Do The Right Thing

Hey there,

Apparently, the Apologists have teamed-up with the obese, unattractive "women" who are "hagging" it over BJ Routh.

A poll is currently being run, asking who is the BEST Superman to YOU:

http://blogs.usaweekend.com/whos_news/2008/08/tell-us-who-is.html


Now currently, Tom Welling is leading the pack. Understandable, as he is currently the longest-running person to play ANY incarnation of Superman EVER. But what is surprising, and also HIGHLY offensive, is that BJ "Singerman" Routh is SECOND. There is absolutely NO reason why he should be above Christopher Reeve. None. Does anyone consider George Lazenby the BEST James Bond ever?? I don't think so.

So it is up to YOU GUYS to make things RIGHT. Start voting, and push Christopher Reeve, the man who DESERVES IT, up past that waste of space BJ.

Don't let the overweight VIRGINS "win"....

Ding Dong, The Bitch Is Dead! But We Still Have Work to Do.

First off, thanks to AP for getting the news of WB's plan to reboot the Superman franchise up as soon as he did this weekend. I was away traveling for business, and wasn't able to access the site. Although I was able to access my email, and imagine my surprise when I logged into it on Friday Night in my crappy hotel room to see that I had almost 150 congratulatory emails in my account without a clue as to why?

As for my thoughts on Singer's ouster, I don't think I really need to explain them, as most of you who've read this little blog with any regularity know where I stand on things. I also think most of us who weren't living in denial knew that this was just a matter of "when" as opposed to "if" ever since WB saw the lackluster public response to Singer's failed effort. I always wondered just how my initial reaction to the official news would go. Would I be ecstatic? over-joyed? urinate my pants? etc. The truth is, it was none of the those. It was more along this lines of someone who knew something they wanted was coming, and had the satisfied feeling of seeing something they believed in come to fruition. Sort of like acing a big exam that you studied your ass off for and knew you nailed it when you took it.

Now I'm not egotistical enough to believe that this blog was a deciding factor in WB's choice to reboot Superman. But I am confident in saying that I know we were seen and heard by some pretty important people. (and YES, even some who's name appears in the site's URL.) But that was never my purpose in starting this blog. I was just one fan who waited for a movie about a character he loved and was horrified to see what had been done to him. I wanted to pierce through all the fluff and BS spewed by the people in charge of this abomination, and show them for what they really were, even if it was initially unpopular to do. After that I just wanted to be a place where people who were of the same mindset could come together and express our views without the shackles of some Draconian web masters who were more interested in kissing the asses of the people making the films so they could get "favors" regardless of what they were actually doing to the characters they claimed to love. In all of those regards I think we succeeded.
And don't just congratulate me, congratulate yourselves. I merely provided the medium, you all stood up for something you believed in and called a spade a spade. You're all a testament to the character of Superman, who'd stand up and fight for something he believed in until he gave his last breath, even if it was initially unpopular.

Now, not to completely kill your buzz, but there is something that came out in the Wall Street Journal article that just ain't sitting well with me. And I'd be remiss if I didn't mention it now.

"Like the recent Batman sequel -- which has become the highest-grossing film of the year thus far -- Mr. Robinov wants his next pack of superhero movies to be bathed in the same brooding tone as "The Dark Knight." Creatively, he sees exploring the evil side to characters as the key to unlocking some of Warner Bros.' DC properties. "We're going to try to go dark to the extent that the characters allow it," he says. That goes for the company's Superman franchise as well."

Robinov, you STUPID BASTARD, you still don't get it, do you? Apparently you do get now finally that Singer's approach to Superman sucked. However, you obviously have not a fucking clue why. Please someone print this next part of the post out and stick it on this man's desk. Neigh, staple this fucking post to his forehead.

Superman Returns didn't fail because it wasn't dark enough. Hell, it was plenty "dark" and "emo." It failed because Singer didn't have a fucking clue about who Superman is and what makes him tick. One of the problems with his film in the first place was that it was too god damn dark because Superman is a character of light, and of hope. He's the inspiration to rise above the darkness that threatens to consume us all. He's us at our peak as humans, not us sinking to depths to deal with those even deeper. That's fucking Batman. THAT is why Nolan's films work; because he captures who the character is and flushes that out. That mindset doesn't work for every character. It's not some fucking magic formula that you can apply to Superman, the Flash, Wonder Woman, and fucking Plastic Man. You need to boil those characters down to who they are and use that for the tone of the film. The Dark Knight didn't succeed because it found some magic formulaic approach that applies to all character's plotlines. It did however find the magic formula for developing comic properties: get a visionary director who respects the source material, update the character for a modern audience, and get a competent cast to portray the iconic characters. It's pretty god damn simple. How are you now missing this?

Needless to say we need to keep an eye on this, and just hope that Robinov was suffering from diarrhea of the mouth and speaking about details he doesn't understand. Otherwise, we could be looking at Tim Burton's Superman Lives all over again. Christ, apparently a hero's work is never done. It doesn't look like we're going anywhere soon here folks. Keep checking in for updates on what's next for Superman.

Forever Vigilant,
S.S.S.

VICTORY!!!!!

The day has come, and doesn't it feel SWEET!

WB has OFFICIALLY put an end to the Apologists, and ANY "hope" they had for a Singerman sequel. It took them long enough, but there was NEVER any doubt that this day would come.

http://www.superherohype.com/news/supermannews.php?id=7609&offset=25

"Warner Bros. also put on hold plans for another movie starring multiple superheroes -- known as "Batman vs. Superman" -- after the $215 million "Superman Returns," which had disappointing box-office returns, didn't please executives."

Oh really? Big surprise to the rest of us, eh? Here's something I am POSITIVE REtard will LOVE to read:

"'Superman' didn't quite work as a film in the way that we wanted it to," says Mr. Robinov. "It didn't position the character the way he needed to be positioned." "Had 'Superman' worked in 2006, we would have had a movie for Christmas of this year or 2009," he adds. "But now the plan is just to reintroduce Superman without regard to a Batman and Superman movie at all."

Bryan Singer, consider your ass FIRED.

I would love to see Steve Eunuch and his reaction to this news. Didn't he just say he got some "super secret" e-mail CONFIRMING writers were hired for a sequel?? That he "sat" on this news for inexplicable reasons? How you going to spin THIS?

It feels like a weight has been lifted, doesn't it? That all of a sudden Superman is seeming more, Super? No more stalking Lois, no more fetish wetsuits, no more MURDERING 5 year olds. Kate "Bryan" Bosworth can go back to starving herself to death, Kevin Spacey can go back to running the "Ol' Vic", and BJ Routh can go back to the North Hollywood bowling alley he came from. NOW we will see how many of the Apologists were actually SUPERMAN fans, and NOT just Singerman Peeps fans.

A friendly warning to whoever takes on the task of rebooting Superman though: We'll be watching. You pull the same shenanigans Bryan Singer did, and this Blog can EASILY turn into ______'s Superman Sucks.

For the Apologists, today is their "Doomsday"......

Thompson: Singerman Going Nowhere Fast

Howdy everyone, SSS popping in here just to say hello, and point out that our dear old friend Anne Thompson, Deputy Editor of Variety and enemy of Singerman apologists everywhere, is at it again just to let us know that a Singerman sequel ain't looking any better than when we last heard from her about a month ago. Not that it should come as a surprise to anyone considering they've been fielding relaunch ideas from just about anyone who has ever written any kind of successful Superman comic before, and it seems they've even talked to a few other directors about the project. Nonetheless it's always nice to hear that the suits at WB have noticed what went on with this whole mess. The article goes on to say:

"Fans have been clamoring all over the web--and on this blog--for a complete reboot. And within the halls of Warner Bros. the same debate rages on. They too believe that the last movie didn't break the mold and wound up in some kind of middle limbo. Today I was told that it is a priority at the studio to find the right direction and if Bryan Singer is willing to do that, fine, but if he gets in the way, he may not stay on the project. There are no writers working on a Superman script now. The studio wants to figure it out. "It might be better to start from scratch," one exec admitted."

Gee, ya think? But let's look at this in detail. They want to take Superman in the "right direction" which obviously means they have a lot of doubts about what went down the first go around. They'll want something vastly different this time. Does anyone see Singer doing a complete about face on this and suddenly let the studio dictate to him what kind of movie to make? Remember, he thought the first Singerman could spawn sequels as it was. I just dont see him capitulating considering everything that would need to be done differently. I also don't see WB hiring on the Meltzer's and Waid's of the world as his new writers, since they've been vocal about how bad the first film was. Those guys also all clearly stated they were pitching a reboot too.

My best guess? Sometime before the end of the year they announce a completely new creative team and they'll be looking to do a revamped Superman franchise for 2010 or 2011, whichever year doesn't have the 3rd Nolan Batman film. Stay tuned.

Grant Morrison & Mark Waid Hate Singerman Too!

Man, the people "coming out" against BS and Singerman Peeps is growing by the DAY! MTV asked Grant Morrison, Mark Waid and Brad Meltzer how they would reboot the lame-duck Singerman franchise, and their response was nothing short of PRICELESS:

"“‘Superman Returns’ didn’t work for a lot of reasons,” Grant Morrison said.

“I so wanted that movie to work,” said Mark Waid, “but every choice they made in that movie was wrong. If you’re making the movie in a vacuum, and there will be no other Superman movies ever again, go ahead and give him a son. But otherwise, that’s a staggeringly awful idea. What are you going to do next? Either the kid has to be a part of his life, or get superpowers, which no one wants to see. I want to go to them and say, "What were you thinking?""

This part is particularly interesting, and a good sign of things to come:

"Both Morrison and Geoff Johns have pitched the film studio on how to reboot Superman — properly reboot him, as if “Superman Returns” didn’t even happen."

Brad Meltzer has some advice of his own on how to do Superman justice:

"Brad Meltzer also has an idea that could work as the basis for the character, based on research for his upcoming “Book of Lies.”

"Superman is a character more recognizable than Abraham Lincoln or Mickey Mouse", Meltzer said. “But no one knows crap about Mickey Mouse. He’s a symbol. Understanding a soul is much harder. So don’t treat him like a walking American flag.”

"To understand Superman", Meltzer says, "you have to know why Superman was created in the first place — because a young Jerry Siegel’s father was shot and killed in 1932 (a fact first uncovered by Gerard Jones in “Men of Tomorrow: Geeks, Gangsters and the Birth of the Comic Book”).

"Superman was created not because America is the greatest country on earth, not because Moses came to save us from Krypton, but because a little boy lost his father,” Meltzer said. “In his first appearances, he couldn’t fly. He didn’t have X-ray vision. He was only bulletproof. So Superman’s not a character built out of strength, but out of loss.”"

Now, I don't agree that Superman HAS to be "born out of loss", or else someone might take the notion to make him all "angsty", and act out of character. Maybe have him "peep" on Lois while having an intimate conversa... Nevermind.

Some of the biggest names at DC Comics have come out against Singerman. Who's next??