbit they posted today:

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/37402

"We've been hearing hints for a while not what Bryan Singer's SUPERMAN RETURNS sequel might take a radically different form than many of us first thought...including not having Singer on-board at all.

Today, this may be closer to reality."


Can you hear it? The sobs? The moaning? The denials and limp trash-talking SURE to be spewed across Younis' Apologist Lair?

Now, The Incredible Hulk was a good movie. MUCH better than Ang Lee's snorefest. Was it the BEST movie they could have done? No. It felt "chopped-up" in parts, and rushed in others. Better than Singerman Peeps? Infinitely. Something tells me if Leterrier DOES do a new Superman, there will be no stalking, no bastard kids, and no fetish wetsuits to be seen. Who knows, maybe Superman will make a fist for more than just "really fast flying with Kryptonite in his side"??

The chicken's is comin' home to roost, BS...

P.S. I know the Apologist "mantra" will be: "It jst a roomor. MOS iz commin out in 2010!!". But think about something: First, we have the Millar rumor, then quick recanting. Followed closely by the Leterrier rumor, again with a quick Hollywood "Uh, what I MEANT was...". It would be one thing if a Singerman sequel was "set in stone". FAR from it. WB is going to go with the biggest profit-potential pitch that comes their way.

Where there's smoke, there's fire.

45 comments:

Anonymous said...

This film deserved to succeed far more than it has. Unlike Ang Lee's weird adaptation, this film delivered in everything as far as I'm concerned: action, story, cast, even the CGI was MUCH improved. You could actually feel for the Hulk in the new film.

So what happened?! Well, I personally believe both Marvel & Universal dropped the ball in marketing. Singer uses that excuse, but it really is valid here.

Case in point? Everyone knew about the hype of Iron Man, but as late as early March, there were still no trailers or pictures of the Hulk himself. So what did the apologist 'fanboys' do? they proceeded to rip the film to shreds over at places like SingerHomoHype.

Finally there were pics & trailers & clips, but they didn't do the final product justice, because when I went the 1st time to the theater to see TIH I was truly impressed!

Why did the studio keep the project such top secret? Apologists whined that it sucked & TPTB were ashamed to release anything due to it really sucking, I guess due to the CGI. I agree that Marvel kept this thing too 'hush-hush' until the last minute & it may've cost them. Not a good marketing strategy, especially when the film was going to have a hard enough time overcoming Ang 'Brokeback' Lee. On top of that the apologists condemned the film before the fact & then obviously didn't support it.

Well, I insist that Marvel not 'can' this franchise again, & I'm sure when it finally leaves theaters it won't be totally disappointing, & the DVD is CERTAIN to do well, as well as cable, so I for one state my support for it.

Anonymous said...

Another Rumor likely to go nowhere at all, what else is new?? And why would WB hand Superman to a guy that just made a mediocre Hulk movie, doing less business than Singerman did??

Anonymous said...

And why should WB give the reins back to a hack & a fag like Singer? So he can dish out more of the same? The apologists cometh forth!

Anonymous said...

"And why should WB give the reins back to a hack & a fag like Singer? So he can dish out more of the same? The apologists cometh forth!"

I'm not an Apologist moron. They shouldn't, Singer does not deserve another chance but this guy has no track record for this kind of thing. WB would really be desperate to go this way, their are better directors out there, more suited. Don't just reboot for the sake of a reboot, do it right.

Anonymous said...

But you call names like an apologist, moron! You even forgot to add a comma, as I thought you were saying you aren't an APOLOGIST MORON. And The Incredible Hulk IS NOT a mediocre film. Even if it doesn't match the box office that they wanted, the film itself IS incredible! It's light-years beyond the Ang Lee fiasco in EVERY way! It's not MY fault if the APOLOGISTS won't support it. THEIR loss. As far as I'm concerned, it was equally as good as Iron Man, & I actually enjoyed it more & want repeat viewings moreso. It's NOT a Ghost Rider or FF as the APOLOGISTS always want to harp on. As far as a well executed comics film, it's pretty spot on. Marvel HAS the right idea with TIH, but they didn't market it very well, like they did with Iron Man, & also Internet Morons such as yourself wrote TIH off, anyway, before the fact.

Nevertheless, Marvel HAS the right idea, regardless.

ApologistPuncher said...

"Another Rumor likely to go nowhere at all, what else is new?? And why would WB hand Superman to a guy that just made a mediocre Hulk movie, doing less business than Singerman did??"

The SAME whiney BITCH I see.

This post proves that this douchebag is a digruntled, sexually-frustrated, idiotic 12 year old. NOTHING will satisy his stupid ass. You think anyone likes reading your inane bullshit? Full of ??? after every sentence?

Either shut the fuck up, or shut the FUCK up. Your choice, shitstain.

Anonymous said...

"But you call names like an apologist, moron!"

Why are you talking shit just because i don't think this is a good idea?? I don't like Singerman but i am not going to support any idea that comes along just so we get a reboot, i want it done right this time.


"And The Incredible Hulk IS NOT a mediocre film. Even if it doesn't match the box office that they wanted, the film itself IS incredible!"

No it was not Incredible. The film was just OK. Nothing great that stood out about it at all. It was so chopped up, i felt like there was a whole different movie Marvel left on the cutting room floor. It had more action but the story was not engaging and flat.

"it was equally as good as Iron Man"

It was not even in the same universe as Iron Man and the BO and reviews clearly illustrate this as well. If John Favreau was talking Superman that would be a different story.

"also Internet Morons such as yourself wrote TIH off, anyway, before the fact."

I supported the Hulk ASSHOLE and thought it looked quite good. I did not dislike it, but it was not a film that in any way gives me confidence this guy can make a great Superman movie. Plus he has already basically retracted what he has said, so like i said before just another rumor that will go nowhere. No different than when Singer opens his mouth about his Sequel that will never get off the ground. It sucks ass being a Superman fan these days.

Anonymous said...

"You think anyone likes reading your inane bullshit? Full of ??? after every sentence?"

You don't like what i have to say, don't reply to it.

"Either shut the fuck up, or shut the FUCK up. Your choice, shitstain."

If You don't want different takes on things, shut down the blog, this is my opinion, i could care fucking less what a piece of trash like you thinks.

Anonymous said...

"I supported the Hulk ASSHOLE"

And everyone has one, such as you & your opinion are like. Predictable apologist response, more name calling. Why don't you go suck on your master down under?!

Anonymous said...

"more name calling."

Who started the name calling? Not me. Don't start shit next time and just stick the subject.

Anonymous said...

It's 'stick TO the subject', not 'stick the subject', but yeah, in your case, maybe so. ;)

ApologistPuncher said...

"You don't like what i have to say, don't reply to it."

Awww little dickhead. No ???'s this time? If I don't like what you have to say, I will kick shit in your eye, dink.

"If You don't want different takes on things, shut down the blog, this is my opinion, i could care fucking less what a piece of trash like you thinks."

Nobody is going to listen to what a little closet-dwelling asshole like YOU says to do. You're a little fuckwad who won't like ANYTHING that isn't YOUR juvenile idea. Guess what, REtard Jr.? NO ONE is handing the Superman franchise over to a fucking CHILD like you. Deal with it.

And obviously you DO "care" about what I have to say, twat. You wouldn't be replying if you didn't.

Jesus, fuck's like this guy are pretty much "Apologist-lite".

Anonymous said...

This site has become a joke. Seriously. I don't care about Returns but this site is just stupid now. It's lost any common sense and it's probably run by a 50 year old gay man wanting to please the young boys who didn't like 'Returns'.

Anonymous said...

This site is deader than any Singerman sequel. Not cool or relevant anymore.

Anonymous said...

"This site is deader than any Singerman sequel. Not cool or relevant anymore."

But I still come here.....

Nice try.

Father Finian Egan

Anonymous said...

...Meanwhile in the land of reality...

There is a MOS casting call out in Omaha for extras and walk-ons. Luckily I live in Omaha and will be signing up shortly.

I hope all 10 of you whiney dumbfucks have fun bashing the sequel. But there is no chance in hell you won't go see it when it releases. And that is why Singer pwns you!

Singer's Superman is AWESOME!

Anonymous said...

Great to see support for Singer. Show you that "we" own this site.
Meaning.......

Singer is shotting in 2009!

Restart

I too will be flying to Omaha for a walk on part.

ApologistPuncher said...

"There is a MOS casting call out in Omaha for extras and walk-ons. Luckily I live in Omaha and will be signing up shortly."

Ah yes, I see Apologists ARE as stupid as I thought! Guess what, you REtarded cunts? ANYONE can post ANYTHING on Craigslist! Go back and read it again, if you can read, and count the grammar errors. You dumb fucks.

Omaha Nebraska? Jesus Christ. Yeah, WB is going to shoot Madame Of Swish in the US, and in cow-fucking NEBRASKA to boot....

"Singer is shotting in 2009!"

Shotting? Is that what BS does when he bricks in your mouth, queerbait?

ApologistPuncher said...

"This site has become a joke. Seriously. I don't care about Returns but this site is just stupid now. It's lost any common sense and it's probably run by a 50 year old gay man wanting to please the young boys who didn't like 'Returns'."

Gee, I wonder if this is an Apologist "pretending" to be one of us with a fully-functioning brain? I mean, they NEVER do that. Do they?

Fuck-off, you inbred piece of dogshit. Apologists AREN'T welcome here.

Anonymous said...

Well, isn't it pretty convenient that the exact same day there are news about heavy rumbling at WB/DC studios AND possible recasting for at least Lois Lane in MOS (which won't even happen, anyway), the Singerman ballsuckers suddenly come out with "casting news" for an unannounced movie which they can't even back up!?

Sorry, but everyone who thinks Younis has ANY kind of real sources is dead wrong! He NEVER EVER brought us anything useful in his news postings and certainly never will. Not even Singer likes that douchebag so he gave bluenuts.net the rights to be the official SR fansite! Should tell all you apologists something, but since your braindead you won't get it anyway and keep dreaming in your own little fantasy world.

Here's a tip for you: Just take a little time and look up some of the bigger comic fanboy sites. For every Singerman fansite there are easily two Anti-Singerman sites!!! The only sites still backing MOS are either sponsored by Singer or run by fanboys who are too scared to betray their master.

that's so sweet/i'm so sorry said...

there is no way warner brothers is going to hand over a big franchise to a director who can't even make movies that do well at the box office. this is what, his third flop now? to be honest the incredible hulk wasn't the masterpiece everyone is claiming here. it wasn't even really that spectacular.

the effects were bad, especially in the last scene. frankly i don't think the public likes the hulk. why they continue to make movies based around him i don't know. also mark milliar's comments involve a american director. and rumor has spread that the guy may well be michael bay.

michael can make great action films but he couldn't make a great comic book film. i wonder really what goes on in some people's heads sometimes. it's laughable really.

Anonymous said...

And you're a self-proclaimed expert, right? Like the usual apologist, you strike down any possible ideas. The Singerman apologists don't even like the suggestion of Nolan for Superman because 'he's not right' but Singer is? Nolan would give us a far better film. Like the usual apologist, you strike down the idea of Michael Bay because of Transformers, but the last I heard, THAT film was a box office smash, domestically AND internationally. Heh heh! With THAT film, they don't have to 'frauduently' focus on the international because the domestic sucked like Singerman. Yeah, in your mind, no one can 'DO' Supes like Singerman!

THAT'S what's REALLY laughable!

that's so sweet/i'm so sorry said...

no. i'm not striking michael bay down because of transformers. i actually liked transformers and thought it was good. i also like michael bay. i just don't think his style of direction will fit a comic book movie. we'd probably end up with another batman and robin/batman forever mess.

a movie that's high on style but low on substance. and comic books have more substance than style usually. as for nolan i agree that he isn't the right style. his style is great and he does make great comic book movies. and his style suits batman to a tee pratically, but it wouldn't fit for superman.


they're two different characters entirely and what works for batman won't work for superman. i'm not totally against singer neccessarily, as he's done good work in the past (if we are excluding superman returns here) but he seems to anger a lot of people more than really is necessary.

so if we're going to please fanboys and stop the harping then maybe another director might be in order. there aren't many up to the challenge though. i'd recommend sam rami, but after spiderman 3 i'm not sure what i think of his ability and whether it would fit with superman.

sadly, there are very few directors out there that can do comic book movies right. either the fanboys don't like the director or the director is already busy doing other projects. and or doesn't fit with the character as well. face it, we've seen what dc comics and warner brothers can do with their comic books. jla comes to mind. as does steel.

personally, i don't think at this point a reboot is going to happen. more than likely if another superman movie is made it will probably be from the same cloth as superman returns. this will anger the fanboys, but warner cannot afford another false start with this franchise. too many of them plagued superman returns.

Dbreiden said...

The word is Marvel already basically has decided to not make a Hulk sequel.

http://www.reelcomix.com/664-No-Sequel-for-Hulk.html

"We're happy with the financial results, even if they (only) reach the first film's levels, "Having a sequel is not the definition of success."

So i don't see why WB would hand him the keys to Superman when he did not make Hulk enough of a hit to do another one.

Anonymous said...

Singer is a FAG and Superman Returns was gay.

ApologistPuncher said...

"So i don't see why WB would hand him the keys to Superman when he did not make Hulk enough of a hit to do another one."

Because whether you like them or not, the Transporter films have been VERY successful. The Incredible Hulk will turn a profit, Live Free or Die Hard was a hit, and WB wants an action-oriented Superman film. Leterrier CAN frame action-sequences. NO ONE can doubt that.

What's with you people that think he has ONLY made The Incredible Hulk?

that's so sweet/i'm so sorry said...

the transporter movies did not well at the box office. they only made a sequel after the first one became a cult hit on dvd. in the end though the sequel didn't well either. the guy really can't make hit movies.

and he cannot frame action sequences. the last scene in the incredible hulk looked like it was out of a video game. that's just not good. i wasn't overly impressed with the incredible hulk. mind you i didn't hate it, but it's not that great.


i can't foresee any kind of reboot at the moment for superman. the cost is too high and they can't really afford anymore reboots or false starts with superman. it's funny how now out of nowhere all of these rumors start popping up about how many people are trying to sell a reboot to warner brothers. it doesn't all add up.

ApologistPuncher said...

"the transporter movies did not well at the box office. they only made a sequel after the first one became a cult hit on dvd. in the end though the sequel didn't well either. the guy really can't make hit movies."

Wrong. But you are an Apologist, so no surprise there. Look for The Transporter 3 to be coming out by the Fall. Moron.

"and he cannot frame action sequences. the last scene in the incredible hulk looked like it was out of a video game. that's just not good. i wasn't overly impressed with the incredible hulk. mind you i didn't hate it, but it's not that great."

You fail at the internets, son. Can't frame an action sequence? Get the fuck out of here, you Apologist dink.

"i can't foresee any kind of reboot at the moment for superman. the cost is too high and they can't really afford anymore reboots or false starts with superman. it's funny how now out of nowhere all of these rumors start popping up about how many people are trying to sell a reboot to warner brothers. it doesn't all add up."

Wishful thinking on your part, shitstain. Can't "afford" a reboot? Uh, is AOL/Time Warner in bankruptcy or something? Jesus, you Apologist douche's don't know shit about shit.

If WB is going to reboot, and they ARE, rumors are INEVITABLE. Doesn't add up? Fuck, you are STUPID son.

that's so sweet/i'm so sorry said...

the production budget on the transporter was $21 million and the movie only made $25 at the box office domestically. that's not a hit. the transporter two made about $43 million domestically. the production budget was $32 million. so the transporter 2 made more money. the figures are ok for these types of small budget films.

the incredible hulk is a bigger budget type of film. not a huge film, but not small like the transporter. it's not even made $130 million yet domestically. that's not good. there isn't anyway that this guy will be handed a huge franchise. warners would be stupid to do it.

"can't frame an action sequence?" no, he can't. look at the last action scene in the movie. it looked like a video game. it was some of the lamest effects i've seen. i don't think the movie is awful, but i don't it's the huge success you're claiming. sorry, but there's no way the incredible hulk will ever be that great of a movie. it's passable. at that.

as for the reboot, no warners is not broke, but do you really think they can afford another to start another reboot. it's going to rack up the budget on the movie, which is partly what killed superman returns. warner brothers will not risk more money on a reboot on a movie that hasn't proven itself at the box office.

not saying that singer can do a better job and make them more money vs. a reboot. not at all. i'm just saying there are less risks involved in using singer again then going with a reboot. but if you stay with singer you piss all the fanboys off who have their panty hose in a twist.

so if warner does a reboot the fanboys are happy, but it's not the most sound, moenywise, decision to make. and warner borthers is not going to make decisions based on what the fanboys want. because fanboys don't pack in movie houses. not enough to make a movie money.

warner brothers is going to do what is best for them financially. a reboot isn't the best idea financially at this time. plus most of the names being tossed out for reboots suck. milliar's a great writer, but has got one hell of an ego.

zac synder perfers style over substance. which just isn't going to work. otherwise we'll get a stylistic hancok at best. at worst we'll get another batman and robin. there has some substance. maybe not as much as superman returns had, but there still has to be some substance. call me what you will. i'm just trying to look at things more realistically here.

that's so sweet/i'm so sorry said...

as for the rumors, it doesn't add up that all of a sudden so many rumors are coming out about the next superman movie when nothing has been said for months. and the focus had been jla, which we all know where that went.

now out of the blue all these people are going on about jow they're pitching reboots. i'll believe it when i see it. just as i'll believe a jla movie is coming out when i see it and i'll believe a new superman movie is coming when i see it. let's be honest here. even as much as the fanboys in us wants don't want to.

Anonymous said...

AP, this prick IS an apologist. He said that the Transporter movies 'did not well' & 'the sequel didn't well.' So he's either a foreigner that doesn't use perfect English, OR he's an APOLOGIST! My vote is on the latter. Leterrier can't frame action sequences? Dude, YOU can't frame SENTENCES! So yeah, you're an apologist.

"now out of the blue all these people are going on about jow they're pitching reboots. i'll believe it when i see it. just as i'll believe a jla movie is coming out when i see it and i'll believe a new superman movie is coming when i see it. let's be honest here. even as much as the fanboys in us wants don't want to.

Well, I read online that WB is meeting with DC to see HOW TO PROCEED with their comics franchises ON FILM! Soooooo, I'd venture to guess this is without a doubt an effort to compete with Marvel, & you can bet if that's the case, they'll do what's necessary. Batman is probably the only franchise they DON'T have to currently worry about. That means they ARE worried about Superman, & a double whammy there, due to the Siegels.


So yeah, Singerman isn't safe. I wouldn't bet on that horse!

Anonymous said...

Hey, spelling dude, you might want a link for that info so you'll BELIEVE:

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117988775.html?categoryid=13&cs=1

You can also view some of this at the Homopage, when you go back there. ;)

Anonymous said...

"There is a MOS casting call out in Omaha for extras and walk-ons. Luckily I live in Omaha and will be signing up shortly."

Hello suckers.

I guess you have to be pretty fuckin stupid to pay to join some shithouse backwater casting agency and think you'll be cast in a movie. Any movie....

"Singer is shotting in 2009!

Restart

I too will be flying to Omaha for a walk on part."

See what I mean...fuckin ReTard is flying to Omaha where Singer will be "shotting" MOS.

Is there any limit to apologists' stupidity?

Father Finian Egan

ApologistPuncher said...

"no, he can't. look at the last action scene in the movie. it looked like a video game."

Hey Apologist dickhead, how can you use your OWN biased opinion on ONE SCENE to justify this assholic statement?? Have you SEEN The Transporter movies? How about Live Free or Die Hard? Of course you haven't, twat. Mommy and Daddy don't let you see "grown-up" movies.

"as for the reboot, no warners is not broke, but do you really think they can afford another to start another reboot. it's going to rack up the budget on the movie, which is partly what killed superman returns. warner brothers will not risk more money on a reboot on a movie that hasn't proven itself at the box office."

Jesus, I feel like I'm taking crazy pills talking to this mongoloid. CAN WB "afford" to reboot Superman? Many times over, dickweed. Want to know what raised BS' budget SLIGHTLY? The failed attempts to make a new movie over the last 10-12 years. That hasn't happened here, genius. Let's not forget dropping over $10 million on the cutting room floor because your 2nd cousin said it was "a little long"...

Superman IS getting rebooted, Apologist, whether YOU and the HomoPage want it to or NOT.

ApologistPuncher said...

Oh, and for the slow Apologist asshole:

Live Free Or Die Hard (2007)
Production Budget: $110 million
Domestic: $134,529,403
Foreign: $248,982,351
Worldwide: $383,511,754

The Transporter 2 (2005)
Production Budget: $32 million
Domestic: $43,095,856
Foreign: $42,071,783
Worldwide: $85,167,639

The Transporter (2002)
Production Budget: $21 million
Domestic: $25,296,447
Foreign: $18,632,485
Worldwide: $43,928,932

Since you douchebag's like to trot out the International numbers, I can do the same. Looks like Live Free or Die Hard was pretty big, wasn't it? But yes, the guy CAN'T make a hit, right?

that's so sweet/i'm so sorry said...

the dirctor of live free or die hard isn't the same director of the incredible. the director of live free or die hard is len wiseman the director of the underworld movies. he is married to kate beckinsale. the director of the incredible hulk is louis leterrier.

oh and louis letterier didn't direct the transporter. he was only the artistic director. he did direct the the transporter 2 and danny the dog. those were the only ones before the incredible. did a search on imbd.com and found the info out. here's the link: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0504642/

that's so sweet/i'm so sorry said...

that firs line is meant to say the incredible hulk. anyway, yes the numbers for the total gross of the transporter 2 is pretty good for a film like that. but it's not anywhere near being even halfway decent for a franchise film for a major hollywood studio like superman and warner brothers for example.

Dbreiden said...

"Jesus, I feel like I'm taking crazy pills talking to this mongoloid. CAN WB "afford" to reboot Superman? Many times over,"

Of course they can afford it but what proof is there that it will matter? SR did not do much at the BO, the new Hulk did about as much as the last Hulk. SSS even said that was going to be important to Superman being rebooted

"TIH could go a long way in determining that, as this is the first time a character has gone through a reboot after a failed film venture in so short a time. TIH will really be the test case for this type of approach."

and it did not work out. Marvel has already basically said there will be no sequel to the Hulk. Does it make financial sense for WB to be fired up to reboot Superman right now? No it doesn't. These films cost a shitload of money to make, it is a high risk investment and another sub-par Supermam movie would be embarassing for WB. Just because they can afford to lose that money doesn't mean they are in any rush to reboot anything.

dbreiden said...

"Live Free Or Die Hard (2007)
Production Budget: $110 million
Domestic: $134,529,403
Foreign: $248,982,351
Worldwide: $383,511,754"

Not his movie

ApologistPuncher said...

"the dirctor of live free or die hard isn't the same director of the incredible. the director of live free or die hard is len wiseman the director of the underworld movies."

You are correct, I was wrong. Not sure why I had his name stuck in my head as the director, could be the bald lead.

"Of course they can afford it but what proof is there that it will matter? SR did not do much at the BO, the new Hulk did about as much as the last Hulk. SSS even said that was going to be important to Superman being rebooted"

Here's the thing: WB already KNOWS that BS FAILED in his attempt. Superman is FAR better known than the Hulk, so to say 1 "reboot" is 100% linked to the other is Apologist jibber-jabber. SSS himself would tell you that NOTHING is guaranteed at WB.

You will NOT be getting Madame Of Swish. Get the tears out of the way NOW, so you won't be depressed when you go to see the NEW Superman film in a few years.

And you know you will...

dbreiden said...

"Here's the thing: WB already KNOWS that BS FAILED in his attempt."

He failed to make it a huge blockbuster, sure that's true.

"Superman is FAR better known than the Hulk, so to say 1 "reboot" is 100% linked to the other is Apologist jibber-jabber."

It is not 100% linked but it was an important event that took place this summer. SSS brought it up for a reason. Had Hulk been a huge hit, the reboot Superman faction would be more up in arms than ever. As it stands the film did as bad as the first one and WB you can bet took notice of that. The problem is WB has to deal with what came before in SR. It was not a huge hit, got a lukewarm response, so the sequel will be tough to sell and a reboot is equally tough to sell because of SR. We saw it with the Incredible Hulk. Those that hated Ang Lees Hulk were not going to see the new one, they just didn't give a damn. Superman's popularity in the movies is really only as good as his last movie. I don't know too many that are amped up for Spiderman 4, at least not like they were for Spiderman 3. Had SR been great this would not be an issue but since it wasn't, it's a problem. Of course a reboot will happen eventually, but in a few years i think is a long-shot.

ApologistPuncher said...

"He failed to make it a huge blockbuster, sure that's true."

He failed PERIOD. There is no "bright side", Apologist.

"Of course a reboot will happen eventually, but in a few years i think is a long-shot."

The good thing is, what YOU think matters NOT. You have ZERO idea about what is going on, and you are HOPING a reboot doesn't happen. You Apologist queens DIDN'T make Singerman Peeps a hit, and you WON'T prevent the reboot from happening.

But of course, you get all of your views and opinions from Steve Eunuch over at the Singerman HomoPage. Are you heading over to Omaha too, to sign up to be an "extra" on Madame Of Swish?

Let us know when they call you back, jackass....

Anonymous said...

"We saw it with the Incredible Hulk. Those that hated Ang Lees Hulk were not going to see the new one, they just didn't give a damn."

I'd like to point something out here. I was reading in a 'weekend' paper I still had from mid-June, same weekend as the release of both The Incredible Hulk & The Happening.

The writer, in reference to BOTH films, expressed being 'cautiously apprehensive' or something to that effect. He described Lee's Hulk as 'just plain awful' & basically was approaching the new film with extreme skepticism. In other words, he quite possibly wrote off the new Hulk based simply on the old one. He also criticized M. Night's previous failure, Lady in the Water. He also expressed a dislike for ANYTHING starring either Liv Tyler or Zooey Deschanel.

So my point is not only did some guy like this PROBABLY NOT give TIH a fighting chance, likewise many an APOLOGIST didn't either! Combine this APATHY with Marvel & Universal's 'joint effort' in TRULY failing to market this film properly (like Iron Man), & they can blame themselves for keeping TIH 'top secret' until the last possible minute & likewise failing to educate the general public that this really ISN'T a sequel to Ang Lee's fiasco. They shot their own selves in the foot.

Bottom line, though. I challenge any skeptic to actually watch TIH with an objective mind. THEN I challenge them to turn right around & watch 'Hulk' DVD. Then honestly tell me which one is better?

I feel when it's all over, TIH may at least be 'somewhat' successful, especially considering international. Hey, the apologists do it with Singerman, WHY NOT?! It's VERY possible that the DVD will do well, both in sales & rentals, & cable, etc. Let's just hope Marvel will see this in the long run.

The sad thing is, we finally got a Hulk film that is WORTHY of being a Hulk film, but going back to what I first quoted, the general public obviously didn't care, & they weren't PROPERLY NOTIFIED EITHER! :(

dbreiden said...

"The writer, in reference to BOTH films, expressed being 'cautiously apprehensive' or something to that effect. He described Lee's Hulk as 'just plain awful' & basically was approaching the new film with extreme skepticism. In other words, he quite possibly wrote off the new Hulk based simply on the old one. He also criticized M. Night's previous failure, Lady in the Water. He also expressed a dislike for ANYTHING starring either Liv Tyler or Zooey Deschanel."

This furthers exactly what i was saying. SR was received lukewarm so an immediate reboot will be a tough sell to those that were not a fan of SR. Their response will be along the lines of "What another Superman movie, i hated the last one" WB knows this. They would be stupid to turn a blind eye to such an obvious point. New Hulk not being a big hit is a major factor here for anyone who wanted an immediate reboot.

dbreiden said...

"The sad thing is, we finally got a Hulk film that is WORTHY of being a Hulk film, but going back to what I first quoted, the general public obviously didn't care, & they weren't PROPERLY NOTIFIED EITHER! :("

I agree with this as well. New Hulk, was much better and would have made a lot more money, back in 2003 but it could not overcome the stain of what Ang Lee's Hulk did to the franchise.