Hey there,
It's been a SLOW last few months, while we wait for WB to decide WHO they are going to let make the Superman "reboot". Over the last few weeks there have been a few interviews with BS, where he does his best "Stuttering John" impersonation when asked about Singerman: Madame Of Swish. It's apparent to ANYONE with an IQ over 25 that he KNOWS he is NEVER going to make another one, but WON'T just come out and say it.
Well, today there is this little "gem" from the NY Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/14/movies/14harr.html?_r=3&pagewanted=2&ref=movies
I only posted the 2nd page, as the rest just talks about his flop-to-be "Valkyrie". What a STINKER that looks to be.....
"After nearly a decade of comic-book movies, “Valkyrie” might seem to represent Mr. Singer commanding himself to do something different. But he said: “I think my work has a real continuity, not in style but in theme. Themes of identity, principal characters who aren’t what they seem: that’s the X-Men, the boy in ‘Apt Pupil,’ Superman of course.”"
I think it's pretty apparent WHAT "theme" his movies have in common. From "Usual Suspects" to "Singerman Peeps", it is there, slapping you in the face. Why not come out and state it for ALL to see, Bryan?
"Mr. Singer’s next move is uncertain. A plan to direct an adaptation of Randy Shilts’s Harvey Milk biography, “The Mayor of Castro Street,” fell apart when Gus Van Sant’s “Milk” beat the project to the finish line. And Mr. Singer tenses visibly when asked about his potential involvement in a “Superman” sequel. “I really don’t know,” he said. Last summer Jeff Robinov, the president of Warner Brothers, told The Wall Street Journal that “Superman Returns” “didn’t quite work as a film in the way we wanted it to” and failed to “position the character the way he needed to be positioned.”"
I highlighted the two most IMPORTANT parts of this paragraph. Uncertain? "I really don't know"??? You mean, he is FINALLY starting to come clean about his non-involvement in WB's next move? Is he finally learning humility, and being honest about the situation and his failure with Singerman Peeps??
"Mr. Singer says his own love of Superman lore may have given the movie the weight of too much nostalgia — “I’m learning to introduce characters a lot quicker and more aggressively,” he added — but he is otherwise disinclined to second-guess his decisions or even revisit his past work."
What the fu...?? "love of Superman lore"?? Ahhh, well-played Mr. Singer. You sneaky-monkey. Here I was, thinking you were starting to be honest and upfront about things, and you do a complete 180!Superman's "lore" goes BEYOND a movie from 1978, genius. You think trying to copy THAT gave it "the weight of too much nostalgia"? Seriously? NOTHING ELSE was wrong with your suckfest, 'eh BS?
You can't even claim your "love" for the FAR SUPERIOR Superman The Movie had ANYTHING to do with your "film" tanking. You DESTROYED the costume that Christopher Reeve used to make us Believe. You gave us a pale imitation of Gene Hackman's campy Lex Luthor. You took Margot Kidder's tenacious, "spunky" Lois Lane and turned her into a bad wig wearing, 12 year old boy looking, whiney BRAT who was SUPPOSED to be a MOTHER!
I won't even MENTION you disgracing Christopher Reeve's memory by having that talentless plank of wood "pretend" to be HIS Superman.
Shame on you, Bryan Singer.
