Singer's Superman Sucks

New Blog

2011-07-01T16:47:00.000-07:00

Hey There,

For anyone who still comes by from time-to-time, there's a new Blog for the Zack Snyder Reboot:

http://supermanfilmwatchdogs.blogspot.com/

Join up at the Forum as well!

A New Home

2010-10-11T19:19:00.001-07:00

Hey everyone,

Now that things are moving on the Superman Reboot, I think it's time we put this little "project" to bed. Singerman is no more, BJ Routh is stumping at conventions (Like I predicted YEARS ago), and that Fruit Roll-Up caped fetish wetsuit is HISTORY. So it's time to "think about the future".

I started a forum for people wanting to discuss the new film in an open environment. There will be no over-eager "mods" looking to bounce people who don't agree with them. No "agendas", just a place to discuss things relating to Supes.

http://supermanfilmwatchdog.forum-motion.ca

Feel free to sign-up and stay a while.

Singerman is dead. Long live Superman!

Zak Snyder To Direct Superman Reboot

2010-10-04T19:31:00.000-07:00

Well, it looks like the first "domino" has fallen in regards to the Christopher Nolan produced reboot.

Zak Snyder has revealed that once he finishes production on Sucker Punch, he will be taking up the reigns as director of Superman's 20-plus-years-in-the-making big-screen reboot.

Read all about it here:

http://www.deadline.com/2010/10/zack-snyder-directing-superman/

"I just spoke with Zack Snyder, who confirms that as soon as he completes post on Sucker Punch, he'll move right into Warner Bros' long awaited next Man of Steel movie in development with Chris Nolan and David Goyer. "I've been a big fan of the character for a long time, he's definitely the king of all superheroes, he's the one," Snyder, who directed Watchmen and 300, told me. "It's early yet, but I can tell you that what David and Chris have done with the story so far definitely has given me a great insight into a way to make him feel modern. I've always felt he was kind of awesome. I'll finish Sucker Punch and get right at it."

Honestly, I think this is a great choice, and if nothing else, we will actually get a Superman who does more than mope, whine and lift things.

'bout time.........

Brandon Routh: Franchise Killer?

2010-08-15T19:17:00.000-07:00

Well, well, well.... BJ is so dull he's putting HIMSELF to sleep...

The weekend box office numbers are in, and what do you know? ANOTHER film franchise is DOA with BJ Routh attached.

http://www.seattlepi.com/movies/425121_tvgmovies15.html

Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World came in a dismal FIFTH in the box office tallies, totaling a paltry $10.5 million for it's opening weekend. FAR behind the Sylvester Stallone action extravaganza The Expendables, opening at #1 with $35 million. Who would have predicted THIS would happen? I mean, there are just SO MANY "people" out there that want BJ to strap on his Fruit Roll-Up cape again isn't there?

Obviously not. The ugly, overweight Apologist virgins couldn't even tally a DECENT number for BJ's latest FLOP.

I took a look at a few message boards these last few weeks, gauging the Apologists "predictions" for the two films listed above. I read things about how "Scott Pilgrim will easily beat The Expendables", and how "amazing Routh will be". Amazing is right. Amazing that this box office cancer was even included in the cast. Not only did The Expendables destroy Scott Pilgrim, but so did Eat, Pray, Love and TWO films in their second to FIFTH week of release! The Other Guys and Inception also placed well ahead of Pilgrim.

Anyone wondering if BJ's "Dylan Is A Dog" will get a US theatrical run? I am not going out on much of a limb when I think NO. The guy just isn't a box office draw, and anything his name is attached to will sink faster than his career projections.

Start filling out those applications at the local bowling alley, BJ. No one is going to be paying you $65 for a picture at a 'con for long....

Bryan Singer: "Ok, Ok, My Superman SUCKED""

2010-03-18T20:04:00.000-07:00

Hello everyone. Long time no see....

Anyway, just thought I'd drop by and post a link to an interview Bryan Singer gave to the LA Times, where he makes a "startling" confession:

"I genuinely like the people, and my personality meshes more with this universe than it does with other universes, I think; I see that now at this point," Singer said, no doubt referring to his defection to the DC Comics universe to make the oddly lifeless 2006 movie "Superman Returns." "I feel a connection to the X-Men characters and also the ensemble nature of the films. If you look at 'Usual Suspects'' or my last film, 'Valkyrie,' I feel especially comfortable with ensemble juggling. In the space between all the characters you can disguise a central thought that's hidden in all the discourse. I missed that with the singular relationship story of Superman. And, well, it always gives you something to cut to..."

href=http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/herocomplex/2010/03/bryan-singer-and-the-xmen-together-again.html>

Not a surprise to some of us, now is it? But this should give the few remaining Apologists a much needed "kick in the pants", shouldn't it? With the news that Christopher Nolan is "godfathering" a Reboot, and that it will be a FUN movie, I'd say right about now it's a GOOD TIME to be a fan.

Singerman is dead. Long live Superman!!

Freedom Of Speech: Alive & Well!

2009-02-23T19:41:00.000-08:00

Evening everyone,

It appears the Apologist attempt to silence the intelligent people who hated Singerman Peeps has failed, and their "proclomations" of SaveSuperman.com being gone for good are ALSO the ravings of "slightly autistic" children.

I'll let the "webmaster" of SaveSuperman.com give you the news:

"Hello there to all the intelligent and true Superman fans!!

Sorry to disappoint you FilmIdiotJamie, Terminated, and Blowtime, but reports of our demise were extremely premature and nothing more than a pipe dream of your collective apologist agenda.

For those who've missed the presence of SaveSuperman.com, you won't have to wait much longer. We'll be back on March 1st with renewed strength, a new look, and a whole new attitude!! The truth hurt so much they needed to resort to a phony gay rights group (United Federation for Equality and Understanding) in order to silence us. Too bad for them it was only temporary and accomplished nothing more than pissing me off. SaveSuperman.com has ALWAYS been by the fans and for the fans. We're not in anyone's back pocket or dependent on advertising and never will be.

With that said, much like we sent SantaFeGrace to SDCC last year, I'm looking for people to cover this years comic-cons around the world. If you live in an area that will be having an event or plan to travel to one, get in touch with me. We need reports, photos, interviews, etc. We've built something great together from nothing more than a love of a comic character. Let's keep that momentum going!!

See you in one week at SaveSuperman.com!!

Steve "Archangel" Manning
steve@savesuperman.com"

It'll be good to have them back, and helping to fight the good fight. As you already know, it's a "Never-Ending Battle" against the Apologist "brood"....

Super-Wachowski-Man?

2009-02-11T21:30:00.000-08:00

Hello there,

Well, it appears the "confirmation" of BS' departure just becomes clearer & clearer:

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/40084

Here is the "important" bit:

Bryan Singer has refused to undertake a re-boot of the Superman franchise and has left the Executives at WB with no choice but to take a fresh creative direction.

He "refused"? Please.

He stated the Wachowski Brothers had been approached to re-boot the franchise as a trilogy and they are currently reviewing their options as its like being asked to take the final play in a superbowl final. Says if they do agree, he will likely either succumb to providing second unit support on the movie or will champion the directorship of Plastic Man - He started to giggle as he stated its like a young child for the Brothers and they wont give that up easily.

- Says, the very thought of the brothers making a superman movie is unbelievable as they have grown up in the world of comic books and they would be ideal for the project.

The Wachowski Bros., huh? I haven't seen Speed Racer, but it looked like they were TOO FAITHFUL to the 60's cartoon. The Matrix movies went from VERY GOOD to PRETTY LAME, but tell me that last fight between Smith and Neo DIDN'T look like a "Superman"-type brawl to you? And I'd rather have someone who respects the characters history, and includes it in a brand-new motion picture, instead of a fatheaded MORON making a film for HIMSELF.

Are they my FIRST choice? Nope. Do I think they CAN'T make a good Superman film? No. IF it's them, I'm willing to give it a chance.

Stated that Bryan Singer is looking to move on to Logan's Run a movie to be produced by Joel Silver.

*YAWN*

Good riddance to bad rubbish....

Freedom Of Speech Under Attack

2009-02-04T07:33:00.000-08:00

Hey everyone,

It appears that a fellow "Anti-Bryan Singer/BJ Routh" site has been forced to temporarily "close up shop" because a certain group doesn't believe Freedom Of Speech applies to EVERYONE.

www.savesuperman.com

This site has been a pretty good place to go and meet REAL fans of Superman, hear a few "rumors" about what may or may not be happening with the Superman reboot, and not have to worry about dealing with illiterate 12 year old Apologists. It's pretty harmless, even though things COULD get a little "heated" over there. But NOW a "gay rights group" has filed a lawsuit against the site's owner, Steve "Archangel" Manning. Why?

Because he doesn't agree with homosexuality.

Is that it?? Yes indeed it is. Because he DARED to say that on his site, he is now being accused of "spreading hate" and of "not being a legitimate news site". Did you get that? Saying you don't agree with homosexuality is NOW "spreading hate". This "gay rights group" feels that Freedom Of Speech means: "Agree with me, or shut your mouth". Funny thing about that though, is I was always taught that it applied to EVERY American citizen, not just to certain "individuals"? Silly me I guess.

I am 100% certain his site will be up and running in no time, and I look forward to finding out just WHO this "group" is and laughing at their pathetic AUDACITY. Frivolous lawsuits are a waste of taxpayer time and money, and I hope they get what is coming to them in the "end".

Unbelievable.

**UPDATE**

Well, I've been given an update by a "source" close to what is going on. It appears it isn't even based on what the SITE-OWNERS "said", but by people VISITING THE SITE. Myself included. Isn't this just getting BETTER & BETTER by the second?

I am going to look into this "group" once it is made public, and see what exactly THEY have been saying. I'm sure it will take about as long to find "dirt" on them, as it would to find an Apologist who can't spell.....

More to follow, I'm sure.

*****BIIIIGGG UPDATE*****

Well, well, well. It looks like this "group" that started this LAME calamity is F-A-K-E! It's title? "United Federation for Equality and Understanding" These DOUCHEBAGS are a bunch of Apologist morons who "thought" they can SILENCE the vocal-majority who HATED Singerman Peeps using the American judicial system as their "weapon of choice". What did they get instead? LAUGHED AT, and threatened with a potential lawsuit of their own for perpetrating a FRAUD of the site's Webmaster, Steve "ArchAngel" Manning.

I told you this would be a laugher, and it turns out I was right. I just hope we get to find out what screennames these LOSERS use on the various forums out there. It's time for some payback, methinks....

Bryan Singer: Still Fired AND Delusional

2008-12-17T11:16:00.000-08:00

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.

Latino Review Won't Give It Up

2008-10-09T22:46:00.000-07:00

BJ Routh gotta eat!! Looks like the "Singerman money" has run out for ol' BJ, doesn't it? Then again, his lack of work after Singerman Peeps FLOPPED at the box office goes to show that maybe this picture ISN'T too far from the truth, eh?

Anyway, it appears one of the "Usual Suspects" is back at it, fabricating stories about BJ Routh being involved in the reboot:

http://www.latinoreview.com/news/exclusive-dc-comics-president-gives-superman-update-5511

"Exclusive: DC Comics President Gives Superman Update

By Kellvin Chavez on October 9, 2008
The only thing better than living in New York, is being at a party in New York. I was out on the town this past Monday night with my partners in crime El Mayimbe and Ron Henriques at the special WATCHMEN presentation that was scheduled for a hand full of media outlets. The footage we watched to me was very good. It had its moments. I definitely believe just like SIN CITY, you will either love it or hate it. I loved the opening sequence explaining the creation and the rise of the Minutemen, which quite frankly blew me away! It was that good. And honestly while I’ve never read the book, I must say I was inspired to immediately go out and buy one just so I am up to speed.

Anyhow, the real action didn’t happen inside the screening, but rather outside of it. While mingling around with guest and watching my partner in crime sneak food into his Latin pockets, I saw the one and only Paul Levitz, the President of DC Comics. I walked over to him and had a moment to hang out and chat with him briefly. I could not keep my mouth shut and had to ask the questions that Latino readers are asking. So I went in straight for the kill.

“So Paul, what the fuck is happening with Superman?” Well not in those words actually. Paul looked over both shoulders like he was about to score some basura and said that things are still brewing.

In fact, he told me that “Last week Brandon Routh has come around the offices in New York and Los Angeles as of late to talk about Superman and what we want to do”……blah blah blah!

At first I thought it was the Apple Martini I was drinking but I soon realized that I just heard a bombshell go off in my brain! Brandon? He did say Brandon Routh was coming around talking about Superman! Why the hell would they be talking to Brandon if he was not going to be part of the reboot? Because he’s still in the mix!!!

The truth of the matter is that the way Mr. Levitz made it seem is that they love Brandon as Clark Kent and that he’s just a great guy, which I agree. I mean remember we at Latino Review told EVERYONE he was going to be the next Superman.

At that point my instincts kicked in and I continued with the questions. “What about Batman 3? You guys must be going crazy over the success of that film.” Paul pulls the cocktail shrimp from his mouth just enough to see him smile. I asked when were they going to get this Superman reboot done and he gave me a look like he was about to tell me the answers to the mysteries of the world. “Everyone is waiting for Nolan to sign on for another Batman, once that happens, the release date for Superman and all other future projects will follow.”

I could not believe my ears! Not only did my partner in crime blast wind next to me, but basically Superman’s future hangs in the balance until we have a concrete signature on the Batman contracts! The party was getting good, and the drinks were flowing making this just as easy as prom night picking. So I pressed with my questions. “What about Green Lantern and Supermax? How is that moving along?” Paul continued that Green Lantern was actually moving faster than Supermax, which to me makes sense because the Green Lantern script was badass!! If you do not remember the review we did, here it is again. The party went into the night, and the drinks continued to flow, finally I knew I had to leave as soon as my partner in crime started to stumble all over the place, looking kind of green in the face.

As of now just a few moments ago another inside source confirmed that yes they are waiting for Chris Nolan to sign the deal with the next Batman, and that they want him to commit to a July 2011 release. If that happens then the following superhero films will be released.

Green Lantern Summer 2010
Batman 3 Summer 2011
New Superman reboot Summer 2012

Also in the mix is THE FLASH."

Ok, first off, did ANYONE read where Levitz said BJ Routh was "in the mix" for the reboot? Or did he say Ol' Bartender was there talking about what DC is going to do with Superman? Secondly, did Levitz HIMSELF even say he thought BJ was a "great guy"? No? Gee, a Singer Suck-Up site like Latino Review would NEVER "bend the truth" to fit their AGENDA, now would they?? It's not like they have been "pimping" a Singerman sequel, or whining about the announced reboot or anything...

The truth is, Paul Levitz will know what WB is going to do when WB WANTS him to. I have a feeling if someone asked him about this little "hatchet job", you'd get a BIG "taken out of context" from him. This "journalist" decided to take what he heard, and inject his OWN personal bias and opinions into the mix. Shoddy journalism at BEST.

Once the new creative team is announced, these "bought & paid for" sites will shut their mouths about BJ Routh and Singerman FOR GOOD. It'll be about damn time too...

Do The Right Thing

2008-08-29T22:24:00.000-07:00

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.

2008-08-25T17:17:00.000-07:00

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!!!!!

2008-08-22T20:58:00.000-07:00

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

2008-08-19T20:08:00.000-07:00

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!

2008-08-14T20:07:00.000-07:00

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??

Brandon Routh Can't Stop Being Gay

2008-07-31T17:56:00.000-07:00

Oh boy... Let's just say that if there's any suits left in WB Studios who still believe Singerman is a viable feature film franchise, they're probably crapping themselves at the moment. Lost in all the hoopla of last weekend's San Diego Comic-Con, was a small bit of news from the panel for the new Kevin Smith film featuring Seth Rogen called Zack and Miri Make a Porno.

At said panel they showed some footage where Rogen and co-Star Elizabeth Bank's characters are at their high school reunion and they run into characters played by "Mac Boy" Justin Long and your favorite Singerman "star" makes a cameo. JoBlo details the carnage:

"Rogen and Banks are at their 10 year high school reunion. Banks is off flirting with Brandon Routh (SUPERMAN!), and Rogen is off to the side, talking to Justin Long--a dude with slick black hair and wearing a nice suite. They talk, it comes out Long is a gay porn star and Routh is his gay lover. Banks was hoping to hook-up with Routh, but not anymore, because... well, he's gay. Routh is not as open to being gay as Long is, and before you know it they're having a gay lovers quarrel. They then kiss and make up after Long tells Routh "You better shut your mouth before I f*ck it."

Ummm yeah.... Look I've got nothing against anyone who is gay. It's your life you do as you please. My point in pointing all of this out is, remember the good ole "Story that Just Wouldn't Go Away?" When WB had to basically launch a PR campaign to combat all of the 'Routh is Gay!" stuff so as not to have an emasculated Superman before the film even opened? (oops!) They even had banner ads on sites like SuperHero Hype! posing that very question.

Doing cameos like this, even if intended to be funny, just seem counterproductive to all that and will just seem to perpetuate that stereotype. He's not just gay in the movie, he's actively french kissing another man in a scene. Not to mention, this isn't Routh's first portrayal of a gay character. He's also done it in episodes of Will & Grace and Cold Case. Is he getting typecast or something?

I know he just recently got married apparently (although not that being married really means all that much anyway.) But if this guy has any hope of carrying on a multi-million dollar film franchise playing the proto-typical alpha male character in comic lore, you'd think he'd make some smarter choices in the roles he takes. Then again, maybe he knows something we don't...

BTW if anybody has link to the actual footage shown at Comic-Con, shoot us an email.

SDCC Come And Gone....

2008-07-28T10:07:00.000-07:00

BS' ORIGINAL choice for Singerman, maybe??

Hello Everyone,

It appears that the San Diego ComiCon was this past weekend. Lots of movie news, clips and previews I hear. One conspicious absence though, and that was Singerman: Madame Of Swish. Why? I think this little tidbit from Zach Snyder might help explain it:
"They asked me to direct a Superman movie, and I said no," Snyder says. "He's a tricky one nowadays, isn't he? He's the king daddy of all comic-book heroes, but I'm just not sure how you sell that kind of earnestness to a sophisticated audience anymore."
Now I don't agree with the latter part of his statement. But the former? They ASKED HIM TO? Doesn't sound too good for the Apologists, now does it? I'm sure they are preparing their "hes suck a lier dey dint axe him to dureck a swooperman mofie!!" and "i dink dis meens dey r gunna half to let brian do MOS!!!". Steve Eunuch must be whipping them into a frenzy over at his "pit".

How many Apologists do you think ran and told their Mommy's??

Anne Thompson Puts the Cold Boot of Reality on Singerman's Throat...Again

2008-07-19T20:31:00.000-07:00

You may remember a few months back when Variety Deputy Editor, Anne Thompson, basically proved to any of the remaining doubters, that the Singerman franchise was in real limbo and a reboot was possibly being considered with Singer and Routh out of the picture.

Well Ms. Thompson is back once again, this time to hopefully quell any of the silly rumors that have popped up about their being some kind of casting call for extras on Craigslist of all places. In an interview with Legendary Pictures producer, Thomas Tull (i.e. the guy writing half the checks for all of their films with WB), he spills a bit about the future of the Superman film franchise:

"He's also vested in making the next Superman installment, which is still years away, come to life. While Bryan Singer has been working on Valkyrie, Tull and the folks at Warners have been listening to various screenwriters pitch their solutions to how to make the next Superman work. "It's an iconic character," says Tull. "After everything that went into the first film, it's important to make sure that nothing is rushed and we come out with a fantastic second film." One thing they all agree on: Superman needs a powerful antagonist, a "worthy opponent," he says."

An opponent other than it's OWN DIRECTOR this time hopefully... Still sounds a WAYS away to me at this point, and they don't seem to really be endorsing the return of the people in charge of the last debacle. And if Singer was involved in this process, wouldn't he have some input on the writers? Whatever it is, its not exactly a ringing endorsement.

And speaking of "ringing endorsements," check out this piece in yesterday's Washington Post where DC Comics President Paul Levitz discusses The Dark Knight. In the interview, Levitz gives a few telling answers to questions about DC's film slate and Singerman.

Washington, D.C.: What other movie projects does DC have on the way?

Paul Levitz: The next film after this is "Watchmen" on March 6. It's an adaptation by Zack Snyder, of "300" of what is probably the most acclaimed graphic novel ever published. The trailer is coming out before Dark Knight in most theaters and you can probably find it online. We haven't announced any other projects, but there are about 6 at the starting gate right now.

Nope, nothing even announced yet. What exactly "at the starting gate" means is anyone's guess though. BTW, The Watchmen trailer is BAD ASS. He goes on:

Washington, DC: In retrospect, do you think it would have been a better idea to reboot the Superman film franchise, instead of continuing the Donner films?

Paul Levitz: I think Bryan approached "Superman Returns" with a great deal of passion for the character and put what he loved up on the screen, which is the best we can ask of any director.

LOL He doesn't even answer the question. He just gives some company line answer about Singer. No backing of the guy or his franchise. He doesn't say, "No I think Bryan's take was great and we look forward to his next chapter" or ANYTHING like that. He might as well have come out and said "Singer is a nice person."

And I got a real chuckle out of this last question:

Albany New York: I'd be interested in your take on why Batman seems to be more appealing to such a broad range of directors/producers/audiences over a long period of time than other superheroes. Superman's the only one that comes close and there hasn't been a Superman movie since Christopher Reeves. What's the appeal?

Indeed my friend, indeed. What's even funnier is that Levitz didn't even attempt to try and correct him by bringing up Singerman. Maybe he agrees?

Damn Am I Jealous of Batman Fans

2008-07-17T20:06:00.000-07:00

Unless you've been living in a cave in the outer reaches of Mongolia, you know that tomorrow, July 18th, is the opening of the latest Batman flick, The Dark Knight. Christopher Nolan's sequel to 2005's great Batman Begins is bar none the most anticipated movie of the summer and perhaps the year.

The hype surrounding this movie is unbelievable (Oscar talk for a superhero movie?), and something I haven't seen or felt since the first Spider-man movie was getting set to unspool back in 2002. Reviews for this thing have been pouring in recently, and they're insanely favorable even from the most pretentious of elitist movie err sorry, "film" critics. (Well except for this asshole, but there's always one I suppose...) I know Heath Ledger's untimely passing has something to do with this, but it's only a tiny part of it. The truth is most of the hype around this movie is due the fact that Nolan has created one hell of a franchise that most fans and non-fans want to experience again and they want to immerse themselves in one of the best comic-to-film character representations in a long time. Imagine that.

Granted I really like the character of Batman. I read his comics, watched all of the TV shows, and have seen and own all of the previous films. But I've never considered myself a "Batman fan." When asked, I would always tell people (pre-2006 at least) that I was a Superman fan. The truth is, as much as I'm enjoying all of The Dark Knight hoopla, part of me is really jealous that this can't be for MY hero. I'm jealous that this generation can't experience Superman with the awe and anticipation that I did as a kid in the late 70's and 80's with the Reeve films. I'm pissed that after 19 years the "Superman" we did get was a piss poor, half-hearted attempt that completely missed who the character really is.

Superman deserves better. He deserves his moment in the sun and he deserves to be held in high regard by yet another generation of fans. He doesn't deserve to be put back in production limbo because some egomaniac of a director used him to write a personal love letter that depicted his own personal plight. Nor does he deserve to appear in some ill-conceived teeny bopper Justice League movie.

So when you're in the theaters this weekend watching TDK undoubtedly kick all crazy kinds of ass, remember that this SHOULD be happening for Superman as well, and remember why it isnt. Next summer, we Superman fans SHOULD be getting OUR own Dark Knight. We SHOULD be going bat shit (pun intended) for months on the Net in anticipation. This blog SHOULDN'T even freaking exist. But instead, we never even got our Batman Begins and are left to play the "What if?" and "Maybe" games.

As such, I'm always reminded of this great manip:

Boot Singer. Reboot Superman.

This! Is! Singer Getting The Boot!?!?!

2008-07-11T20:05:00.001-07:00

Well, well, well,

It looks like the Anti-Singer rumor-mill is working overtime:

http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/

"Mr. Matt Holmes,

After your recent article was brought to my attention, I figured you would enjoy this. So far it hasn’t been posted anywhere, but we know this image was sent to a few websites within the last day including IESB, SuperheroHype, Superman Homepage, and our site as well. Unfortunately for us, the image is part of a proposal we are putting together to pitch a reboot trilogy of Superman to WB. The artist’s cousin who took the photo didn’t know he works for me and I was one of the people copied on their email. It also included a number of pages to our script, but I’m trying to keep those under wraps still. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me any time.

In regards to this recent news involving Mark Millar and now Louis Letterier, I can tell you that there are at least four groups preparing to pitch reboot ideas with us being one of them. There could be more."

I posted the artwork in question, and it seems VERY similar to what is going on over at the Save Superman website....

As to Zach Snyder doing Superman? In a HEARTBEAT. He has a distinct visual style, can frame an AWESOME action sequence, and is a HUGE Superman fan too. If anyone has the best chance of kicking BS into the bottomless-pit of "moving on", I believe it's him. 300 was a HUGE hit for WB, Watchmen looks to follow-suit, and he showed he can "reboot" a film franchise the RIGHT WAY with Dawn of the Dead.

What was the last rumor for a Madame Of Swish film? A BOGUS Craigslist "casting call" for EXTRAS?? Guess who fell for it, hook-line-and-sinker? You guessed it: The Apologist buffoons.

Lordy, lordy. Things are getting GOOD.

Hulk Smash Bryan SInger??

2008-07-10T07:27:00.000-07:00

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.

Mark Millar "WANTED" For A Reboot??

2008-06-27T07:58:00.000-07:00

Hey everyone,

Something interesting popped-up in the "news" recently. It appears that maybe Mark Millar is going to have a second chance at writing a NEW Superman film AFTER ALL.

http://forums.millarworld.tv/index.php?showtopic=82235

Mr. Millar himself:

"PS That Superman news is interesting, isn't it? In the interests of clarity (because I'm sure this will be picked up somewhere) a very well known American action director heard about my love of Superman, approached my and asked me to team up with he and his producer to make a pitch for this. We've been talking for several weeks now and, if this is going to happen, we'll know by Christmas. He has huge pull at WB so fingers crossed. But this is nothing more than a huge US name pulling me into his fold and making me part of a package."

This news, of course, has caused GREAT "angst" amongst the Apologists at their usual "bath houses". Much whining, crying, hand-wringing and lame "insults" have already begun. Oh, and in their usual childlike-mindset, Mark Millar is just "wishing", and this will "never" happen. But BJ Routh says he's "hoping" to be shooting Singerman: Madame Of Swish next year? SEQUEL ON!!!

Things should get interesting in the next 6 months or so....

A More Accurate Singerman Trailer

2008-06-19T21:28:00.000-07:00

I was "lurking" around YouTube, and found something that I think fits with what MOST of us have been saying all along about Singerman. I'm not sure if you guys have seen this, but it is pretty darn HI-larious:

"I hear everything". LOL.

A Telling Weekend for the Future of Superman?

2008-06-14T12:22:00.000-07:00

Hey folks. SSS here, back after a bit of a hiatus to my "home world." I hope I didn't impregnate any of you before I left? Anyway, just popping in to bring up something that was brought up from time to time in the past here, and that is this weekend's release of The Incredible Hulk movie.

This film marks the relaunch of Marvel comic's Hulk franchise. After Ang Lee's disappointing Hulk limped out of theaters a mere 5 summers ago. Marvel decided to go in another direction and reboot one of their flagship characters with a new film that really doesn't contradict Lee's film, but doesn't really build off of it either. A new director, writers, and cast are all in place to give the jade giant a fresh start that focuses more on the action and raw brutality of the character as opposed to meaningless psycho babble and moss growing on rocks.

This was a pretty bold step on Marvel's part being that Lee's film (and horrific images of Nick Nolte) is still fresh in the general public's mind. And if you think the other studios aren't watching this with a close eye, then you're missing the obvious. The success or failure of the film will not only determine the future of the Hulk franchise but could also have a huge trickle-down effect in the comic movie industry as a whole for any character who left a lot to be desired in a previous film incarnation like say Superman.

Will studios continue to shelve these otherwise bankable characters because previous directors blew it? Or will they wipe the slate clean and start from scratch in a few years? 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. If it succeeds, its a great incentive for studios like WB to wipe the slate clean with characters like Superman and start anew instead of dancing around the issue of whether they're going to go ahead with another Singerman sequel. (How's that coming BTW?) Obviously this won't be the sole determining factor, but it will give a strong precedent.

So far the critics seem to semi-like the new Hulk film, but as we all know here most critics don't tend to see eye to eye with the general populace and at times will even like pretentious crap that the public doesn't buy. The proof, as they say, is in the pudding and we'll likely have a better idea once the weekend box office tallies come in. For anyone hoping to see a new actual Superman franchise in the next decade or even a rebooted character like Daredevil, its really in our best interests that TIH do well. Stay tuned for updates as they become available.

UPDATE 6/19: Box office figures are in and TIH looks like it pulled in $55.4 million domestic in it's opening weekend. Not a great weekend, but not terrible either. (although Ang Lee's film made $62 million in its 1st weekend) Through Wednesday TIH has made $70.7 million and should break the $100 million mark by the weekend. Not really figures that wow you, but this weekend will be really important to see what kind of legs the film will have. Hulk in 2003 (69.7%) and Singerman (58.5%) both fell on their faces in their second weekends with huge drop-offs. We'll see how TIH looks come Sunday. It will need to have a drop-off closer to that of Batman Begins (43.4%) if it hopes to have some staying power.

Don't Call It A Comeback.....

2008-06-08T15:21:00.000-07:00

"Yay, I won! Yay!"

I know to SOME people, they feel this Blog has "died". Just wanted to let everyone know, this AIN'T the case. We're going to have some fun here once again, and piss some people off in the process.

"Look! Up in the sky! It's a turd! It's lame! It's Singerman!!"

Strike Coming to an End, Singerman Sequel still Dead

2008-02-09T20:12:00.000-08:00

Just checking in for the first time in a little while. Finally there appears to be some light at the end of the tunnel with this whole Writer's Guild strike business. According to The Hollywood Reporter and various other sources, the WGA leadership in an impromptu press conference today revealed that they are encouraged by a proposed agreement from the AMPTP and that if all goes as planned, the picket signs could be put away as early as sometime on Monday. In our opinion, its about damn time, as the thought of endless months of reality television were starting to make my skin crawl. I have a feeling the AMPTP will really be the one to have "won out" this time around.

But that's not all the good news we have for you today. Well it's not really "news" since we've been saying it for a good long while, but its always nice to see it in print nonetheless. According to yesterday's Hollywood Reporter, the strike's impending resolution has heartened studios, specialty divisions and mini-majors that a host of development projects could suddenly be jump-started. They then go on to give a few blurbs about some of the upcoming WB projects:

The consensus from industryites seemed to be that Warner Bros. had the most immediate need on both the development and spec script sides. The studio's offerings for 2009 are light, with "Watchmen," based on the graphic novel; the children's fantasy "Where the Wild Things Are"; and "Terminator Salvation: The Future Begins."

There are at least nine more projects that are not dated but could be slated for 2009, according to one source. But one studio tentpole, the sequel to "Superman Returns," is not so lucky. There apparently are no current plans to add the project to the slate, according to a studio source.

Yup, still as dead as ever. Sorry, Restart there will be no Singerman 2 in 2009, and god willing, never, ever again. Oh yeah and they do also mention the JLA film:

Meanwhile, productions with known script issues such as Warner Bros. tentpole "Justice League" are expected to get fast-tracked once writers return to the scene.

Let's all pray to whatever deity you choose that by "get fast-tracked" they mean "gets tweaked, rethought, and recast. " As bad as that last update got we sounded, WB is still more confident in it than going forward with another Singerman film. This should hopefully put to bed those silly rumors that another Singer film was only being delayed due to the strike.

JLA is Not Looking So Good

2008-01-17T18:59:00.000-08:00

Hey, at least that Superman can fill out a suit...

It appears WB's ineptitude with it's superheroes knows no bounds, as recent reports in both Variety and the Hollywood Reporter are now suggesting that the much ballyhooed film has been put on hold until at least the end of the WGA strike or it possibly could even be joining Singerman II in the scrap heap. It looks like the project encountered a myriad of issues from casting, to the inability to do rewrites, to a lack of necessary tax incentives from the Australian government.

But my friends, that is just the tip of the iceberg! Wait until you hear who they were going to cast in this film. It appears that the "WORST CAST LIST EVER!" that was posted on Superhero Hype! a few months back was pretty spot on. The Hollywood Reporter details the carnage:

The decision to put the project on hold now frees up the actors who had been cast in the roles of Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Green Lantern and the Flash. D.J. Cotrona, Adam Brody, Anton Yelchin, Common, Teresa Palmer and Megan Gale had been cast in the movie in November, with their holding deals extended at least once as the studio tackled the script problems. The extensions expired Tuesday, after which a pay-or-play situation would have taken effect.

"Justice's" delay is considered good news for Christopher Nolan's camp. Nolan is in post on "The Dark Knight," the sequel to "Batman Begins," and is said to have been unhappy with the "Justice League" movie because its version of Batman (to have been played by Armie Hammier) clashed with his (Christian Bale).

Holy shit on a stick does that list suck! Sure the delay is good news for Nolan's camp.. and anyone who hasn't ever wiped their ass with a JLA comic. What the hell is WB thinking? They were going to make a gazillion dollar film and have a nickel and dime cast? The only name on that list that doesn't make me cringe is Common, but he's a decent supporting actor, he's not good enough to carry a cast of soap opera rejects. Please tell me the man who gave us Mad Max is not responsible for this and that some suits foisted them upon him? Otherwise I've lost a ton of respect for George Miller. D.J. Effing Cotrona was going to be their Superman??? He's 5'9" for Christ's sake! The Baking Soda kid who was to play Batman is 6'5", Cotrona would've looked like his god damn side kick and together they've got the acting resume of Paris Hilton. The "casting issues" the article speaks about have to have something to do with someone in the studio with at least a modicum of common sense looking at this cast list and saying "WTF? Are you serious?"

Regardless, for anyone who thought that WB was starting to come around and get any kind of handle on their superhero properties, if Singerman wasn't enough then this should convince you that Batman Begins was a complete fluke occurrence.

Now on to something I feel I need to address: the whole "Uncle Bingo" fiasco. As I've always said to you, be careful to ever believe ANYTHING you read on internet messagboards. Someone ALWAYS has some kind of agenda. And once again I was proven correct as Uncle Bingo's was either to mess with people or spread false hope. It's clear now that he, and those who were singing a similar tune, were DEAD wrong. I was really surprised by some emails I'd gotten showing me just how far it had spread too.

The thing that does piss me off about it is not so much that he came on here and did that, its because since his comments were posted in the comments section here, some people (a few even with their own websites) have attributed them to this blog. Why? Hell if I know. Another chance to badmouth the blogosphere and make themselves feel superior perhaps?

Singerman II Going "Nowhere"

2008-01-11T16:16:00.000-08:00

In today's Variety, Anne Thompson followed up her previous blog scoop with an interesting article that discusses the fate of any potential sequel to Singerman. While its not really anything we didnt already know, it does at least bring the point home for those who were whining about how" if she REALLY knew this why not put it in the magazine?" Well here you go. While she seems to be attributing a lot of things to the WGA strike, she brings up some interesting points in giving a run down of what we've been following for the past 6 months:

After "Superman Returns" delivered a disappointing box office take of $386 million worldwide, Warner Bros. and Singer debated how to proceed with the next "Superman" pic. The studio even considered rebooting the franchise with someone else.

But eventually WB execs Alan Horn and Jeff Robinov agreed to proceed with Singer at the helm of a $170 million "Man of Steel" packed with more action, a super-powered villain and less romantic melodrama.

We've heard this before, and it still makes absolutely no sense. How do you expect "more action and a super-powered villain" with $35+ million less in budget? From Singer of all people? If anyone still doubted his sense of fiscal responsibility, you need to look no further than his current project.

Before Singer started production on UA's "Valkyrie," WB and co-financier Legendary Pictures closed a deal for him to produce and direct "Superman: Man of Steel."

What she's talking about here is the development deal we heard about over the summer.

According to a spokesman for the director’s reps at William Morris, “ ‘Superman’ is moving forward with Bryan Singer attached.” But inside the studio, “Superman” is not on any fast track, and word is that Singer may wind up not directing it.
Nothing is happening. The WB supervising exec on the project, Dan Lin, has moved over to a studio production deal; exec Lynn Harris is taking over.

And there it is., right there in the pages of Variety for all who complained about it only being a blog posting.

So while Internet comic sites are rife with rumors about Warners replacing Routh with the new Superman from "The Justice League," the question of who plays Superman will depend on who directs Superman.

As we speculated, Routh's fate is tethered to that of Singer's apparently sinking ship. Don't be surprised if her remark about Singer looking for another project to direct is a subtle hint to a pending agreement with UA, especially since they've now cut a deal with the WGA.

The only thing I find odd about the article is that she seems to at times be attributing this all to the WGA strike. But a potential Singerman II was off the radar WELL before the strike happened. Otherwise they'd be in the position that the JLA film is now trying to make a Summer 2009 release. Obviously there are other factors at play here, and the change of leadership at WB may have more to do with it than you think.

Say Goodbye to Routh Too

2008-01-04T06:35:00.000-08:00

When it rains, it pours I guess. These past few days feel like that scene in the movie Goodfellas when all of the mobsters who were in on the Lufthansa heist start turning up dead. Only their crimes weren't as egregious.

Just days after we got news of what potentially could be Bryan Singer's demise as director of Singerman, comes word via the fine folks over at Latino Review that Brandon Routh is OUT as the "Man of Squeal" as well in any solo Superman films, and that the Superman from the Justice League film, when or if he's ever cast, will take over the role in any stand alone flicks that will thankfully have absolutely no relation to Singerman. The article reads:

Kelvin knew about Brandon not being the new Superman for weeksand weeks now, but made a promise to the DC people that he wouldn't break the story. Variety has now confirmed what we've secretly known for a while and Brandon Routh will be replaced in the stand alone sequel by whomever is cast as Superman in the upcoming Justice League of America movie.

If Singer is gone as is expected, then Routh getting the boot is basically just a formality. We pretty much thought that would be the case. Routh is, in effect, the ugly baby getting thrown out with the dirty bathwater. As I've said before, personally I have no issues with Routh. While his acting is a bit stiff, he wasn't the big issue here and might've been serviceable under better direction. He seems like a likeable enough person, but he's just too much a part of what Singer did and that's something that will never come off in the public's eyes. Any future incarnation of Superman with him in it would automatically be linked to Singerman and that's NOT a good thing in WB's eyes at this point. Best of luck in your future endeavors maybe now you can devote more time to campaigning for Barack Obama. Ugh.

Now as for this JLA Superman. The heat has been pumped up a notch. As we suspected, this role will be bigger than just one film or even the JLA series. This person will have to be able to star in the role in solo films as well. God help us all if WB thinks some schmeg like D.J. Cotrona is going to be able to hold up that burden. Your move, WB.

UPDATE 1/5/08: Here we go again, Now AICN is allegedly "debunking" this claiming that they've talked to one of their infamous "moles." I had a feeling something like this was going to pop up from someone else with a source. Honestly, I'm deferring to Latino Review and their previous track record until I hear otherwise. We all know AICN's track record for things Superman has been a bit sketchy at best. Remember Rupert Evans and Scott Porter? Stay tuned.

"Highly Unlikely" That Singer Will Return

2008-01-02T09:14:00.000-08:00

Set phasers to DONE!

Well what we've been speculating on for months now seems to be coming to fruition as rumblings in and around Hollywood are that Bryan Singer is on his way out as director of the Superman franchise! Word of our pending independence comes via the blog of Variety Deputy Editor Anne Thompson.

In her most recent posting, Thompson discusses meeting Batman director Chris Nolan as well as the current state of the DC Comics movie franchises:

Speaking of DC Comics pics, it is highly unlikely that Bryan Singer will return to shoot the next Superman movie. (The director is finishing up Tom Cruise's Nazi film Valkyrie, and prepping The Mayor of Castro Street). The next Superman we will see on the big screen will not be Brandon Routh, but a younger Superman among a cast of youthful superheroes in The Justice League. That movie will likely not be shot, however, until after the WGA strike is resolved. Warners is so happy with Dark Knight that their fondest hope is that Nolan will return to do another Batman.

Not to toot our own horn here, but we've been saying that was a strong possibility for a while now. From the unsupportive comments of Alan Horn, to the fast-tracked JLA project into the 2009 slot formerly thought to go to a possible Singerman sequel, to the release of Harris and Dougherty, all things seem to pointing to Singer going 'bye bye." We can only hope this is indeed the case. Hopefully this means that this version of the franchise is dead and that WB doesn't plan on having some other director try to clean up his mess in it's current state. Keep your fingers crossed.

Interesting tidbit there about JLA as well, since previously the thinking was that it would lense before the WGA strike ended.

Jon Peters is a Class Act

2007-12-27T18:58:00.000-08:00

Hey true believers, SSS here in between the Christmas and New Year's drinking binges. We know we haven't posted anything in quite a bit but Superman movie news related to either Singerman or JLA has been about as rare as a comicbook on Singer's bookshelf so its been a bit tough to come up with much. We did however find this recent news story about Singerman producer Jon Peters latest escapade and couldnt resist commenting on it.

After the last time good ole Jon made the news, it really made us wonder what exactly goes on over at WB Features and why there seems to be an overall lack of accountability for ANYTHING over there. But this latest incident of Peters' really takes the cake, as he's now being sued by THREE former employees, one for sexual harassment, and the other, a couple, who claims Peters wanted the pregnant wife to have an abortion or he'd fire the husband!

Blanca Hernandez alleged in her suit that Peters "systematically sexually harassed" her on nearly a daily basis. The incidents included unwanted touching, hugging and attempting to push Hernandez into bed while Peters was naked. The suit also claimed that Peters attempted to kiss her breasts, referring to them as "pillows."

The suit also alleged that an official at Peters Entertainment warned her that if she complained about Peters, "her and her daughter would be murdered." Hernandez was fired July 25, 2006, after approximately a year on the job, according to court papers.

Nice guy. At least this time, the person he's harassing is of legal age. Although the murder threat is a new one even for him. It gets better:

Adriana and Andrew Silveira contended in their lawsuit that after she learned she was pregnant in June 2006, her husband was told by Peters that if he wanted to keep his job, she should have an abortion. The lawsuit did not make clear why Peters allegedly made the demand. When the couple refused, Peters sent Andrew Silveira an e-mail informing him that he was being fired, the suit stated.

That should remove any kind of lingering doubt in anyone's mind as to whether Peters really is a grade A douchebag. How he continues to remain employed by WB is anyone's guess at this point. How long can the credit he gets for Batman in 1989 really last? We wonder how Superman could be taken so far out of character by Singer and Co. but the answer would seem to lie at the top of the food chain starting with it's producer and trickling on down. Let's hope this clown gets thrown out as well.

Alright, So Who the Hell is Going to be Superman?

2007-11-21T18:54:00.001-08:00

S.S.S. here, checking in from an undisclosed location as I prepare to stuff myself until I pass out tomorrow. Anyway, not much going on recently except a continuous stream of bullshit casting rumors about who's going to be donning the "S" in George Miller's Justice League, and each media outlet seems to be winding up with more egg on their faces than the last. In the wake of the "Tom Welling fiasco" that IESB caused you'd have thought they would've learned.

Let's recap, shall we?

First on 11/16, Scott Porter from Friday Night Lights was TOTALLY going to be Superman. Only one problem, he apparently wasn't aware of that. In fact, he tells us two days later while at Wizard World that he never even tested for that part. That next day, 11/19, Superhero Hype! gets a hold of what looks like the WORST CAST LIST EVER and it says that 5 foot 9 inch D.J. Cotrona "might" be playing Superman! WTF? Who????

Then all of a sudden on the same day JLA apparently doesn't even have a shooting script and NONE of the actors are even signed according to The Hollywood Reporter. The following day, Clint from Moviehole calls "bullshit" on that and reveals that the film is "still definitely on track" regardless and that "The cast is a lock as of today''. They then go on to say that the "cast is expected to be announced tomorrow" which was actually today, 11/21, but as of 10 PM EST there still hasn't been any kind of announcement. Shocking I know.

Here's a tip in case you haven't learned this yet. NO ONE KNOWS A FRIGGEN THING ABOUT THIS MOVIE. Outside of the fact that George Miller is directing it and that the plot is "loosely" based on the "OMAC" and "Tower of Babel" storylines, nobody knows anything about how the strike might impact this film or who is going to be playing the roles. The trades don't seem to know, Moviehole doesnt know, super secret "insiders" from random messageboards don't know, and IESB sure as hell doesn't know. It's best just to sit back and wait for the word from the proverbial horse's mouth to come down from on high and then deal with it then.

For the record, both Porter and Cotrona SUCK as choices for Superman. Although Porter would've been a much better choice for Flash than Adam friggen Brody. And that SHH! cast list is BEYOND HORRIFIC with the exception of one or two people. It reads like the list of dead body extras for an episode of CSI. George Miller can't possibly be that stupid. I hope.

Writers Out, Singer to Follow?

2007-10-22T17:01:00.000-07:00

Women and children first.

Well news comes today via Variety that Bryan Singer's hand-picked cronies and partners in crime, Mike Dougherty and Dan Harris, won't be returning to write any alleged Singerman sequel. As a result, WB is now "allegedly" taking pitches from anyone who might possibly be able to save this disaster.

Of course the article claims that the two are leaving to "pursue more directing gigs." But in reality its more like they were "asked" to leave because A) the crew to Singer's film is slowly being let go as WB pushes forward with JLA, or B) they just weren't able to bring the goods when they pitched a sequel.

How can I make such a claim? Well, if you go back to those glamorous Saturn Awards in May, both of these guys went on record about their plans for the sequel and how they were working on it "right now." Then in August, some guy from BlueTights ran into Dougherty in Washington D.C. at which point he told him that the sequel was actually being written and also that there would be even 2 villains, so obviously these guys did some form of mapping or scripting a sequel film, and Singer was intent on using them for it. Put this together with the fact that WB is accepting sequel pitches, and there you have your answer that either the sequel pitches thing is bullcrap to avoid making a complete cancellation announcement or that what these guys planned on doing was completely rejected by the studio to the point where they told them that they wanted to head in a new direction (like a reboot, hopefully).

Why do we think Singer might soon follow? Other than the rumored Harvey Milk film and the fact that the more JLA news we get the less likely a sequel is looking anyway? Well, although some would like to chalk this up to wishful thinking on our part, this is a legitimate inference from Harris and Dougherty leaving. These guys are good friends with Singer and were brought over from the X-Men franchise specifically for this project because they're in his inner circle. These are "his guys." WB getting rid of them, sorry them "leaving," takes Singer out of his comfort zone, and likely forces him to work with a writing team that the studio is going to appoint, if you believe the news about the open solicitations for scripts. Does anyone think that's something Singer and his ego are going to acquiesce to? Despite what some company mouthpieces are telling some of the shill sites, this is a legitimate possibility and somehow I don't see this captain going down with his ship.

Should be interesting from here on out to hear who starts moving on to other projects.

Miller's Justice League Sucks?...Or Not?

2007-10-17T19:38:00.001-07:00

Wonder Twin powers ACTIVATE! Form of... a giant piece of shit!

Yeah ummm, I'm just at a loss for words here. Apparently Clint over at Moviehole got a hold of a sizeable portion of the JLA script that was set aside for the effects guys and let me tell ya, it ain't good. Well, at least it won't be for those of us who are out of the 6th grade. For those of us who were expecting something along the lines of Bruce Timm's animated series or something out of the many epic JLA comics, we're going to be SORELY disappointed. Clint reads through the carnage:

"So what are they working with? Well, not a lot. Not to say the film reads terrible, it doesn’t, it’s just that it reads more like a Saturday Morning ‘Superfriends’ cartoon than anything else – like, say, something that’ll appeal to the over twenties crowd - and basically, WETA need only look at the old cartoons to seek inspiration for their whizbang dressings. Having said that, maybe that’s exactly what they’re going for – a family-friendly toon-esque romp; like say “The Rocketeer” or “Sky High”.

The film introduces the main characters very quickly – as if they’re a 42-minute TV show and have to get it done quickly. You don’t get to know much about any of our central heroes before they all unite."

Sounds great doesn't it? Clint then goes on to briefly explain the introduction of the main characters which seem so utterly cheesy, I expect them all to be winking into the camera. He then finishes up the awful news with:

"Look, the film seems pretty underwhelming, sure, but what I think might’ve been their motivation here is to distance themselves from any of the “Superman” or “Batman” films already in existence – which is something the fans will be thankful for – and as this is merely light and fluffy cartoon adventure-stuff, without any of the dark undertones of those other films (largely “Batman”), they’ve definitely succeeded in that. This will definitely appeal to a much younger crowd than those that say, loved “Batman Begins” – it’ll be one the twelve-years-olds go ga-ga for.

Great! Sounds like a 2 hour toy commercial that will sell many a happy meal and action figure.

"So all-in-all, “Justice League” won’t be our film – and when I say ‘our’ I mean, commonly anyone considered of adult age – but it will probably be right up the kids’ alley. It’s essentially a live-action version of “Superfriends” – in terms of pace, story and set-up."

Well, there you have it. Part of me thinks it funny that this type of schlock is whats going to be replacing Singer's franchise at WB. Another part of me wants to once again run up to Singer and punch him in the nuts for screwing the pooch so badly that he scared the studio so shitless that they've gone completely off the other end of the spectrum in terms of the balance between action and story.

Christian Bale, Tom Welling, and Brandon Routh should be thanking their lucky stars that they won't be involved with this thing. (We think.)

But dont push the panic button, just yet. Like most other things with this movie we could find out tomorrow that this is all really bullshit, but Clint at Moviehole is pretty good with this stuff so this is more than likely the case.

Looks like we may have our next crusade on our hands. Stay tuned.

UPDATE 10/18: Well it appears, as I mentioned a few paragraphs up, that yesterday's "news" from Moviehole was yet another in a long line of the total clusterfuck of rumors that surround this project. Apparently Clint was sent a bogus script, according to Dirty Sanchez over at IESB, although given his recent track record who the hell knows if he's right? The Moviehole article has since disappeared and we're seemingly back to no one knowing much of anything. How fun!

UPDATE 10/19: So it looks like this rumor may be true again now? Someone stop this AWFUL ride. I want off.

Even Dean Cain Thinks Singerman Sucks

2007-10-13T16:16:00.000-07:00

Well you know you've reached a different plateau of "suckitude" when the worst Superman of all time, i.e. Dean Cain, thinks you suck. In an appearance on the KTLA morning show ( you can watch the video HERE if you can stand the vapid, tedious morning show banter), Cain was on talking about his guest appearance on an upcoming episode of Smallville as well as his time in the tights, when the subject of Singerman was breached by one of the douchebag morning news anchors (who himself even called the film "not very good"). He kind of puts Cain on the spot about his impressions of the film. Cain's response: 'Um it didnt do very well at the box office...but it was umm "visually stunning," I'll tell you that."

Really Dean? That's all you could come up with? You couldn't even put out a "it wasn't too bad" or something even a bit more positive? That's like going out on a first date and when a friend asks you how it went, you respond by telling him that she had nice shoes. You could tell Deano was struggling to find something, ANYTHING to come up with on the spot, and that's all he (a Princeton University grad BTW) could come up with? Hilarious, to say the least.

Superman vs. The Shitstorm of Casting Rumors

2007-10-03T19:35:00.000-07:00

SSS here, just checking in since I've been away for a bit as real life sometime dictates. When last I left you, the confirmation that JLA was a go, and that Singerman 2 was going into carbonite had just come through. And boy does it look like some fun has ensued! Especially with regards to casting the new Superman in the JLA movie.

It looks like IESB has been at again with the Tom Welling will, oh wait no he won't thing. And now from the emails we've been getting today it looks like they're back on the, "oh maybe he will" kick again. Guys, make up your freaking minds already, either Tom Welling is one of the most indecisive actors in Hollywood, or your sources need to learn how to read contract negotiations better. As cool as it would be to see Welling finally get the hell out of Smallville and don the tights, I really think it's wrong that they're leading people on like this without more concrete info.

In the process of debunking Welling (before they um "rebunked" him?), it looks like IESB also managed to kick up another mess of rumors involving the transition of Brandon Routh to the JLA Supes role, simply because someone reported that he had a meeting on the WB lot one day. I can say without a doubt this is one of the more ridiculous rumors we've heard. The team at WB behind JLA led by V.P. of Production, Dan Lin, may even rival the great "ApologistPuncher" in terms of their dislike for Singerman. Those guys are the ones who convinced Alan Horn and Jeff Robinov to proceed with a JLA film and let Singer go off to do films about Hitler and gay mayors. To think they'd then turn around and use the frontman of Singer's failure as one of the leads in their movie is preposterous. I'm sure those guys would rather piss on an electric fence then use Routh in their movie. As I've said before, he seems like a decent enough guy but he added nothing significant to the part the first go around, and now he's saddled with Singer's baggage. Why the hell would they tie themselves to that?

The other option for casting would of course be anyone who isn't Routh or Welling. And a lot of people seem to knock that idea because they "don't want 3 Supermen (Supermans?) running around." To which I say "nonsense!" JLA is due out in Summer 2009. Even if they were to drag Smallville out for 8 seasons it's over by May 2009 so Welling's tenure, assuming he's not in JLA, would be over. And honestly, if JLA is a big huge hit and a new guy nails it as Superman, do you really think they're going to resume the Singerman franchise with Routh? And if JLA is a terrible financial failure, do you really think WB is going to touch another big budget superhero film not named Batman for another decade? I don't, so either way you don't have Routh "running around" anymore either, and it will be over 3 years since Singerman stunk up theaters so its not like he'll be fresh in too many people's minds in the general movie-going audience anyway. The new guy would be the only current Superman or no one would be.

Other recent rumors are suggesting that casting may already be finished for the most part and that an announcement is imminent. Hold on to your hats folks, its sure to be a wild ride, and in the words of Jigsaw "oh yes! there will be blood!"

JLA Confirmed, Singerman Taking a "Back Seat"

2007-09-20T16:05:00.000-07:00

Well it looks like today the official word finally came down via Variety that George Miller will indeed be helming the JLA movie, and our old friend Singerman is being put on indefinite hiatus. Of course anyone who's read this blog over the last few weeks already knew that was the case anyway so this really isn't much of a surprise. Ok maybe to everybody except "Restart Mel" that is.

According to the article:

Warner Bros. is moving aggressively ahead with the bigscreen adaptation of DC Comics’ “Justice League of America,” with George Miller on board to direct.
Project, which is the initial phases of casting, is a pre-strike priority for the studio, which needs a superhero tentpole in 2009.
Still, making all the pieces fit has been complicated by overlapping superhero projects in the pipeline, since “Justice League” features a pantheon of superheroes, including Superman and Batman.
Batman and Superman are active properties for the studio, though the next installment in the Superman franchise has taken a backseat to “Justice League” in part because Warners is so keen on the “Justice League” script by Kieran and Michele Mulroney.
“Justice League” will likely feature the characters of Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, the Flash and Aquaman.
Warners is in the preliminary phases of casting for “Justice League.” Several sources close to the project said that Christian Bale, star of the revived Batman film franchise, and Brandon Routh, star of Bryan Singer’s “Superman Returns,” would probably not appear in the movie.

Again, obviously all things we've heard before, but still nice to hear it from one of the industry trades as opposed to websites who's credibility everyone is always calling into question. Exactly, what "taking a back seat" means for Singerman I can't say for sure, but I would think that if JLA is a big success and the guy who plays Superman nails it, I'd have a hard time believing WB would have any interest whatsoever in returning to Singer's mess.

Oh and for all of you guys who've been emailing me asking this, I'd be fine with Tom Welling taking up the mantle in this film. He seems to have all the prerequisites for the part in addition to 7 some odd years of training for it, literally. The key thing above any actor though will always be the script and the director's vision. If those two are in line with the Supes we know and love, then everything will be alright. If we get another Singerman situation where the characters are marginalized and the source material is ignored, then it doesn't matter who we've got in the title role.

Finally, although we may have been ragging on the guy for a while we are men of honor here and we will give credit where credit is do, "Dirty" Sanchez from IESB called this one almost a month ago.

UPDATE 9/21 - Well just when you give IESB some credit for getting a scoop right it seems they've served up a big "shit sandwich" on their "big scoop" from last month about Tom Welling being the JLA's Man of Steel. Nice job, go on TV to declare to the masses that this is going to happen and then a few weeks later back away from it with the infamous "I have no idea what happened." Like I said if they were wrong on this they're going to get fried regardless of the Miller thing. They've likely now succeeded in pissing off a seemingly overwhelming amount of fans of Welling/Smallville who because of this may now have some vitriol against the JLA film when before they probably would've cared very little. Add this to the half dozen girls left on BrandonRouth.com that still care about him and feel as if he's getting replaced, and it's going to be UGLY when the new guy is announced. Way to go IESB!

I'm Sorry Mr. Singer, You're Not on the List.

2007-09-13T19:02:00.000-07:00

Just a quick update before I head out for the weekend. The fine folks over at Filmjerk have gotten a hold of a list that started circulating around the Hollywood talent agencies two weeks ago, listing the 300 projects in active development which have become pre-strike priorities for the major studios and a number of top production companies. Comingsoon.net has now also verified the authenticity of the list.

Curiously the Warner Brothers looks like so:

WARNER BROTHERS
1906 - Dir: Brad Bird
ALTERED CARBON - Dir: James McTeigue
ARRANGED - Dir: Gary Winick
CARPE DEMON - Dir: None attached
CLASH OF THE TITANS - Dir: None attached
THE DIRTY DOZEN - Dir: Guy Ritchie
FARRAGUT NORTH - Dir: None attached
GUARDIANS OF GA'HOOLE - Dir: None attached
HARRY POTTER AND THE HALF-BLOOD PRINCE - Dir: David Yates
HEART SHAPED BOX - Dir: Neil Jordan
HIMELFARB - Dir: Miguel Arteta
THE INCREDIBLE MR LIMPET - Dir: Chris Columbus
JUSTICE LEAGUE - Dir: None attached, but looking to George Miller
LOSERS - Dir:
MEN - Dir: Todd Phillips
MORTDECAI - Dir: None attached
NIGHTCRAWLERS - Dir: McG
PENETRATION - Dir: Ridley Scott
SHANTARAM - Dir: Mira Nair
SHERLOCK HOLMES - Dir: None attached
SPOOKS APPRENTICE - Dir: Tim Burton
THE TOWN - Dir: Adrian Lyne
YES MAN - Dir: Peyton Reed

Notice anyone missing from that list? Notice someone else who IS there? Didn't we hear things from certain places about a Singerman sequel film still being in development and a script was being "feverishly worked on" by Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum? Well those people dont seem so sure any more, and seem to have switched to the "it will be delayed" defense when they used to be SO sure it was coming in 2009. (You can run, but you can't hide!!)

Obviously not all of those films on that list will develop before the strike as things can and do change in Hollywood, but those are what is in the potential pipeline at the development stage and you'd have thought from everything we'd been hearing Singerman 2 would've shown up on that list. And yes, sequels do show up on this list as evidenced by the Harry Potter listing.

Sorry Restart, it doesn't look like Singerman will fly again in 2009, and God willing, if JLA is done well and is a big hit, we won't ever have to see him again.

The Way Singerman SHOULD have Ended

2007-09-06T18:55:00.000-07:00

Alright, emotions are obviously running high across Al Gore's internet as the wheels of "justice" seem to be in motion for the proposed JLA film, while Singerman II seems to be in limbo. Anyone who's perused our comments section can tell you that. (and they can probably tell you a few new "words" too...) Of course, people in suits at Warner Bros. are probably all laughing at us as they light their cigars with $100 bills in their ivory tower.

Since news on the fate of these projects is likely to become more frequent in the coming weeks and tensions will inevitable run even higher, we thought we'd take a moment to lighten the mood by showing this fan made video of how Singerman should've ended that was sent to us a few weeks back but we never posted because the JLA shitstorm broke out. Kudos to "PresidentLuthor" who seems to have a knack for these alternate endings.

Now wouldnt that have made the movie better? OK, it still would've sucked but the ending would've been more satisfying than watching Singerman sneaking into Super Kid's bedroom. Enjoy!

Tom Welling in Talks to be the JLA Superman

2007-08-24T16:44:00.000-07:00

Take this with a BIG grain of salt but "Dirty" Sanchez just reported on G4's "Attack of the Show" and also over on IESB that Warner Brothers is in talks with Tom Welling and the Smallville producers to get him as the Superman for the JLA movie, which is a live-action film BTW with CGI motion capture in it. (Kudos to the fine gentlemen at CHUD for calling that one a few days ago.) Again, it's IESB so take it with a grain of salt since they've spit the bit on more than one occasion recently. He also said he thinks it will have no bearing on whether Singerman II gets made or not. How that works? I dont know.

UPDATE: Here's a clip of the interview:

UPDATE: Apparently SMHP called "BS" on IESB after, for some unknown reason, asking Al Gough and expecting him to give them an honest response (Hey Younis, ever hear of an NDA??). Then IESB just called BS right back on SMHP. It's like a battle to see who can be the least credible. Grab your popcorn folks.

UPDATE: 8/25 - IESB is STILL pretty sure of themselves. Boy, are they going to get burned if this doesn't pan out.

UPDATE: 8/30 - The KryptonFan Podcast interviewed both Dirty Sanchez from IESB and Steve Younis from SMHP about their "nerd off" last Friday. Sanchez still seems pretty darn sure of himself, and seems to able to at least speak "somewhat" intelligently about the situation. He also mentions a certain "blog" that dislikes Bryan Singer, although I don't think we've EVER said we had anything against the X-Men movies?
Steve Younis on the other hand, adds virtually nothing other than reiterating how he ran to Gough and Gough told him "no." Not once does he even breach the possibility of Gough not being able to talk to him.

UPDATE: 9/2 - Looks like you can score an early one for "Dirty" Sanchez as they appear to have announced casting directors for New York, Toronto, and, strangely enough, Vancouver, where incidentally, a certain actor films a Superman TV show. They've also posted script sides for some lesser roles in the film.

More on this as it becomes available.

JLA Movie Confirmed? Routh is One and Done?

2007-08-21T19:19:00.000-07:00

Wow! Talk about a film coming together fast. I'm not sure if I should be excited or scared about this? Apparently while we were all busy arguing about just how BAD Singerman was, it appears WB was busy with their big Plan B. Just into us tonight, Moviehole reports that the proposed Justice League film is in fact confirmed to be just as "full speed ahead" as we've been hearing recently and it should be up and running by next year. And that's not all, they've got a few other goodies regarding casting. They go on to say:

A casting director for the movie will be onboard next week and it's then that they'll be going after their tighted strongmen.

Director George Miller ("Mad Max") has some ideas who he'd like to cast as Batman and Superman but naturally, they mightn't be the same faces the WB want. Either way, doesn't sound like Christian Bale or Brandon Routh will be involved in the film. I assume that's a financial thing.

(Update : We have been informed by another source at Warner Bros that it will be an all-new cast and that Bale and Routh will NOT be back.)

So within the next month we should start seeing a few announcements about the movie.

I'm not surprised really, I told you in the earlier post that Bale's Batman just didn't fit into the world of the JLA, and that most likely they wouldn't want Routh anywhere near it since he could only hurt the film by dragging over Singerman's problems with him.

Not surprisingly, IESB does a follow up to this report (completely ignoring their prior "Singerman II is coming come hell to high water!" stance BTW) and add this bit (take it for what it's worth):

"Let me clear some confusion, Batman and Superman are the central characters of the Justice League film that will now be played by different actors.

WB is looking for a complete new cast for the multi-hero team up and that casting will begin as early as next week.

The IESB has been told that early meetings have already taken place for certain key roles and to expect announcements very soon. Just in case there was any doubt, George Miller is 100% locked in as the director.

Once again, the confirmed heroes are Superman, Batman, the Flash, Aquaman, Wonder Woman and the Green Lantern.
We are working on a couple of leads that are indicating what actors may be up for a couple key roles.

They also have a really brief interview with Bale from today's 3:10 to Yuma press junket where they surprisingly didn't swear at him. Then again , he probably would've kicked their asses if they did.

Is this the death knell for Singerman? Or is it just delaying it? In our opinion here, the whole reason this film is being fast-tracked for Summer 2009 is to fill Singerman's slot because WB doesn't have the confidence in it. We'll stick around until we hear the official announcement and see Singerman's bloated corpse. Stay tuned.

Now Where Have We Heard This Before???

2007-08-17T20:18:00.000-07:00

Remember back a couple months ago when we told you that Warner Bros. was fast-tracking a Justice League of America film that would either take the place of or delay a possible Singerman sequel? And certain "Pro-Singer websites" then ran around screaming "All is well!"? Well it appears one of those sites, IESB, is starting to see the light, now that the train is right on top of them. Better late than never I guess.

Take it for what it's worth, well because it's IESB, but their "sources" who don't have the best track record on these things are now finally acknowledging that the proposed Justice League of America film is now more of a reality than they first thought. The self-serving carnage is below.

"When the news broke that JLA (Justice League of America) was moving forward with a script written by Kiernan and Michele Mulroney, speculations began that the follow-up to Superman Returns, The Man of Steel, would be delayed or even completely scrapped.
WB studio sources quickly said that was just mere speculation and The Man of Steel was still planned for a first quarter 2008 start date. Even recently, Brandon Routh told us the same thing during a quick red carpet interview at the premiere for Transformers."

I think Routh would've said anything at that point to get a way from you. He didn't exactly look comfortable with you dropping the "F bomb" in front of him repeatedly.

"At the same time, we are hearing some execs over WB were not happy with the way Superman Returns performed regardless of the $390 million plus worldwide box office take and that’s why Justice League is being pushed through the studio at a record pace."

At the same time? We've been hearing that for almost a year. Where have you guys been?

"The JLA script has been received with open arms by Warners and the goal is for the film to be the launching point for The Flash, Wonder Woman, The Green Lantern and Aquaman as well as rejuvenate Superman.

When do the powers-that-be want to start production on Justice League? Apparently, as soon as the first quarter of 2008, that’s right, WB sources have informed the IESB that execs behind the Justice League of America want it to be in production as early as February/March 2008 to be ready for a summer of 2009 release."

Now would these be the same sources who just a month ago said any talk of a delay in a Singerman sequel was "horse shit?"

"Some questions arise. What will happen to The Man of Steel film that Bryan Singer has already signed on to do?"

I'll give you 3 guesses.

"Would Warner Brothers be willing to lose the money they would have to pay to Singer regardless if he directs the film or not? Will Christian Bale and Brandon Routh reprise their roles as Batman and Superman?

Some rumors indicate that studio execs have considered recasting Superman and a few names have popped up. But the honest truth is that the studio just does not know at this time whether Routh will return or not. We’ll just have to wait and see."

It wouldn't be the first time WB has lost money on a pay or play deal with a director on a Superman movie. Something tells me based on their past experiences with Tim Burton, Bret Ratner, Michael Bay, and McG that WB covered themselves a bit more when they negotiated with Singer.

As for Routh returning: sorry Brandon, you seem like a nice guy, but you bare the mark of the beast, the scarlet letter "S" of Singerman, and with you comes all the continuity and issues of Singer's film. Even if you completely ignore the events of Singerman, the general public will identify you with it, and that could condemn this movie. Your performance, while not a huge issue in the film, was nothing that a hundred other actors off the streets of L.A. couldn't have done.

"I want to be very clear about this, I want to see a JLA film very badly and I am pretty certain that George Miller will direct. The problem that I have is I can’t foresee the Nolan camp, including producer Charles Roven, to lose the third stand-alone Batman film by allowing Bale to JLA instead. Maybe Warners should bring a few of the Batman/TDK producers on board the JLA production to keep that camp happy."

The concept of something like the JLA is pretty much absurd in the gritty, realistic world that Nolan and Co. have created in Batman Begins and The Dark Knight. That was the whole reason they took on the project in the first place. I can't see them wanting to have anything to do with a JLA film. Honestly, if I can only have Bale as Batman 3 times, I'd rather see a Batman film trilogy.

"I have to wonder if they are willing to pay the huge amount of money to Bale to keep him for possible future JLA and Batman films. I definitely think he’s worth it but it’s not my checkbook.

Routh’s price tag is no where near Bale’s and I’d bet he’d be willing to do possible future JLA and Superman films."

Routh would most likely wash your car at this point if you were going to give him $10 to do it. The "next big star" burned out before he ever had a chance to shine.

"Finally, what about Singer’s The Man of Steel? At this stage in the game, yes, it appears that the Man of Steel will be pushed back to accommodate Justice League.

Does that mean that Singer is out and the sequel to Superman Returns scrapped? Not likely.

As I mentioned earlier, Bryan Singer has already signed on to do The Man of Steel and his team is reportedly already working on the film. I find it hard to believe that the studio would be willing to lose the money that will have to be paid to Singer if they decide to drop the project. I just can’t see that happening."

Yes, you keep saying these things but yet the evidence keeps mounting against it. You said a lot of things were "reportedly happening" that weren't. And what's riskier for WB? Coughing up a couple million max to pay off Singer for good? Or missing the mark by $100 million again on another Singerman film?

"It would be a mistake on Warner Bros. part to recast Superman, Brandon did a fine job and under Miller’s direction he could do great, besides I hear that Warner Bros. really dug Bryan Singer’s take for the sequel and Michael Dougherty is already working on the new script."

I knew I could count on you guys to get that one little last barb of unabashed fanboyism in there so you dont have to completely eat crow. Of course, you heard WB "really dug" Singer's take on a sequel and that they're working on a script. I wouldn't have expected any less.

Fun with the "Motivator"

2007-08-14T20:22:00.000-07:00

Well, news has been slow lately so we're going to have a little fun. I'm sure you've all seen those cheesy motivational pictures hanging on the wall in some tool's office. You know the ones, with the inspirational term or attribute in big capital letters and then a sentence below it that bestows the values of said term? They even have some spoof ones out that are pretty damn funny.

Well BigHugeLabs.com has a neat little web application up that lets you create your own. And of course, us being us, we had a little fun with the application at Singerman's expense and of course we figured that we'd share the results with you. Click the image to enlarge. Enjoy.

We'd love to see the ones you guys in the Comments come up with.

And hey, don't forget: BOOT SINGER, REBOOT SUPERMAN!!

The Man in the Mask Does NOT like Singerman

2007-08-08T06:09:00.000-07:00

Here's another amusing string of videos that were just put up on YouTube by 'The Hideout" where the hosts take Singerman to task. (better late than never I guess) I'm not really sure why the guy on the left is wearing a wrestling mask? Maybe he was a crew member?

Aside from the fact that they keep saying that Superman: The Movie came out in 1979 (as opposed to 1978) everything else seems to be pretty much on point. There's 3 more parts to the Singerman series if you're interested.

Part 2 , Part 3 , Part 4

And hey, don't forget: BOOT SINGER, REBOOT SUPERMAN!!

The Sound of Silence

2007-08-01T01:57:00.000-07:00

S.S.S. just checking in folks, back from the sun and fun in the great state of California. (It's great when you have a job that let's you schedule business trips around major geek events.) I had the privilege of catching the weekend happenings at the San Diego Comic Con International. Between this and the Superman Festival in the span of a few weeks, I've had enough of awkward people in funny costumes to last me a good LONG time.

Anyway, as I expected, there was nary a mention of anything related to Singerman at the convention, which should seem odd to those who believe a Singerman sequel could hit theaters in Summer 2009. When you consider that The Dark Knight which is due out next summer, had just a few big announcements at last year's Con including the title and the casting of the new villain, you'd think that there might be something, ANYTHING, about a proposed sequel to Singerman to keep your core audience and media in the loop especially given the seeming back and forth stories we've been getting between the studio and those who suckle at Singer's teet.

I realize according to Alan Horn a few weeks back, they were still in the stage of waiting to see the next pile of crap that Singer would be turning in, but if they had any faith in the franchise or desire to keep it in the spotlight at all, this weekend would've been the chance to do something. They could've at least propped Routh up in a booth or something to give his usual schpiel about "all being well" as far as he knows. Lord knows, he's not doing anything else.

Apropos of nothing, they did have KICK ASS panels for Heroes and Smallville at the Con.

Oh and don't forget: BOOT SINGER, REBOOT SUPERMAN!!

Grab Your Pens and Paper!

2007-07-19T06:42:00.000-07:00

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

Horn Doesn't Sound So Sure of a Singerman Sequel

2007-07-10T06:34:00.000-07:00

Say that title 5 times fast....

An interesting report from today's Hollywood Reporter was just brought to our attention. In the piece they talk about how the movie studios are in search of the next big property to turn into a successful film franchise. In it they also give updates on the more recent big time franchises like Spider-man, Shrek, Ice Age, etc. and their plans for the future. At one point in the article they get to talking about Warner Bros.' properties. and Singerman comes up with a quote from studio head Alan Horn:

"The future of the studio's recent comic book adaptation, 2006's "Superman Returns," is somewhat more dubious. That film cost $209 million (even after various tax rebates) and marketing costs sent expenses upward of $300 million, but director Bryan Singer's Man of Steel picture made only $201 million domestically. While insiders say the movie was profitable, the studio mandated major cost cuts before proceeding with a sequel."IF we do a sequel to 'Superman,' we want it to be less expensive," Horn acknowledges. "I have to see a screenplay before I say yes to anything. But the studio would be willing to spend as much as $175 million if the screenplay and other factors warranted it."Still, Singer has announced that he plans to direct a second "Superman" project."

Interesting. Not exactly a vote of confidence for the continuation of the franchise when the studio head is using terms like "IF we do one" or "we'd need to see a screenplay before we say yes." You'd think he'd have a little more confidence in a director in an already established franchise if it was doing as well as some would have you believe. Obviously a script must be turned in before any film is greenlit, but you would think he'd be talking in a lot less uncertain terms about one their alleged big movie franchises

Even if it does get approved that's gonna be a REAL tight budget for a director like Singer who allegedley wants to up the action in a sequel. It also seems that Singer and his cronies (and his worshippers over at IESB) may have gotten a little ahead of themselves with talk of doing a sequel because the "money man" doesn't seem so sure right now.

Speaking of money, Michael Bay did quite a nice job updating an iconic character franchise from the 1980's, no? And for the cost of only $150 million (and that's with heavy CGI). Now there's a guy who gets the most bang for his buck. Just pair him a decent writing team and script supervisor to keep him in check and you're good to go apparently.

Happy Birthday to umm...us!

2007-07-08T21:02:00.000-07:00

Just thought we'd take a moment to commemorate the fact that the blog has been up and running for one year now. The first posting may have been done on June 30, 2006 after coming home from the theater in shock at what we had just witnessed, however we didn't publish the blog until about a week later. Since then it's all been a blur.

Though some would argue, and probably rightfully so, that the blog has had a longer and more interesting run the movie it was setup to pick apart, it has for the most part been a truly interesting experience. None of us on here had ever done this before, and we really didnt anticipate the fan response that we got, nor did we know the blog would be seen by some of the people who have seen it. A big thanks goes out to ClarkKent-Is-Superman, Metropolis_Native, and everyone else who helps us with news, emails, photoshop, etc. We'd also like to thank all of the great commentors who have made their voices heard and kept the debates raging on. Even the ones who keep insisting they've "PWNED" us even though we cant understand half of what they've typed.

That being said, we dont want to waste an entire post on a sappy thank you, so we've dug up an interesting piece of news for you. Recently many of you have been wondering what the heck Brandon Routh has been up to lately and why he hasn't become this "big star" that we were all told he would be last year. Well you can put those rumors of him squeegeeing car windows or busing tables to rest, because WE'VE FOUND BRANDON'S LATEST PROJECT and boy is he multi-talented! Enjoy!

Another Superman Film is "Way Off"

2007-07-01T19:30:00.000-07:00

For those of you who've been wondering what the status was of the Superman franchise, after Singer got done screwing it's corpse, the outlook doesn't look too rosey. It appears that if they do choose to do another Singerman film for some ungodly reason, it won't be for a good long while.

According to Rotten Tomatoes, Singer's producers, Neil Meron and Craid Zadan, are moving forward with Singer directing their pet project, a biopic of slain gay right activist Harvey Milk called The Mayor of Castro Street, as soon as Singer finishes with his current film -- the WWII story Valkyrie.

The next Superman, that's a ways off," claimed Meron, with Zadan adding. "Don't worry about it. Trust me. We may even start preproduction on Harvey Milk while he's on post production on the Tom Cruise movie."These boys are determined to make their movie, comic books be damned. "We've been working on that for 15 years," said Meron. "It started off with Oliver Stone and Robin Williams. Now it's Bryan Singer directing, Chris McQuarrie writing the script."

Now in addition to this is appears that Valkyrie is having a lot of issues on their own, as Germany didn't want batshit crazy Tom Cruise to make a movie there because he's a scientologist. Although now it seems they've backtracked on that, although they're still denying the production crew access to some key sites they planned on using which is still going to cause delays.

Could this be the opening for the potential JLA movie that just had a script turned in? Or could WB plow ahead with this franchise without Singer at the helm? (They did after all, boot him off of the Logan's Run remake he wanted to do so badly.) Either one would be an improvement. We also predicted this might happen back in April.

Perhaps someone should relay this news to Brandon Routh? (and all of the suck-ups over at IESB. ). He seems pretty confused about a lot of things. The fine folks over at C.H.U.D. have an amusing take on that "interview."

JLA Film on the Fast-track?

2007-06-16T21:11:00.000-07:00

While fans await news on the uncertain future of Singerman, Warner Bros. appears to have moved another property to the front burner.

On February 22, 2007, Variety reported that Kiernan and Michele Mulroney [pictured] were hired to write a preliminary script for a future Justice League film.

Now it seems less than four months later, a first draft has been submitted, and even Variety is speculating that the "superteam" might eclipse Singerman.

Here is the latest article on the film, as posted in Variety this past Friday, June 15th:

One of the more ambitious projects around town - the bigscreen adaptation of DC Comics' "Justice League" - cleared a major hurdle last week.

Husband-wife writing duo Kieran Mulroney and Michele Mulroney turned in a first draft that had Warner Bros. suits actually smiling - no small feat, considering "Justice" follows a half-dozen of the best-known superheroes working together, including Batman and Superman.

But the accomplishment raises a tricky question for Warners: Should it release "Justice" before its "Superman Returns" sequel?

Christopher Nolan's next Batman pic "The Dark Knight" bows in July 2008. Bryan Singer's "Superman" follow-up had been expected to play in 2009. But there's no script yet for that pic, while Singer is busy getting ready to shot Tom Cruise starrer "Valkyrie" for UA.

The question now: Will a souped-up "Justice League" prove to be Kryptonite to Superman?

Superman fans know how much Singerman was 'teh suck.' We can only hope this news about a JLA film means Warner Bros. has finally realized it too.

S.S.S. Live from the Superman Celebration!

2007-06-10T06:31:00.000-07:00

Despite rumors to the contrary we havent left the planet unannounced to find our previously destroyed home world. We've been away doing the summertime vacation and work type stuff for the past few weeks, and with nothing that's "on the record" really coming out of the studio other than the proposed Teen Titans film,, news has been a bit slow. Although the rumors still seem to be flying fast and furious.

Since I just happened to be in Illinois this week for work, I had a chance to attend the Superman Celebration in Metropolis, IL this weekend for the first time ever. It was basically like a huge comic convention that was just dedicated to Superman, but pretty cool nonetheless. If you're a Superman fan I'd recommend getting there at least once in your life. They had Superman themed everything there: costume pageants, car shows, auctions, art shows, dog shows, etc. They also had some celebrity guests there from the various incarnations of Superman in TV, comics, and movies. I actually got to meet the original Lois Lane, Noel Neill and Supergirl, Helen Slater, which was cool. Erica Durance from Smallville was supposed to be there, but was apparently very sick and unable to attend.

The one thing that stood out to me during the time I was there was the lack oi anything really having to do with Singerman there. I thought this odd considering Singerman had come out less than a year ago, and this was the first Superman Celebration since it's release. I think I saw 2 kids out of a few hundred that were there in anything even resembling the Singerman costumes they were selling for kids last Halloween. Most everyone was sporting the traditional look. Also, in all of the auctions there was little, if any, Singerman merchandise. I came across one of the vendors who was selling an authentic Singerman DVD for $6.99 and asked him why it was so cheap? His response was, "I have so many of them, I just want to get rid of the damn things." I was half-tempted to direct him to this blog posting so he could make the best of his bad situation. There were also no guests there from Singerman. Sure Noel Neill was there, but she was there as "TV's First Lois Lane" not "Dying, old bag that signed her fortune over to a pathetic version of Lex Luthor."

Being the inquisitive gent and social butterfly that I am, I figured I'd do some informal questioning of some of the most hard core of the hard core Superman fanbase about some of the hot button topics (and yes, these people were pretty hardcore. If you fly 2500 miles to go to this convention in your own handmade Supes costume, THAT's hardcore!) I did this without revealing who I was, so as not to taint the answers and to protect my secret identity. I talked to a few dozen pretty interesting people during my time there; at the hotel bar, at the merchant tables, at the costume shows and I found one common thread regarding Singerman. When asked what they thought of the film, I got a luke warm response at best. Answers ranged from "It was OK" to "I liked the guy in the suit but the movie was silly" to "Bryan Singer is clueless" (NOT making that one up) to "They crapped all over the character" (that one came from a mother of 3). Granted this wasn't a statistically accurate poll or anything, and I'm not trying to use it as definitive evidence that the film sucked. I just liked hearing the opinions of people who eat, drink, and breath Superman and would go out of their way to support the character in any medium. The highlight of my day had to come when I was talking a woman in her late 40's/early 50's in one of the art galleries and when I asked her if she followed tha character developments on the internet, she listed this blog as one of the places she checks occassionally for news. It's the little things like that, that brighten up your day.

Why Spider-man Soars and Singerman well...Sucks

2007-05-08T09:34:00.000-07:00

Unless you've been living under a rock for the past week I'm sure you've heard by now about Spider-man 3 's record opening weekend box office take of $151.1 million domestic and $382 million worldwide. (75% and 97% of Singerman's TOTAL box office take respectively) Mind you this is for the third film in a trilogy when these big film franchises usually tend to fall off a bit i.e. Batman Forever, Superman III, The Matrix Revolutions, etc.

Now granted the box office take is not the sole indicator of a film's quality, as the few supporters of Singerman like to point out. (except when it comes to comparing it to Batman Begins, then box office matters for some reason?) However it can be one big indicator of a film's quality since if people enjoy a film or a franchise of films, they'll actually pay to see it... a novel concept I know.

So why does Spider-man, Marvel's flagship character, continue to break box office records and soar in popularity while Singerman, DC's big gun and American pop culture stalwart, festers in cinematic mediocrity and Brandon Routh's photo appears on milk cartons? Well it's a pretty simple formula, parts of which we've discussed on this blog before. The break down is as follows:

1. A director with an appreciation of the source material who isn't afraid to do his own spin on it within the bounds of what's consistent with the characters. - This is the most crucial piece to any of these films. This is why the Sam Raimi's and Christopher Nolan's of the world get such rave reviews from the fan communities and why websites like this exist for Bryan Singer. Raimi is a life-long Spider-man fan. Even so, he admitted to spending hours upon hours with the writers brushing up on the comics to decide where he wanted to go with all 3 of the Spider-man films. He wanted to do his own updated take on the material while remaining true to who the characters are. He knew these characters had withstood the test of time for a reason, and didn't have the ego to try and make them something they weren't. True, he took a lot of shit for the whole "organic webshooters" thing, but in the end it was a relatively minor alteration and he still came through with the same Spider-man character everyone knows just with an updated twist.
Singer on the other hand, admittedly shit-canned the comics, and had his cronies Harris and Dougherty pen an unabashed love letter to Richard Donner's film and took liberties with the Superman character in an attempt to give him some kind of "emotional weight," when if he had just studied the character in the comics over the last two decades since Superman: The Movie he would've found all of the weight he needed.

2. A charismatic cast who plays well off one another. - Chemistry is an important part to casting any film . Not that I'm a fan of Kirsten Dunst by any means, but she and Tobey Maguire have "it" on screen together. You buy them as a couple and you empathize with them. The entire cast plays well off one another and that energy comes across when you watch the films. There's little to no "scenery chewing" in these films either with the exception of Dafoe at times in the first film. Most everything comes off as sincere.
Compare that to Singerman where you have background extras who have more dialogue than Brandon Routh, and he and Kate Bosworth have all the chemistry of old oatmeal and dont allow the audience to build a shred of empathy for them. (and you wonder why people keep bringing up Tom Welling and Erica Durance as a basis for comparison?) Add to that the fact that they completely wasted Kevin Spacey's talents by making him play a long extinct, petty swindler version of Lex Luthor that was far too Gene Hackman-like, and it's no wonder why audiences really had trouble caring about these characters or they alleged "drama" the film was trying to build.

3. Appeal across all demographics. - Again Spider-man makes a killing at the box office because its got something for everyone. It's true to its roots so the life-long fans enjoy it. Its got a ton of action for the young male crowd. Its got love triangles for the young female crowd. It's got the fast-pacing, super villains, and bright costumed characters to appeal to children of all ages. It also doesn't take on touchy issues like pre-marital sex and illegitimate children that offend the politics of some and turn certain people off.
What demographic exactly was Singerman trying to appeal to? Besides himself that is? Singer copped to the fact that he thought he made a "chick flick." An odd choice considering comicbook movies generally skew towards the young male demographic who prefer the exact opposite of that which is the action blockbuster. (Studio head Alan Horn acknowledged that shortcoming.) It makes sense to add pieces of that drama element to a film, not dominate the movie with it, and even then it fell flat since Bosworth's zombie like performance killed any believability in the romance angle. The only person you really felt bad for in the whole mess was Richard White.
Children weren't really targeted by the film either with it's slow-pacing, lack of an interesting villain (unless you count the island...) and drab, washed out pallette, which was an extremely odd choice for such a light character. The sluggish merchandise sales figures basically confirmed that the movie didn't hit home with kids. Then you get to the alleged "elements of drama" like the illegitimate "super kid" and the creepy stalker angle, and you don't really have a family friendly film either.

4. Storylines that don't unnecessarily paint the film into a corner and lend themselves to further sequels. - At the end of each Spider-man film you know the direction the characters are headed in and they don't make have any unnecessary plot contrivances that they'll have to sweep under the rug in the sequels. They dont saddle Spider-man with children he doesnt know he has for the sake of trying to evoke some emotional response about him being an orphan. Seriously, what the hell do you do with that kid in sequels? (unless you never intended for any...) Forget him? Kill him? Make him a side-kick? If that's the case, why invent him in the first place other than for arbitrary drama?

5. Don't be ashamed of who you are. - These are comicbook characters. Embrace that! You dont need to pretend to be some boring, weighty think piece. There have been compelling drama aspects to comics for years even though the focus has always been on action and the super reality the stories are based in. You dont need to pretend to be The Bridges of Madison County in order to evoke an emotional response from your audience, the emotional aspects are in the books already. Plus going overboard like that's something that is only going to bore them to tears.This is what killed the first Hulk movie and why it's being relaunched as the action/adventure epic it should've been the first time. But at least in the case of that film, most of the cast had the acting chops to pull it off.
The Spider-man films do the comicbook drama aspect very well. The death of Peter's Uncle Ben, Peter explaining how he could've stopped the shooter to his Aunt May, the revelation to Harry Osborne that Peter is Spider-man are all very well done and all straight from the comics. Where was that in Singerman? Even the way you actually empathize to an extent with the Spider-man villains is great and they dont do it in an over-the-top, sappy way. They do what they do for a reason, not for the sake of just doing so. They actually have real motivations not wacky real estate schemes for no apparent reason. That's part of what keeps people coming back and recommending the film to their friends.

This whole "Spider-man formula," however, has been evident since May of 2002 when the first Spider-man film exploded onto the scene, a full 4 years before Singerman was even released, so why did WB miss it? Hell Singer even got parts of it right in the first two X-Men films. The only thing I can think of here is that his ego and ambition to suck up to Donner got the best of him now that he felt he didn't have to prove himself in the genre any longer.

I'm a Marvel... and I'm a DC

2007-05-02T22:11:00.000-07:00

Just a quick post here, to bring to your attention quite possibly one of the funniest video spoofs we've seen in a long time. It's a series of videos that spoof those popular Mac and PC commercials where they portray the PC as being stiff and nerdy while the Mac is hip and versatile. They're a pretty witty critique of the current state of affairs with the Marvel and DC Comics film franchises, and have some especially amusing criticisms of Singerman. Awesome work by ItsJustSomeRandomGuy.

There's actually 3 other videos in the series, and all are great. Check them out here:

Part 1
Part 3
Part 4

I'll be back with some more news next week.

SSS

Here's a Superman Movie We'd Pay to See!

2007-04-26T07:32:00.000-07:00

Thanks to everyone who sent us this link over the past few weeks. We weren't going to post this at first since it was just a fan-made trailer (albeit one of the BEST we've ever seen). But the online response to this thing has been pretty impressive to say the least so we figured we'd give it some more pub here for those of you who havent seen it, and maybe, just maybe, people in "high places" will get some ideas from it.

Big kudos to "WormyT" on this. This must've taken him/her a LONG time to do, as video manipulation like that isn't easy by any means.

This isn't to say we're officially endorsing the casting choices in the video, though we know there's a large portion of the fandom that would be all for it. We just love the story possibilities you could get out of something like this. This trailer looks like Superman's version of Spider-man 3.

Now why does a minute and a half fan trailer elicit such an overwhelmingly positive response among fans when a two and a half hour epic film is met with a lukewarm at best response? Is it the super-villains? a ton of action? a classic-looking Superman? a Lois who can emote better than a doorknob? no super children in sight? Whatever it is, sign us up for Superman Reborn.

Singerman is Making People do BAD Things!

2007-04-19T13:04:00.000-07:00

Well as we await any sort of serious news about whether a Singerman sequel is ever going to happen or not or what Singer's next new film project will be that he's going to do before he TOTALLY starts working on the sequel next March, we thought we'd bring these "fun" little news bit to your attention. Apparently Singerman is such a bad film, that it's driving people to commit all kinds of heinous crimes. That's right folks, people across the globe are literally being driven mad from watching the film and taking it out on their fellow man!

Take this first story from Japan for instance, about a bank worker who was paying a Canadian man to give her English lessons and got more than she bargained for:

It's not always the teachers who fall foul of the system, though. A bank worker we'll call Fumi paid a Canadian man to give her private English lessons. He started by suggesting they watch a movie to get used to hearing English. Fumi agreed and they began watching "Superman Returns."
"As soon as we sat down he put one of his arms around my shoulders and thrust the other one between my thighs. When I tried to move his hands away, he grabbed hold of my hand, tried to force it toward his crotch and said to me, 'I'm a Superman too, you know,' "
Fumi tells Shukan Post. "When we got out of the movie theater, he had the hide to tell me that our lesson had gone into overtime and he wanted to be paid more for it. I paid him 5,000 yen for the cost of a single hour's lesson and never contacted him again."

Anyone else find it ironic he was going to teach her English by taking her to a movie with so little dialogue? Also I guess the guy must've picked up on the whole "super rape" thing and thought this was OK? Somewhere Jon Peters is smiling.

But the evil this film is spreading hasnt stopped there folks. Take this next story about a murder alibi from the UK where a man killed another man with a baseball bat:

He was arrested at his mother's home in Spring Rise, Kettering, Northants, but told police: "I'm telling you on my baby's life, I didn't have anything to do with it."When he was interviewed Spouse said: "All I know is he got stabbed by Stelios." Spouse said on the night of the killing he went to a pub for drinks and then watched the film Superman Returns at a friend's house.

So was he watching Singerman at the time of the murder or did Singerman drive him to it?? He'd sure as heck have a motive, and in my book a good defense. I mean who WASN'T infuriated beyond rational thought after seeing it?

Hmmm but the plot thickens. The European Commission recently found high levels of lead and chromium in some of the Singerman toys, so perhaps that's what's driving people to do these things? Whatever it is, Singerman and his insidious plot to make us all into sexually harrassing, bat wielding criminals must be stopped!!!

Future of the Singerman Sequel Beginning to Look a Bit "Milky."

2007-04-13T10:04:00.000-07:00

Today's Daily Variety is reporting that your friend and mine, Bryan Singer is trying to be first in production with a film about Harvey Milk, the San Francisco supervisor and first openly gay elected official in the U.S., who was assassinated along with Mayor George Moscone by Supervisor Daniel White. The article goes on to say that:

After 15 years in development, "The Mayor of Castro Street," the movie based on the book by Randy Shilts, is moving toward the starting gate. Warner Independent Prods., which brought in Singer two years ago, is near a deal with Participant Prods. to co-finance and with Chris McQuarrie to write the final draft.

Craig Zadan, who is producing "The Mayor of Castro Street" with Neil
Meron, liked their chances to get into production quickly. This despite Singer's commitment to the Cruise movie, "Valkyrie," which has a July 8 start date, and a "Superman Returns" sequel which Warner Bros. hopes to have ready for release in 2009.

"We're seeing the light at the end of a long tunnel," he said. "Warner Independent is pushing us to get the film made right away. Some of it might have to do with the enormous success of 'Brokeback Mountain,' and some of it is passion for the right tone and the story we are telling. Chris has nailed the take, and the goal is to have the script ready so that we can make the movie as soon as Bryan finishes his UA film. We've had tremendous response from
actors."

A lot of us doubted Singer's ability to make 1 film before the production of a potential Singerman II film began but thought maybe there was a chance it was possible. Now do you really think he's going to be able make 2?? All before next March when Singerman Ii was allegedley supposed to begin production? Also could this have been the film that Singer was seen talking to Orlando Bloom about with WB producer Jon Peters? And if you're WB wouldnt you want to make some kind of announcement about the future of the Singerman franchise? Round and round we go..

If You Can't Beat Them, Hire Them??

2007-04-10T08:20:00.000-07:00

Well here's another rumor to add to the fire, and since there's been next to nothing of relevance lately (other than the Singer slappies at IESB personally attacking people who write letters to WB) we're going to talk about it. A recent report on JustJared.com says that POTC star and former Kate Bosworth boyfriend, Orlando Bloom was seen in Hollywood with Singerman producers Mindy and Jon Peters and the movie’s "director," Bryan Singer. (there's no word if Peters showed him his junk.)

What can you take from this? Well if I was a a betting man, I'd say that it has something to do with a supporting role, not that they'd actually be getting him to play Singerman himself. I'd say it's most likely for a bigger role as some kind of villain. While Bloom is a talented actor, he's about as masculine as a bouquet of daisies, so the thought of him playing any serious kind of super-villain is a bit laughable to me. Do we really want to see a pretty boy General Zod or Metallo? Not that we want to see another Singerman film to begin with mind you. I just cant help but laughing at the thought of Brandon Routh fighting Orlando Bloom in an "epic" hero/villain battle. It's going to look like something out of Zoolander.

And say didnt Alan Horn fess up to the fact that the first Singerman missed the mark especially with young male audiences due to an overall lack of action? Well hey, everything should be "A-OK" now, because you know that NOBODY screams action and brings in the young male demographic like ummm... Orlando Bloom? Last I checked, he was female eye candy. Then again, Singer does like him some chick flicks. Seriously, are they even trying anymore?

Singerman 2 to be Shelved in Favor of the JLA Movie?

2007-03-19T19:52:00.000-07:00

Take this one with a BIG grain of salt, but Moviehole has an article up today quoting "inside sources" close to W.B. Studios saying that they may be shelving any plans for Singerman 2 to move ahead with the Justice League of America movie featuring Superman as a lead character.

"I heard from a pretty reliable source this weekend – who, has some top contacts himself – who essentially confirmed that the WB are thinking of putting the next “Superman” movie into turnaround, and instead will just use the character in the new “Justice League” movie. (Funnily enough, Batman would not be involved in the new film – he’s too big to waste on a film like this, apparently).

Having now heard the same from about half-a-dozen reliable insiders, I checked in with a couple of sources near the Water Tower itself, who wouldn’t confirm nor deny the reports, but definitely haven’t dismissed that it’s a possibility. One of them would only say that there “could be something in [that]”

If true, that's quite interesting. The evidence would also seemingly be starting to mount against Singer getting the chance to have another go at the rotting corpse of Superman he left us or at the very least delaying it.

It seems they'd be taking Superman for the JLA film as a way to help try to drum up support for the Superman character after the lackluster box office from the first Singerman film. If the JLA film was a monster hit, the article muses, they might then go ahead with a Singerman 2. But does that make much sense? If someone is able to make the JLA a monster hit using Superman (hopefully, correctly this time) why would W.B. then want to turn around and hand him back to the guy who screwed it up the 1st time? Unless of course they mean, they'll go ahead with another Superman film perhaps not with Singer attached to direct again, but that's not really clear.

The article also states that they think Brandon Routh would most likely be donning the tights again in the JLA film, but I'm not too sure about that. If you believe some of the rumored script ideas for the JLA movie Routh's Superman wouldn't exactly be in continuity with it, although let's face it his Superman wasn't in continuity with ANYTHING. Another thing to consider is that he might have the stigma of being part of Singerman attached to him, and if WB's unhappy enough with the Singerman franchise to bale on it, or at the very least delay it for a while, why would they want to risk the public associating the two films by having the same star in the same role?

UPDATE: IGN has admitted hearing the same rumor over the weekend.

Singerman's Next Flight Could Be Delayed.

2007-03-14T07:00:00.000-07:00

Just one day after Brandon Routh did an interview to remind the general public that he had not been sucked into a black hole and was still in fact here on the planet Earth, comes a report in today's Variety that the next installment of the Singerman travesty errr trilogy could be delayed due to Singer agreeing to make another film with United Artists and one of the few people with an ego bigger than himself, Tom Cruise. Some interesting bits from the article:

"United Artists toppers Tom Cruise and Paula Wagner have
greenlit their second film, an original thriller that Bryan Singer will direct
as his next feature...

The film will delay Warner Bros.' hope of mounting a
sequel to "Superman Returns" in the near future."

Hmmm... this is quite interesting on two fronts. First and most obivous, if Singer is directing this World War II film as his next project and they haven't even gotten to the pre-production phase yet, there's no way in hell it's completed in time that they start doing a Singerman sequel early next year for a 2009 release as has been speculated. As Variety says, it has to delay any kind of Singerman sequel, unless of course now that W.B. has cleaned it's "superhero house" with the exception of the Batman franchise, perhaps plans have changed?

Which leads me into the second front. Could this be the first sign that Singer is possibly on the way out of the Superman franchise? While it may be just wishful thinking on our part, seeing him taking on a film like this at this point in time does raise some eyebrows. Are Singer's "principles" somehow compromised by WB's mandate for a more action-oriented film with a scaled down budget? Or could the studio, who had a rough go of it in 2006, be looking for a new creative direction with a director who can do more with less? Too bad Zach Snyder is already signed on to do The Watchman next year. Now there's a guy who can do a comicbook justice. At one time, Singer was supposed to do a film in between Singerman and a potential sequel, but that was supposed to be part of his deal with WB and the project would be a WB project. This film has nothing to do with WB.

Some Superman "fan" sites have claimed this report is false, but offer no clue as to how they would know this? Given this report is from a credible industry source like Variety, I'm inclined to believe it for now. WB has made no official statement as of yet.

If you build it, they will come... Sometimes

2007-03-12T19:31:00.000-07:00

"This is SPARTA!"

Well no. This is Singer's Superman Sucks. That image up there is Sparta, or more specifically, "300," the latest film from Warner Bros. that proved marketing works - as long as you listen to what your audience wants.

Grossing 70.9 million dollars, this tasty little masterpiece just became the highest grossing film ever to open in the month of March and is third behind The Matrix Reloaded and The Passion of the Christ for R-rated films. 300's opening included an estimated $3.4 million from 62 IMAX screens, surpassing Singerman as the biggest IMAX debut ever.

As Brandon Gray from Box Office Mojo pointed out...

Warner Bros. waged a striking marketing campaign for 300, based on the picture's hyper-stylized, digitally-enhanced look, the mythology of Ancient Greece and the high stakes premise of 300 Spartans fighting a vast army in the Battle of Thermopylae, replete with passing references to freedom to recall past audience favorites like Braveheart and Gladiator.

Steve Daly of Entertainment Weekly broke it down...

A tight 60-day live-action shoot began in fall 2005, and Warner got busy positioning 300 to the obvious fanboy-heavy, Sin City-loving audience. The studio organized a Q&A panel with director Zack Snyder and writer Frank Miller last July at San Diego's Comic-Con International, where they showed preview footage so gory and spiked with nudity it couldn't be posted on the Internet, thanks to MPAA rules about trailer content.

According to Snyder, Warner had given up on trying to appeal to a female audience. Then a pair of test screenings changed all that. "We got, like, a 100 percent recommend from women under 25," says the director. "They don't even get that kind of score on a romantic comedy." Why did women respond? In Miller's original graphic novel, Leonidas' wife, Queen Gorgo, appears only in passing. In the movie, Queen Gorgo (Brit Lena Headey) is a front-and-center partner to Leonidas, calming his nerves in bed (while both are very, very naked) and getting her own new subplot about political corruption as Leonidas marches off to war.

"At first I very much disagreed with it," Miller says. "My main comment was 'This is a boys' movie. Let it be that."' But the Snyders felt strongly that Leonidas needed something specific to fight for, and that female ticket buyers needed someone to identify with. The preview scores vindicated them. "Those numbers came back, and Warner said, Wow, we need to rethink this a bit," says Snyder. Instead of spending big on one 30-second Super Bowl TV spot, Warner sprinkled previews into more female-friendly TV shows, including Grey's Anatomy, Heroes, Lost, and American Idol.

If you missed it, the key was test screening and audience Q&A, something that is routinely done for big budget motion pictures but was reportedly undervalued by Singer during the production of Singerman. Warner Bros. pulled out all the stops but they seemingly ignored the one thing that would drive the film to boffo business: word of mouth.

It was by far, the most anticipated film opening in June. "More than any other studio, Warner Bros. has embraced the summer tentpole strategy. Spending huge sums to produce and market big titles, the studio regularly produces $200 million gambles that would make Vegas high-rollers blush." (Link) "On top of the $50 million or so it spent on its own marketing, Warner lined up promotions with Duracell, Samsung, Pepsi's Tropicana, Quaker, Aquafina, and Frito-Lay brands as well a Got Milk? campaign. Giant "S's" were projected on Chicago's Sears Tower, Niagara Falls, and other recognizable sites in about 10 major US cities. Sky divers made an "S" in parachuting formations in Boston, Dallas, and several other cities on June 27. (Link) "By the time 'Superman Returns' [opened], the 'S' logo was used to sell everything from soft drinks to motor oil. And toy manufacturers hoped that products like the Superman InflatoSuit would help to revive a sluggish licensing industry." (Link) Routh was seen on the covers of countless magazines, often more than once, and he, Bostworth and Singer made various appearances at press junkets worldwide. Warners also dumped a boatload of cash into Singer's blogs and ComicCon marketing. As Warners VP of targeted marketing, Viviana Pendrill once said, "you'd have to be living under a rock not to know about big releases like 'Superman,' 'Batman' and 'Harry Potter.'"

In terms of release, they covered all the bases. Print distribution was at blanket saturation levels. "Warner shipped out a whopping 8,500 prints of the film in North America, insuring there wouldn't be a cineplex in America that wasn't likely to have the big fella flying in." (Link) The studio "decided to wait until the World Cup ended July 9 to go outside Asia and Australia, launching in mid-July in Brazil, France, Mexico and the U.K.; it will wait until mid-August to open in Germany and Japan." (Link) Release date was carefully chosen; it was "perhaps the best date any studio has had in years: the Wednesday before a Tuesday holiday -- essentially giving "Superman Returns" a seven-day weekend." 'We're in good shape, and we have the primo date of the summer with a very long weekend ahead of us,' declared Warner Bros. distribution prexy Dan Fellman. 'Now it's up to the movie gods.'" (Link)

They should have started with the script writing gods, because an entertaining film will market itself.

"'Superman isn't caught up in the same angst that other characters like Spider-Man or Batman are,' says Gaetano Mastropasqua, Warners' corporate senior VP of global promotions and partner relations. 'Superman stands for truth, justice and a positive way of life.'"

Obviously, the suits in marketing had a handle on the big picture.

"In marketing Singer's version, Warner Bros. has paid particular attention to the comicbook's fan base, some of whom were wary of previous incarnations and expressed their opinions so on high-trafficked Internet sites. Last summer, in the midst of shooting, the studio flew Singer via private jet from the film's Australian location to San Diego, where he screened footage at the annual Comic-Con comic book convention. The response was enthusiastic.

'You are never going to satisfy everybody,' says producer Michael Uslan ("Batman," "Batman Begins"), who has started a new company called Comic Book Movies with financier M. Jonathan Roberts. 'But if you can't satisfy the main part of the fan base, you are going to have problems. These are people who are not only schooled in the characters, the mythology and the history but also in the creators over the years. They know what they like.'"

So what happened with Singerman? Was it the film itself? Why yes. Yes! We think it was.

Word of mouth is arguably, the single most important aspect of any film's success, and good WOM is directly related to how well a film reaches people. Look at the 2002 film year, for example. Paul Dergarabedian, president of Exhibitor Relations, a Los Angeles-based company that monitors box-office results, said...

"Without question, the two movies that exemplified the year (2002) were 'Spider-Man' and 'My Big Fat Greek Wedding.' They couldn't be more different in terms of budgeting, marketing, everything. But they were both mega-blockbusters. It just says that moviegoers are open to anything. As long as it's a good movie of course."

The Kevin Smith NY Comic Con Footage

2007-03-05T20:33:00.000-08:00

Thanks to a number of readers who submitted this over the past week. Sorry for the delay in getting it up. Here's the clip of Smith talking about Singerman at the N.Y. Comic Con a couple weekends ago. Instead of getting the details second hand, it's always more interesting to hear them directly from the source. Note how the audience is just eating up every bit of it. Guess that's what happens when you get a room full of people who understand the character of Superman. Why couldn't Warner Brothers do that?

Kevin Smith Thinks Singerman is Boring... and a Rapist

2007-02-26T06:05:00.000-08:00

Well you can add another name to the list of people in the comic/film industry who have come out to voice their issues with Singerman. The latest one being Hollywood director and comic writer Kevin Smith, who by his own admission is a huge fan of the Man of Steel. As you may recall, Smith was actually brought on the Superman Lives film project a few years ago before Jon "Let me show you what boys have" Peters ultimately scared him off the project with talk of gay robots and polar bears.

Smith appeared at last weekend's New York Comic Con and conducted a Q&A session for fans. Some of the fan questions had to do with his impression of the group of comicbook films that have been released recently. According to numerous reports, Smith responded with the following regarding Singerman:

"It was kind of....boring," he said, before launching into a diatribe on the lameness of Lex Luthor and the silliness of pitting a superhuman alien against a real-estate scam artist. "I'm gonna get a mortgage at .4 percent!" Smith joked. He said that X3 was better than Superman Returns, and also went off on another tangent, about supposed logic problems with the film.
According to Smith, the logic problems occur if you accept Bryan Singer's premise -- that Superman Returns picks up where the second film leaves off, with Superman having sex with Lois, then giving her an amnesia kiss and taking off to go find his relatives and whatnot. When Lois finds out her kid in Superman Returns can throw a piano, and is therefore Superman's kid, why is she not very surprised? She should have no memory of having sex with Superman, so
when she visits him in the hospital, shouldn't her first question to him be -- Smith's words -- "When did you rape me?"

If I had a nickel for every time I heard someone say that Singerman was boring or pointed how stupid the Luthor land scheme was, I might have enough money to make my own $200 million disaster. Smith also echoes our earlier point about Singer's giant cop-out of using the first two film's continuity but only where he sees fit. If you're going to pick up where another film left off, you've got to do it all the way. You can't just pick and choose where you want because the audience has no idea what's in continuity and what isn't. Despite the lameness of a lot of Richard Lester's Superman II, that's what people know since that's what was released to the public, the vast majority of the audience will never see the Donner cut (although as one of our astute readers pointed out, in Donner's cut Supes turns back time anyway so the sex never happened so Singer is still screwed.) Sticking with that, you've got Lois who has a kid with superpowers who never remembers sleeping with an infinitely powerful being (well, some of the time at least) who she knows could use his powers to do pretty much anything he wants to someone. No, that's not creepy at all... Good job Singer!

Mailbag: February 24th

2007-02-24T09:14:00.000-08:00

Been a bit busy the past week or so, but wanted to take the time to answer a few of the deluge of emails we've gotten recently about our views on certain hot topics regarding Singerman, etc. Instead of emailing readers back and forth, we thought we'd just address the most common comments/questions here on the blog. We did this once before back in August and figured we'd give it another shot here since the emails picked up again.

So now let's get on to the mailbag (user names and emails have been omitted to protect the innocent):

"Hey! I cant believe this blog is still up and running and still getting so many comments! Kudos to you on the dedication. I think the blog has actually outlived the interest in this crappy movie. If they feel the need to punish us with a sequel, I'll look forward to getting the "real news" here."

Thanks, and that's the beauty of these things I guess. There's so much that goes on now with films after the theatrical release between the DVD's, financials, awards, etc. that there's usually something every couple of days worth noting. Plus the fan response has been great, and knowing there are a LOT of people out there who share our feelings about this keeps us going.

"I was just wondering whether or not you post on any Superman-related message boards on the Net like SuperHeroHype, Supermanhomepage, BlueTights (LOL), etc. and what your screen name was?"

Posting on message boards isn't really our thing. Every once in a while we'll peruse a couple of them just to see fan reaction to certain things, but we've never had a serious urge to really post much. There seems to be a lot of vitriol on message boards (especially on one certain board anytime we post anything here) and too many people think that their opinion is THE ONLY opinion that matters. We have our opinions on things and feel strongly about them but don't begrudge others who feel differently (why do you think we dont moderate the blog comments?). SuperheroHype is an excellent site as a news source though and seems to be the most neutral out of those you listed.

"It's funny how you mock SR for not getting any worthy Oscar nods and make fun of Bosworth for her Razzie nomination, but yet you mention nothing about the TEN Saturn Awards that SR was just nominated for. A little unfair, no?"

The only reason we even mentioned the Oscars was because of that silly poster WB put out to the Academy. In our opinion at least, the Oscars are really the only one of all these silly awards that are handed out this time of year, that really mean anything. The fact that Singerman didn't get nominated for any of the awards outside of one for visual effects was no real surprise to us, just like the fact that Date Movie wasn't nominated. The fact that WB thought the film was worthy enough to grab a nomination is what we found truly humorous.

We pointed out Bosworth's Razzie since it had to do with one of our major critiques of the film, her abysmal performance. The Razzies are the anti-Oscars that are sort of a tongue-in-cheek thing in Hollywood. If she wins, and is a good sport and actually accepts it like Halle Berry did a few years back, we'll give her all the credit in the world.

As for the Saturn Awards, I'm not sure why the fact we didn't post that they were nominated would surprise you? This is after all a blog about for people don't like the film. Do the sites that shill for Singer post anything even remotely critical of the film? I must ask though, is a nomination for one of these really that big of a deal? What is a Saturn Award nomination supposed to mean? I see films like Snakes on a Plane and X-Men 3 nominated for Best Film awards. Are you sure you really want to put yourself in league with those kinds of movies? (although we TOTALLY would) Kate Bosworth for Best Actress??? C'mon now.
This all seemed a bit odd to me so I did a bit of digging into just how these awards work and why they were nominating such bad movies like Singerman. Well as it turns out they're pretty much like the Oscars where they have committees of film professionals who nominate films in the genre, but low and behold look at what we have here!!! Who's name should appear as one of the committee heads for the Saturn Awards? None other than Bryan Singer, himself! And who else do I see as committee heads? Brandon Boyce, who wrote Apt Pupil for Singer, and WB executive Bradley Marcus! Hmmm very interesting to say the least, that explains a LOT of things.

"Hey SSS, I found the following image throughout my travels on the internet. Thought you might get a "kick" out of it. LOL. Sort of sums up these two movies, no?"

Heh, that is pretty cool. OWNED indeed. Could you imagine those two facing off in a potential Justice League movie? Talk about a mismatch.

Well that's it for the mailbag. Feel free to email us HERE with any comments, questions, suggestions, death threats, etc.

Singerman: My Creepy Valentine

2007-02-14T15:18:00.000-08:00

Just in time for Valentine's Day, an emailer sent us this YouTube link to a video compilation of scenes from Singerman set to some rather creepy music that highlights the "Super Stalker" aspect of the film that we all "loved" so much. This is pretty damn funny, and we give kudos to "jmariamellinas" whoever you are. Enjoy.

If you have any more videos send them in to us, we'd love to see them.

The Singerman Ripple Effect?

2007-02-06T19:09:00.000-08:00

<-- Singer seems to have gotten some practice hanging on to Singerman. Hey may need it.

Well it's been quite the bloodbath the past few days over at the W.B. Studios Superhero Department. Last Friday, Joss Whedon announced that he'd been relieved of his duties on the long-in-development Wonder Woman project. The following day David Goyer announced on his MySpace page that he and W.B. have gone their separate ways on doing The Flash film. Then on Monday they announced that they've brought in Shawn Levy to helm the project.

While there's noting truly earth-shattering about a film changing directors, it's the timing and the apparent reasoning behind the changes that caught our attention. Some of the reasons for the "irreconcilable differences" sound AWFULLY familiar to some of the criticisms people had of Singerman. Coincidence? Perhaps not. Check out what Whedon had to say on his website about his dismissal:

"I had a take on the film that, well, nobody liked.

We just saw different movies, and at the price range this kind of movie hangs in, that's never gonna work. Non-sympatico. It happens all the time. I don't think any of us expected it to this time, but it did. Everybody knows how long I was taking, what a struggle that script was, and though I felt good about what I was coming up with, it was never gonna be a simple slam-dunk."

Now what is Whedon's writing style? And what do Buffy, Angel, and Serenity all have in common? That's right they have a dark, edgy tone to the characters. Also keep in mind this was just days after it was announced that WB had purchased a Wonder Woman spec script to allegedly avoid any copyright issues with Whedon's. Latino Review got a hold of that spec script and reviewed it as:

"The spec that Silver picked up ROCKS! A fun filled adventure packed girl power action movie in the 1940s! 1943 to be exact...Overall, a very great read. The writers did their homework. As a comic book character origin movie - it is just as good as Batman Begins.I can see why Silver supposedly took it off the spec market. If I was a betting man, I figure this is the origin story that Warners might stick with. My note to the studio is to not touch the script, leave it intact, get yourself a good director and shoot this script. It is all there on the page."

LR also points out that WB buys this excellent spec script and says something along the lines of committing to Whedon’s contemporary version, then the very next day Whedon is off the project. Why would you take a spec off the market when you own the rights already?

Now let's compare that to what went down on The Flash project. On his MySpace Goyer is quoted as saying:

Well, I've been waiting a few months to relate this news -- but I am sad to say that my version of The Flash is dead at WB. The God's honest truth is that WB and myself simply couldn't agree on what would make for a cool Flash film. I'm quite proud of the screenplay I turned it. I threw my heart into it and I genuinely think it would've been the basis of a ground-breaking film. But as of now, the studio is heading off in a completely different direction.

Sound familiar? The following day it comes out that Shawn Levy will be replacing him, and The Hollywood Reporter tells us that:

"Despite Levy's previous films, including Cheaper by the Dozen and The Pink Panther, they have "no intention of making Flash a comedy," but they do intend to "aim for a lighter movie than previous Warners Bros comic adaptations, such as Batman Begins and Superman Returns." Goyer was in part responsible for the former's script, his Flash was said to be "dark themed" as well."

Hmmm, sensing a theme between these two? A lighter, more action-oriented film? Didn't like the previous director's dark, overly serious take on a historically "lighter" character? Who does that sound like? Yup that's right folks, Singerman.

While Batman is a hero historically depicted to be of a darker and more cerebral nature lending himself to a writer like Goyer, characters like Superman, Wonder Woman, and the Flash are not. Wonder Woman and the Flash were slated to be WB's next big new superhero franchises launched after Singerman, but now seem to be years away from seeing the light of day. Is WB trying to avoid repeating the mistakes that it made with Singerman especially now that most of the damage from the lackluster box office and home video sales has been assessed by the studio's bean counters?

It seems to me that there's a MAJOR rethinking of the studio's comic book projects not named Batman at this point, thanks in great part to some of the major shortcomings of Singerman. Whedon and Goyer were both paid millions of dollars for their efforts, so the fact that Singer signed on to write the script for the sequel doesn't exactly assure him of helming the project. We can only hope that someone out there writes an outstanding spec script for an actual Superman film, and WB kicks Singer to the curb.

Miscellaneous Bits: 2/2/2007

2007-02-02T07:44:00.000-08:00

There's been a lot going on recently. So here's a few interesting tidbits from around the World Wide Web that we thought we'd lump into one big blog posting for you.

If you thought we disliked Singerman, wait until you see this guy's website! We were laughing so hard at the photoshop gallery that we were almost crying. Case in point. --> [BrandonRouthIsNotSuperman]

Apparently the guy who coined the name "Super Man," Friedrich Nietzsche, wouldn't have been a big fan of Singerman either. [PopMatters]
Time Warner had a nice 4th Quarter of 2006. No thanks to film and home video divisions though. Say, who was their main summer tentpole film again? [Bloomberg]
Now is the time to go write a Singerman 2 spec script. W.B. may buy it off you to cover their butts when Singer and Co. steal some of your ideas, because W.B. just TOTALLY did that with Wonder Woman. [/film]

If you have anything else, keep sending them into us! The feedback has been great recently.

Non Speaks on Singerman!

2007-01-30T20:38:00.000-08:00

<-- Non says "You Suck Singer!"

Recently, Jack O'Halloran, who played the mute Kryptonian villain "Non" in Superman The Movie and Superman II, did an interview with the website Ringside Report about his life in the boxing ring and Hollywood. O'Halloran talks a bunch about playing Non, what went down on the set of the first two Superman movies, and he also gives his thoughts on the recent Singerman movie, Brandon Routh, and Bryan Singer.

GM: What do you think of the new Superman movie: Superman Returns, that came out in 2006?

JO: You know, I thought that the kid (Brandon Routh) got away with it, but I think that Bryan Singer is too much of a CGI guy. I think that they ruined and wasted a lot of very good talent. It is very difficult to replace Gene Hackman, but the kid ended up doing a good job as Superman.
...
now they do this new film, and they change the costume, which I thought was a bad idea. There was too much CGI. You had great actors in Kevin Spacey and Frank Langella, who didn’t have enough screen time.

There wasn’t enough screen time for Clark Kent as Clark Kent. The kid should have been Kent a lot more, and the storyline sucked.

I think he meant to say "Christopher Reeve" at the end not "Gene Hackman." But this is interesting to hear. It's the honest opinion of a guy who worked on the classic films who no longer has any ties to W.B., etc. and can actually speak his mind on the topic without worrying about who he offends. Needless to say we couldn't agree more with his assessment. I wonder if he knows about the $10 million of CGI that was left on the cutting room floor? Now we just need to find out what Terrence Stamp and Sarah Douglas think.

Finally a Nomination Worthy of Singerman!

2007-01-24T06:38:00.000-08:00

Singerman may have been shut out of any nominations for any of the big Oscar categories, but dont cry in your pudding just yet folks. There may still yet be some hardware in their future. The nominations for the 27th Annual Golden Raspberry Awards, or Razzies as they're more commonly known, were released the other day, and snagging a nomination for Worst Supporting Actress is none other than Singerman's gal pal Lois Lane, Kate Bosworth! (Wasn't she a lead actress BTW? We use that term loosely of course). The Razzie press release reads as follows:

Any honest Academy member will admit that Oscar voters are dealing with slim pickings for 2006. But at the other end of the quality scale, voters for this year's 27th Annual RAZZIE® Awards had literally dozens of deservingcontenders to choose from. And choose they have…and RAZZ the nominees they will,in ceremonies to be held at 7:30pm/PST on Oscar eve, Saturday, February 24 at Hollywood's Ivar Theatre.

RAZZIE® regulars Jenny McCarthy and Carmen
Electra are competing with LOST star Michelle Rodriguez, Kristin Chenoweth and Kate Bosworth (as an ultra-lame Lois Lane in SUPERMAN RETURNS) for Worst Supporting Actress.

It's nice to finally see someone from the film getting the recognition they deserve. We'll all be keeping our fingers crossed for her.

Apparently the Academy Laughed as Hard as We Did

2007-01-23T13:39:00.000-08:00

Don't fret friends, we're back from a minor vacation and full of some great stuff coming at you in the next couple days. Well it looks like nominations for the Oscars came out today, and guess who was conspicuously absent from any of the relevant nominations? Yeah, Singerman. Despite WB's silliest efforts, Singerman didn't sniff a single nomination for any of the top categories. Not that anyone here thought they would mind you. Well OK maybe that guy in the comments who keeps insisting the sequel is now in production did, but hey, a guy can dream can't he?

Though like we predicted they might they did snag a nod for visual effects. Though if I were them, I wouldn't be beating my chest. When you make a $210 million film wouldn't you think the special effects would be something "special?" If only we could say the same for the directing, writing, acting, music, costume design, etc., etc., etc. And hey check out who they're up against! That super-mega hit Poseidon!! and Pirates of the Caribbean 2...again. Seriously does anyone really think this award ISN'T going to POTC2? Was anything in Singerman even remotely as good as the CG Davey Jones?

Good Writing to Get Rid of Bad Writing

2007-01-10T20:01:00.000-08:00

I was contacted recently by some people who have started up a letter-writing campaign to oust Singer and his cronies and change the direction of the Superman movie franchise . They advocate even doing a "Hulk-like" reboot where they wait a couple years for everything to die down and then go in a new direction if that's what it takes to get it right. Since the film is a disappointment both artistically and financially, and there seems to be some internal difference of opinion with the franchise, and no firm commitment has been made to a Singerman sequel at this point other than Singer signing on to do a script, I thought this could be just the right time for something like this to get some attention.

Their approach is a bit different than what you've seen here at SSS. They advocate more of a "use honey for the bears" approach, whereas we've been known to just beat the hell out of the bear with a stick. Their site is dedicated to taking a more positive approach to contacting the powers that be at WB, namely Alan Horn and Jeff Robinov, and relaying their disappointment and dissatisfaction with the film in a professional manner. Their website is just up and running and in blog format. It basically just lays out their mission statement, and provides updates, commentaries, and some sample letters that you can use. Their also appears to be an email list of some kind.

Personally I've already fired off a letter to both Horn and Robinov. At first I tried using my trusty Singerman Kryptonite pen however anytime I tried writing the words "action" the pen stopped working, go figure. In all seriousness, I know people have been writing letters to W.B. since the film unspooled back in June, but now might not be a bad time to fire off another one to hammer the point home to the people in the "ivory tower."

More Year End Review Goodness

2007-01-05T17:35:00.000-08:00

Now that we've finally awoke from our alcohol induced comas from New Year's Eve, and have taken a look around Al Gore's internet, it appears that a fair number of media outlets were a little "late" with some of their 2006 box office reviews. Go Figure. Here's a look at a little more of the talk going around entertainment circles in year end summaries about just how big of a turd Singerman really was.

The New Yorker (NY) - "But “Superman Returns,” with its underwritten script and its bland hero, was not just boring but superfluous: in the digital years since the 1978 “Superman”—which have also seen five “Batman”s, two “Spider-Man”s, and three “X-Men”s—the airborne crusader has lost his wonder. But Warner, in late October, announced that it would make yet another “Superman” film. Variety earlier summed up the situation as follows: “Many speculate that WB has invested too much time and money to walk away. What’s more, the film fuels a number of Time Warner outlets, including homevid, ancillaries, and merchandising—even subsid DC Comics." So there you have it: the business model swallows the studio, which, obliged to supply its conglomerate outlets and subsidiaries, cannot prevent itself from repeating a failure."

Movieweb - "2006 will be talked about as a year that was great for the business side, but terrible for the artistic side, and, I've gotta tell you folks, it really wasn't that great in either aspect. Superman Returns, probably one of the most over-hyped and over-marketed flicks in recent history, was the 5th highest grossing movie of the year at just over $200 million... and it LOST $70 million."

Hollywood Reporter (CA) - "Meanwhile, Warner Bros. Pictures, which arguably had one of the most anticipated slates of the year, had difficulty delivering and dropped from a first-place market share in 2005 to fourth place because of such misfires as "Poseidon," M. Night Shyamalan's "Lady in the Water" and a disappointing "Superman Returns," even though the superhero's long-awaited return did climb above the $200 million mark domestically."

Fort Collins Weekly (CO) - "It’s a bird! It’s a plane! No, it’s the biggest flying turkey of the year. As the Man of Steel, newcomer Brandon Routh did a super impression of balsa wood in tights. "

Wilmington Morning Star (NC) - Best wig of the year: Kevin Spacey's, playing Lex Luthor in the five-hour snoozathon called Superman Returns.

Austin Chronicle (TX) - Most Forgettable: Superman Returns. I can't remember anything about this picture. Can't remember faces, mise-en-scène, not one damn thing. Somebody flew, right? And I recall now that the remarkable Peta Wilson had a bit role she'd never be reduced to in a just world.

The Billings Outpost (MT) - It has its slow moments and gets a little too wrapped up in the psychology of its core characters... He pushes a small continent into orbit, for God’s sake!

Monsters and Critics - "The next award goes to ‘Superman Returns’ in the Needs More Action category. I was more psyched to see this movie than the Scarlett Johansson sex tape. On paper the film had everything working for it, an unknown as Superman, Kevin Spacey as Lex Luthor and Bryan Singer calling the shots. So where’s the action? He’s the Man of Steel, punch somebody already! It’s cool that bullets bounce off your eye, but knock somebody out with more than your kick ass breath!"

The Village Voice (NY) - Superman Returns (all downhill from the credit sequence...)

Philadelphia Daily News (PA) - "'Happy Feet' was a much-needed big hit for Warner, which had been less than overjoyed by the $200 million gross of "Superman Returns."

You noticing a trend here yet?

Singerman: The End of the Year Reviews

2006-12-31T15:31:00.000-08:00

Several of the major media outlets (besides those owned by WB) have done year end pieces about the 2006 movies and of course Singerman. Here's a look at what's being said at the end of the year in which Superman was supposed to return, but all we got was this lousy t-shirt.

Detroit Free Press - "For nine months, the cabal that is Hollywood has an unspoken agreement that it will release no film of actual greatness, unless, of course, it also happens to also be of great commercial potential. That is why "Superman Returns" (which failed to live up to its moneymaking potential, perhaps because it was too subtle) and "Cars" were released this summer."

Santa Cruz Sentinel (CA) - But "Pirates" covered up the colossal failure of another sure-fire Hollywood franchise. "Superman Returns" exploded onto the scene in June and quickly sank into irrelevance.

Blogcritics Magazine - Superman Returns - a ridiculous story to feature the return of Supes.

The Toronto Sun - "Look past the eye-popping $1-billion US bounty hauled in by Pirates Of The Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest and you'll see a horizon scattered with costly letdowns -- from the barely broke-even Superman Returns to the utterly disastrous Poseidon."

The Decatur Daily (AL) - "Two icons returned this year, one with renewed relevance, the other creaking under his own pretensions. Strangely, James Bond, the character who shouldn't work divorced from his Cold War origins, showed new energy. Meanwhile, the supposedly timeless Superman, remained as stiff and lifeless as ever, not so much the Man of Steel as the man of rigor mortis."

The Joliet Herald News (IL) - "Who needs kryptonite? "Superman Returns," one of the year's most anticipated movies, quietly falls to earth. Not that that has stopped Hollywood from greenlighting a sequel." (SSS note: The sequel hasn't been greenlit yet, Singer was just signed to develop one.)

St. Petersburg Times (FL) - "Don’t go overboard with the Champagne, though. Too many sequels, remakes and knockoffs still take up too much megaplex space and public attention. But consumers seem to be wising up a bit — just ask Superman, if he returns again."

Jam! Showbiz (Canada) - "Or that Brandon Routh, touted just 12 months ago for super-stardom as soon as he was announced as the new Man of Steel in Superman Returns, would remain more anonymous than not in the first days of 2007 after the would-be blockbuster sputtered more than soared?"

Miami Herald (FL) - Best self-indulgent directorial flourish: The "Heart and Soul" sequence in Bryan Singer's Superman Returns: Menacing tattoos, a fax, chopsticks on the piano, and the movies' first appearance of Superboy.

St. Petersburg Times (Russia) - "Meanwhile, “Superman Returns” was on the edge of being imbecilic and it seemed like it was made for 10-year-olds to watch while their moms run errands."

Global Box Office Reports:

Australia - "Superman Returns" should have performed well Down Under because it was lensed in Sydney but film did not even make the top 10, returning $11 million, well shy of the $15.5 million indicated by the 10% rule.
Germany - Underachievers at the Teutonic box office include "Superman Returns," which made only $4 million. In Germany, comicbook heroes face a never-ending battle for cinematic recognition.
Mexico - Still, Mexicans this year didn't like their American superheroes to be bland: "Superman Returns" for one slumped at local wickets.
Italy - Hollywood titles that elsewhere had been summer films but were Italo fall releases played below par, such as "Superman Returns" ($7 million) and "Miami Vice" ($4.4 million).
France - Below par were "Miami Vice" ($12 million), "Superman Returns" ($11.5 million), "Cars" and "Happy Feet."
Hong Kong - Top 10 films "Superman," "X-Men 3" and "Cars" all arguably underperformed against expectations -- as did bomb of the year "Poseidon."

Some pretty damning evidence right there, both in media opinion and B.O. statistics.

A happy and safe new year to all of you out there! Yes, even you Bryan.

"One of the Biggest Disappointments of 2006"

2006-12-29T15:43:00.000-08:00

Sure we've been saying this for over 5 months now, so for that to come from us, it wouldn't mean a whole heck of a lot. However when that comment is coming out of the mouth of someone at a nationally respected publication, people will sit up and take notice. And when said publication just so happens to be owned by Warner Brothers, well then that's really telling and pretty darn humorous if you ask us. That's right folks, Entertainment Weekly has come out with their list of the biggest disappointments in entertainment for the year 2006, and guess who's near the top of the list? Yup you guessed it, neither your friend or mine, Singerman!

Here's a few choice quotes from EW's Assistant Managing Editor, Dawnie Walton:

"Cut to opening weekend, me asleep in a theater. I checked out around the time someone exposition'ed that Lois Lane (a limp Kate Bosworth) had won a Pulitzer — a Pulitzer! — for some petulant, woman-done-wrong essay titled ''Why the World Doesn't Need Superman.'' When I woke up, Kevin Spacey was screaming at me, and former soap star Brandon Routh was doing something amazingly tedious with a huge floating island of Kryptonite. I wouldn't have minded if the movie had been merely bad — it would've given me something to talk about/make fun of with my husband on the walk home from the theater — but Superman Returns was just... boring. And is there anything worse than that?"

Well she certainly hit the proverbial nail on the head! I don't think there's anything else that we can add to that which hasn't already been mentioned here. The fact that something like is getting published by a WB entity leads me to believe that there's just a bit of a difference of opinion among some of the major players at WB as far as Singerman is concerned.

Warner Brothers Has No Shame

2006-12-20T19:47:00.000-08:00

Academy Award season is just around the corner, and this is the time of the year when studios start to pitch certain of their films that they feel may have a chance to bring home an Oscar. For the major awards, Best Picture, Best Actress, etc., we usually see art house films like Brokeback Mountain or films with a deep message in them like Crash take home the awards. Every once in a while you'll see an epic film like Braveheart in there if it's especially good. You can sort of tell what films will be nominated by how critics and the Hollywood press react to them.

Now does anything I've just described sound like it has anything even REMOTELY in common with Singerman? No, of course not, but apparently Warner Brothers didn't get that memo as they're now trying to sell Singerman as being worthy of an Oscar. (That's OK, I'll wait until you stop laughing uncontrollably.) If you click on the picture of the poster above you can see what I'm talking about. We could possibly see the film getting some consideration for some kind of obscure sound or visual effects award, but the ones on this poster?? C'mon, let's get real here folks. Singer for best director? I'm sure all the great ones leave millions on the cutting room floor. Routh for best actor? Did he even have 12 lines of dialogue in the film? Bosworth for best actress? BWWAAAAAHAAAAHAAAA!!!!! Best costume design? Maybe if the film was about a pleather clad scuba diver. Best original score? Shouldn't that be John Williams' name there instead of Ottman?

With all of the hilarity seeing that brought to us the other day, it made us think of a few awards that we might actually nominate the film for. Take a look and see what you think:

Best mutilation of a legend - Bryan Singer
Worst attempt at disguising the remake of a script - Dan Harris, Michael Dougherty
Worst miscasting of a lead actress - Bryan Singer
Worst on-screen chemistry between lead actors - Bosworth/Routh
Worst misuse of an otherwise talented supporting actor - Bryan Singer (Spacey)
Most unnecessary plot device that will weigh the franchise down like a lead weight - Super Kid

If you've got any others, we'd love to heat about them in the comments.

Creative Ideas for those Unwanted Singerman Gifts

2006-12-13T19:19:00.000-08:00

<--If Routh takes this out of the box, does that constitute playing with himself?

The season of giving is upon us! And we here at Singer's Superman Sucks continue to give to you, our loyal blog readers because we care. We're here this week to help you with a problem some of you might come across this holiday season. That problem of course, would be those unwanted Singerman gifts! (cue the horror music)

Everyone has that aunt who's gotten a bit senile in her old age and has trouble telling the difference between the toilet and the kitchen sink. She "knows" you like "that Superman fella," and in her bewilderment at the giant electronics store with all the flashing lights and loud music, she picks you up a copy of Singerman. You open it, give her a half-assed smile as she kisses you with breath that's some ungodly combination of tuna fish and moth balls. Or perhaps you just got the DVD because you weren't aware they stuck it into the Ultimate Collector's Edition box set, and are trying to figure out why? You then contemplate how far the thing could fly if tossed out your car window at 70 mph or perhaps which one of your buddies DVD collections you're going to hide it in to see if he notices.

Well fret not my friends! Don't waste those DVD's. With a little patience and a dash of creativity you can make "Singer-ade" out of Singerman! Here's a few ideas of ours. Submit your own suggestions in the comments section.

Perhaps you or someone you know has a cat... or two... or six. Well with a little hot glue, a plastic handle, and a bit or patience, you've got this handy, dandy kitty litter scoop! You know how they say "fight fire with fire?" Well now you can scoop crap with crap! Maybe that same senile, old aunt who gave you the damn DVD in the first place who has the cats and you can "re-gift" it back to her. Hell, it's not like she's going to notice anyway! If you don't know anyone with cats, try to pass them off as ping pong paddles or maybe even a spackle knife! Either way it'll be the most action these DVD's have ever seen.

Maybe there's a special lady in your life who's a little on the ummm "big-boned" side and she really likes to accessorize her outfits. Well then just slap some thin iron clasps into these babies and you've got yourself a pretty snazzy pair of dangly earrings. And don't forget our gender bending friends who like to play dress up either!

Tired of cups and glasses leaving those darn rings on your furniture? Well just take your Singerman DVD's, a little hot glue, and some cork board, and in a matter of minutes you've got yourself a lovely decorative coaster set that the whole family can enjoy! If Singerman can hold up a giant island made of Kryptonite, he should have no trouble at all with your vodka martini or a Diet Pepsi!

If your feeling really crafty and say someone gives you a multi-disc set of Singerman, try making a festive holiday wreath! You may think you don't need a holiday wreath made of Singerman DVD's, but every day I hear you crying for one! The best part is that it's REALLY easy to do! Just like Bryan Singer you can hastily slap it together, add in some semi-cohesive glue, and then throw a bunch of garbage onto it and see what sticks! Sure it's not as good as real, traditional wreath, but who cares? It's yours to do with as you please.

Jon Peters Wants to Show You "What Boys Have"

2006-12-09T00:00:00.000-08:00

From the "You Can't Make This Stuff Up" file, it looks like Singerman producer Jon Peters has gotten himself into some hot water. The same guy who wanted to put giant spiders, polar bear guards, and gay robots into a Superman film has apparently added sexual harassment to his list of transgressions...again.

According to multiple sources, a woman claims in a lawsuit that Peters sexually harassed her and exposed himself to her and her 3-year-old daughter while she worked as his personal assistant.

"Shelly Morita began working for the producer in February 2005 but quit after about a year, the suit said.

According to the lawsuit, Peters frequently grabbed Morita's breasts, buttocks or legs, hugged and kissed her and made "rude, sexual and disparaging comments."

During filming of "Superman Returns" in Australia in July 2005, Peters crawled into her hotel room bed and refused to leave, the suit alleged.

Morita also claims that in August 2005, while working in Peters' home, she walked in on him as he was naked and waiting to get a massage. The suit claims Peters chased her and gave her a bear hug.

The suit also claims that last December, while on a trip to Peters' ranch in Santa Barbara, Peters exposed himself to Morita and her daughter, commenting, "Look what boys have!"

He later joked about it to other employees at the ranch, the suit claimed."

Nice guy. Just the type of individual you want working for your company. And guess what? This isn't the first time this has happened while he was in WB's employ. In 1998, Colleen Bennett, Peter's former executive vice president of finance, filed suit, alleging that Peters groped her, exposed himself to her and conducted meetings in his underwear. If guys like this are allowed to stick around WB Features, it really explains a lot how management there conducts business and why we get the Catwoman's and Singerman's that we do.

Singer Likes Him Some Jesus in his Singerman

2006-12-07T18:04:00.000-08:00

One of the MANY criticisms of Singerman was the repetitive, over-the-top Christ imagery in the film. We know there are obvious parallels in the tales of Jesus Christ and to a lesser extent Moses, with that of Superman. Richard Donner and Tom Mankiewicz took this up a notch in Superman: The Movie with how they chose to portray Marlon Brando's Jor-El. It was pretty subtle stuff, put into his dialogue about "sending his only son" and having Kal-El be the "light to show them the way." Nothing really obvious or "eye-roll worthy." You understood where they were going with it, but it didn't offend the senses or overshadow parts of the film.

Singerman on the other hand took this to unprecedented levels and had all the subtlety of sledgehammer to the groin. We seemingly got beat over the head with Stations of the Cross visuals at every turn. Half the time I was expecting Routh to say 'See! Just like Jesus!" which is a bit odd considering Singer is ya know, Jewish and all. For all those who think we were reading too much in to the film, Singer himself has basically just copped to the whole thing, and doesn't seem one damn bit ashamed about it either. Superhero Hype has up an interview Singer did with some guy named Stephen Skelton, who recently authored a book about the religous parallels in Superman lore called The Gospel According to the World's Greatest Superhero. If you can make it through him sucking up to Singer more and more with each passing moment, there's actually some pretty revealing stuff in the interview.

Skelton: Time magazine said, "Earlier versions of Superman stressed the hero's humanity…The Singer version emphasizes his divinity…He is Earth's savior: Jesus Christ Superman." However, I take a little bit of an issue with that. Certainly Donner's "Superman: The Movie" stressed the parallels to Christ, as you were touching on before we started the interview. Now, I think I know the answer to this. But do you see your version as different or similar in that regard? Doesn't it pick up from what Donner was doing and kick it up a notch?

Singer: It celebrates that notion. These stories are told in so many different ways. From Sunday School to pop culture. You're not saying that Superman is Jesus Christ. He's not. He's Superman. He's the last son of the planet Krypton; he's in love with Lois Lane; he has a human side. There's a lot of things going on here that are a product of comic fantasy. But if you're going to have lines like Marlon Brando saying, "I send them you—my only son." And there being spoken with absolute seriousness, then when you carry it forward and you have him return after five years, face an immeasurable conflict and then… I mean, it's all... I mean, if you're going to tell that story, you've got to tell it all the way. You've got scouring at the pillar, the spear of destiny, death, resurrection,
it's all there. And I remember sitting with one of my writers and we were
watching the visual effects of him [Superman] falling to Earth. And his hands
are extended and he falls to Earth in that very…

Umm Christ was put to death and accepted his fate for the good of mankind. Singerman ignored what his infinitely intelligent father told him about his home world, left on a whim not caring about the good of mankind, and then returned only to ruin the relationship of the person he allegedley loved but left without telling, and then fight a giant island. I don't see how telling THAT story evokes the need to beat us over the head "all the way" with all of the savior allegories he lists out? Superman wouldn't refer to himself as a "savior" either. He has the utmost humility, not a God complex. Singerman wasn't a savior, he was a jerkoff.

Skelton: It's the crucifixion pose; it's beautiful; it's fantastic.

At this point in the interview, you pretty much lose any respect for the interviewer.

Singer: "We're going to tell the story. If we're going to tell this story, some parts are going to be subtle. But this one is not." And we were in the theater, he was visiting the effects session, just looking what I was doing, and I just said, "Either we're going to tell it or we're not." Either we're going to have him float down kind of in [the position of the crucifixion]or not. And it's entirely plausible the way we left him in the scene, in the moment, that he falls in that position and then he falls out of it. But if there was ever a time to hammer it home, this is it. Visually, this is it. And what's wonderful is when you see it with an audience. And I worried, that there could be a snicker. But instead you could hear a pin drop.

Why? Why is it all or nothing? I dont get this. Far greater talents like Donner and Mankiewicz were content with leaving it to a few lines of expository dialogue and letting the audience draw their own inferences. Why must anything like this be "hammered home" anyway? Donner's Superman was given the type of characterization to do this type of thing and didn't even take it that far. Singerman on the other hand acts anything BUT Christ-like over the course of the film. So the imagery sticks out like a sore thumb. It's like the guy who acts like an idiot 6 days a week but then suddenly becomes pious at church on Sunday. You don't buy it. As for the "pin dropping," was this the infamous "friends and family" screening?

It's a rather long interview, and the rest of it is more of the same. The interviewer gushing and telling Singer how smart he is (we know he LOVES that), and then Singer explaining how all of his different scenes have some kind of religous subtext, when in fact most of them are pretty damn overt. It becomes all the more comical being that had he actually written Singerman to act like the actual Superman, some of it might have had some actual depth to it. But since his main characterization didn't reflect the one from the source material that spawned the religous comparisons in the first place, most of it is lost and is basically just hollow imagery that winds up annoying the audience and insulting their intelligence.

Miscellaneous Bits: 12/1/06

2006-12-01T20:58:00.000-08:00

Some rather interesting tidbits from around the internet about the goings-on with Singerman, the DVD, Warner Brothers, etc. that dont quite deserve their own postings, but are none the less still intriguing to read.

Gasp! Even more shady marketing from WB to sell their DVD's? Shmuel Tennenhaus has a theory about something fishy going on over on YouTube, and it seems to have some merit. [Cost Per News]

Apparently there are some BIG problems with some of the DVD's in the "Superman: Ultimate Collector's Edition" Box Sets. And we mean besides that DVD they shoe-horned in there with Singerman on it to try and help boost it's sales numbers. [DigitalBits]

Singerman's box office apparently wasn't the only thing that we were expecting to be "bigger." Those Hi-Def DVD's show EVERYTHING, don't they? [Defamer]

You know how Singerman having a kid in the film really sucked? Well Singer doesn't care, and he wants to give you a whole lot more of him in the sequel! Better hide your musical instruments! [Rotten Tomatoes]

An amusing review of the Singerman HD DVD: "Bryan Singer's 'Superman Returns' is instead best described as an unapologetic cinematic love letter to Richard Donner's 1978 blockbuster 'Superman: The Movie.' Never have I seen a movie so in love with another movie -- I'm sure if Singer could have somehow CGI'd Christopher Reeve and Kate Bosworth together, and had them spawn bald children that looked like a cross between Margot Kidder and Gene Hackman, he would have done it." [High-Def Digest]

OK, so which one of you anonymous commenters is a TV critic for The Boston Herald? [BostonHerald.com]

This guy wants Hiro Nakamura to help him get the time back that he wasted playing the Singerman video game. [The Daily Bulletin]

It Doesn't Take X-Ray Vision to See Through This Marketing Ploy

2006-11-29T18:49:00.000-08:00

In case you've been living under a rock the past few weeks, you might've missed that Singerman was released on DVD yesterday along with a slew of other DVD's that actually relate to the character we know as Superman. Like any other big budget film, ads were all over the place for that one last grab at revenue from the rather lucrative home video market.What really caught our attention was not the volume of ads for the Singerman DVD, but one particularly egregious piece that WB tried to pass off as something charitable, but came off looking about as disingenuous and sleazy as you can possibly get.

On Monday's edition of the Hollywood gossip show "Access Hollywood," sandwiched in between advertisements for the Singerman DVD aired the following piece featuring Singerman star Brandon Routh at a children's hospital.

On the surface you may be thinking, "what's wrong with that? He's visiting sick children." Which any other time, it may have been just that. But given the timing of this segment (the day before the Singerman DVD goes on sale) and the way it's presented by the AH hosts, it's rather obvious that this was solely done for the sake of selling DVD's, which if you ask us pretty damn exploitive and in very poor taste. Where's the evidence for that, you ask? Well consider this?

C'mon let's be real, it's aired the evening before the DVD release, it's screaming marketing ploy.
After the teaser for the segment aired and before the segment itself, there's a Singerman DVD commercial. (you can see these in beginning of the clip)
the female host shills the "2 disc Special Edition DVD" coming out before they introduce the segment.
When the hosts introduce the segment, there's a picture of the DVD on the 20 ft tall video screen behind them.
Billy Bush makes sure to tell us that "they asked him to do this months ago" so we're not to think this just came up out of the blue, which might've meant it was ya know, spontaneous and somewhat sincere. Of course they asked him months ago, when they planned the rest of the DVD marketing. Duh.
look at the huge team of people that are there with Routh to film the segment. If he was just coming to cheer these kids up, why did the cameras need to be there in the first place?
the kids in the hospital are WATCHING THE DVD's!!! And Routh makes sure to point that out for us.

Look, and we'll make this really clear, this isn't a shot at Brandon Routh. From all accounts he seems to be a nice guy, though he's been known to have his moments. He's obviously got to go along with this sort of thing to fulfill his PR requirements, and he seemed to actually care about the kids. Who should be taken to task are the marketing people at WB who were trying to pass this "gesture" off as being something genuine on the studio's behalf.

You want to do something meaningful? Do this 6 months from now, or in the months in between the theatrical release and the video game/DVD when you're not peddling anything, and don't do it with the camera crew. Hell if you REALLY want to make a difference in those kids lives, instead of giving them posters and crappy DVD's, why don't you donate some of your precious revenue from those DVD sales to the hospital to ease the burden of paying for the care of those kids?

Last time I checked, Superman didn't seek recognition or attention for his good deeds. He just went about his business happy to know he was making the world a better place. Then again, its not like these guys seem to know much about Superman anyway so maybe I shouldn't be surprised.

The Verdict on the Singerman Game

2006-11-24T07:39:00.000-08:00

<-- Don't jump Singerman! We know the movie sucked, but life's still worth living!!! Previously on the blog we talked about the Singerman video game, and wondered why it was being released almost 5 months after the film? Then we found out that it looked like the game was almost intentionally differentiated from the shortcomings of the film. Well with the game now on store shelves, we were interested to hear what the response was from some of the more well-known gaming sites around the web. And from the looks of things, it seems like the game may be almost as disappointing as the film that spawned it.

From Xboxic:

"EA has barely scratched the surface as to the potential of a Superman game. Perhaps, if they had spent more time working on story mode rather than focusing a majority of their time and expenses on flight and the size of Metropolis. Yea, there’s an incredible, lush environment for Superman to engage in, but it is completely barren when it comes to crime for him to face off against. In Superman Returns, Kal-El’s greatest villain is boredom. The curse lives on." - Final Score: 4/10 - Poor

From Gamespot:

"After the thrill of flying around Metropolis wears off, Superman Returns is nothing more than a below-average, repetitive movie tie-in that doesn't even do the movie tie-in part well...
It's hard to shake the feeling that EA viewed the movie's DVD release as the last chance to capitalize on the movie license and was going to ship this game finished or unfinished, good or bad. It looks as though they finally settled on unfinished and bad. Superman Returns doesn't have much to do with the movie of the same name; the plot is a bunch of nonsense; and the game just doesn't capture the essence of what has made Superman such an enduring icon." - Score:4.5/10 - Poor

From IGN:

"The final boss in Superman Returns: The Videogame is a tornado. Not Lex Luthor. Not General Zod, not that nuclear guy -- not even Richard Pryor. A tornado!

That alone sums up the wrong direction EA is flying in Superman Returns, an unfinished game that suffers from a poor narrative, monotonous and brainless enemies, and a questionable take on the Superman universe. It should be said that flying and using superpowers are generally fun, but not enough to overcome the average graphics, sound and suspect game design." - Score 5.5/10 - Mediocre

From Eurogamer:

"Superman Returns is so criminally lacking in any inspiration, though, and is such a dismal waste of the licence that you'll want to curl up and rock yourself into a trance. At least then your mind can entertain you with thoughts of what a good Superman game might be like." - Score: 3/10 - Poor

From TeamXBOX:

"There are fun moments to be had when playing Superman Returns: The Videogame, but I never really felt that I was playing a complete game during my time with it. I’m guessing the team ran under some time constraints and had to push Superman Returns: The Videogame out the door before it was fully optimized." - Score: 6.7/10 - Average

Those bolded parts were all taking about the game right? Not the movie? Because I wasn't sure there for a second... Seems like Singerman just can't catch a break. I was hoping to get at least a rental out of this one.

Brandon Routh Clings to Fleeting Career with Super Strength

2006-11-18T21:47:00.000-08:00

Our Canadian friends over at DOSE.ca have a humorous look at some recent comments made by Singerman star Brandon Routh at the recent Singerman videogame/DVD (i.e. "Hope and Pray") launch party. It's good to know he's still around.

"With plans for a sequel to Superman Returns in the works, and with director Bryan Singer reportedly on board, Brandon Routh wants everyone to know he’s still around and will, like, totally play Superman again.

Routh told website E! Online, “They've publicized that Bryan had finalized his deal, which was the lynchpin in the whole talk about a sequel. So, everything looks to be heading that way.”

The actor, who made his much-publicized film debut in Superman Returns, also revealed some details of the sequel — tentatively titled The Man of Steel — including its possible villain
“There’s a lot of talk about Braniac; everyone wants to see [him]. But in the Superman Returns video game, you get to play as Bizzaro [the imperfect Superman clone], and Bizzaro’s pretty fun — you could have some fun with that [too],” says the actor. “So, I’m leaning towards one of those.'”

You tell em Brandon! Your ideas already sound more original than anything Singer's coughed up.

Film Threat's Frigid 50

2006-11-16T06:15:00.000-08:00

Based on their initial review that described Singerman as both "creepy" and "sinister," it's apparent that, like many people, filmthreat.com wasn't all that impressed with the film when it opened either. We here at SSS feel their pain. But Film Threat is still poking fun at Singerman as evidence by their latest 2006 list identifying the 50 Coldest People in Hollywood. They explain...

Unlike those other lists aimed at browning the most nose, the Frigid 50 is a written declaration of who or what in Hollywood needs a reality check, detailing the least-powerful, least-inspiring, least-intriguing people in all of Tinseltown. Before celebrities fall off the face of the Earth, they get one warning, and the Frigid 50 is it.

Throw up a big middle-finger to the Hollywood "Power" lists and enjoy Film Threat's Frigid 50: The Coldest People in Hollywood 2006!

Here's numbers 27 & 28...

27. Bryan Singer
You left the "X-Men" franchise to collapse under the weight of its own failed expectations (and Brett Ratner), and you brought a "Superman" film to the multiplexes that re-imagined the Man of Steel as a peeping Tom obsessed with Lois Lane (and little else). Whatever comic book credibility you had disappeared the second Lex Luthor threw the first crystal into the water.
Anti-Freeze: Quit the "Superman" franchise too, show you're nothing if not randomly insubordinate.

28. Brandon Routh
Look, up there in the sky! It's a bird! It's a plane! It's - a flash in the pan? The new Superman didn't quite leap the A-list in a single bound. The lack of public enthusiasm for Routh might suggest the Curse of the Red Cape struck a bit early in his career.
Anti-Freeze: Show an emotion. Smile, frown, something so we know that you're real.

At this point, to say we agree is probably superfluous.

That's Some Funny Math There, WB

2006-11-09T13:28:00.000-08:00

Just wanted to bring to your attention a great article put up on Dave Poland's always entertaining Hot Blog that takes a look at the financials for Singerman and just how WB may fudge the numbers in their favor in order to avoid the rath of their shareholders. That's the magic of accounting. If you know what you're doing you can make profits appear and disappear when it's convenient for you.

I was reading a Merrill Lynch study on equity funding of movies. And it finally occurred to me how Warner Bros could claim profitabilityfor Superman Returns without getting sued by Time-Warnerstockholders.
Superman Returns grosses $392 million worldwide. That’s
roughly $210 million in rentals. WB takes roughly $130 million in worldwide
P&A and another $55 million in distribution off the top. That leaves $25
million for distribution toward participations and production.Ancillaries on
this movie look to be (generously) about $175 million net. That’s $200 million.
WB takes half of that, $100 million… plus roughly $55 million in distribution
fees… equals $155 million. Why, that would be a $5 million profit! And if you
accept WB’s acknowledged cost on the picture of $210 million, you’d be looking
at… taa dah!!!... a $50 million profit, as they claimed in the NY
Times.
Of course, you have to overlook the $60 million in failed development costs… also acknowledged by WB. And the $30 million or $40 million in additional production costs that are generally acknowledged inside the non-publicity side of the studio as real. And my figure of $130 for worldwide publicity is generous, especially considering the long push to crack $200 million domestic (it happened last week) and the big money spent on weeks two and three and four of the domestic run. And any participants who might have gotten paid (did Bryan Singer have gross points?) are not offered here. But studios are good at hiding costs when they so wish, just as they are good at hiding profits when they so wish.

Interesting. When you look at a film like that and add back things like distribution fees you can really enhance the look of the film's bottomline. But how much of that money does the studio actually ever really see?

Best of all, by this accounting method, Legendary Pictures took an
only-in-for-$105- million hit of $5 million and an it’s-really-$150-million hit
of $50 million.
In looking towards a second Singer Superman, there is the
obvious advantage of not carrying the load of failed development costs. And
keeping Singer to a $150 million budget is possible. But Variety’s
story on the idea of this sequel says that a financing partner is key for WB
to movie forward. Why, if the first film was allegedly profitable?

Yeah, I've been asking the same thing. If the film would've been profitable whether or not WB split the $200 million in revenue ($25M from theaters plus $175M in ancillaries) with those distribution fees added back, why DOES the financing partner matter???

Well, as you see, WB gets to triple dip, while an equity partner has only one
shot at breaking even or profiting. Recovered marketing costs also pay for
permanent WB staff on the picture. Distribution returns are mostly profit. So if
Superman Returns Again did 20% less at the box office ($400 million is nothing
to sneeze at), the dollar flow looks like...
Production cost: $150 million
Total net: $310 million (on $315 million worldwide gross)
WB P&A - $120 million
WB Distribution – $40 million
WB Production - $75 million
Partner Production - $75 million
In other words, a breakeven movie, with $40 million in profit for WB, using this year’s SR calculation. And nothing for a partner. (Again, this is without profit participation.)

Yeah, I know that's enough to make your head spin, and there's even more figures on the blog page that details other scenarios for a sequel, but the point is pretty clear how you can make it look a lot better than it actually was.

The betting is that Superman Returns gets more love on DVD than it did in
theaters and that it is stronger going into another film, plus the idea that
Singer makes the movie that people really wanted to see the last time.
That said, Batman Returns was down 10% from Batman and Spider-Man II was off 7% from
Spider-Man.
Realistically, what will make the “deal with Singer” into an actual movie? It could be DVD revenues. Everyone involved will be waiting to see how SR sells on DVD. The margin for financial safety on another film in the series is that thin. And of course, this all becomes moot if the next film soars. And so it goes…

So like we said last week, even though Singer is "signed" to some form of a contract to do a sequel, just how and in what form that materializes will be dependent on what happens in the home video market and just what kind of profit margin goes on the books after that.

Will Work For Food

2006-11-05T08:05:00.000-08:00

Found on page 2 of the Sunday, Nov 5th issue of Parade Magazine:

Question: Why has Superman Returns' Brandon Routh fallen off the media radar since being favorably compared to Chris Reeve?
- Geri Smith, Fort Walton Beach, Fla.

Answer: Routh, 27, filled Reeve's tights but failed to put his own stamp on the role. Our advice: Choose a serious acting challenge for your next role and raise your asking price. His paltry Superman salary (reportedly $1 million or less) led some to dub Routh "the Man of Steal."

Superstitious people might want to blame Routh's disturbing disappearing act from public view as portends of the infamous Superman Curse, but we here at SSS tend to think it has more earthly causes. Too bad Singer didn't give him something better to work with.

Singer and the Sequel: What Could be Changing?

2006-11-03T14:19:00.000-08:00

We're back after being away on a business for a few days, and unless you've been living under a rock (or throwing a giant one that contains a material that should kill you) you've heard the news that WB and Singer have a preliminary agreement for him to direct a sequel to Singerman.

At first I thought to myself, "great! he just got done raping Superman's corpse, and will now be coming back for seconds." Upon further reflection however, I think there's a few interesting tidbits to be gleened from the article that show things are still from rosey.

"Pic is tentatively intended for release in summer 2009, although the studio stressed that there's not even a script or budget yet.

Sequel is apparently at the very beginning of the development process and, as with any other project, there are any number of factors that must be addressed before it is greenlit."

Even though Singer is signed to some form of an agreement, there still appears to be a WAYS to go before this thing moves forward. Once the final take for Singerman can be determined, they'll set a budget for a proposed sequel, which will most likely be less since Singerman performed far below expectations. A script will then be submitted and then pruned to fit that budget.

"Insiders say Warners and Legendary are sure to insist that the sequel's production budget comes in under $200 million.

"Superman Returns" fell under endless scrutiny for its production budget, which the studio puts at $209 million after tax rebates and incentives. The number is much higher when factoring in more than $40 million in development costs -- "Superman Returns" was in the works for years --even though those costs were previously absorbed.

Critically, "Superman Returns" was disparaged for lacking in action. Singer has said he would address this concern in the follow-up."

And here's where things get a bit iffy. Singer's production budget is going to be cut to somewhere in the $140 - $175 million range we'd assume. Assuming it's the high end for argument's sake that's a minimum of $35 million minimum less he's got at his disposal. He's also claiming to remedy the action deficiency of the first film. Everyone knows that more action = more special effects work = more budget. Now granted some sets are already built and some of the CGI modeling is already done from the first go around, but we'd assume (hope) there will still need to be various new set pieces built and the CG work will have to be done extensively again, unless of course Singer plans on reusing his few action sequences from the first film. On top of all that, you have these rumors floating around about Singer introducing a super villain (please NOT Zod) this time. What effect do you think something like that has for the FX budget?
Granted I'm a bit shocked that the action criticism is actually being addressed, but how is it going to get done for less? And how many big budget sequels do you know that cost LESS than thier predecessors to produce? And how many of those were actually successful? None that I can think of. Sequels up the ante, which means you need to up the investment. Singer had free reign with over $200 million to play with and couldn't deliver the goods. Why should anyone assume he'll put out a better film for less?

"In terms of casting, Warners has an option on "Superman Returns" star Brandon Routh."

Interesting note there. We've said before we didn't think Routh was really a problem in this film, although his exposure seemed to be limited, and he didn't have the greatest PR at times. But is it still possible WB may want to tweak the casting of the franchise? (If they should scrap anyone it should be Bosworth!) However, how happy can they be to see things like this on the website of a magazine they own? And don't get all pissy on us, we wouldn't have liked this movie any better with Welling or Christopher Reeve in the lead role. We just thought that result was a tad shocking since one of them hasn't even thought about the suit yet.

"Michael Dougherty and Dan Harris penned the script for "Superman Returns" based on a story they created with Singer. It's not clear whether Dougherty and Harris will return for the sequel."

One can only hope WB forces Singer out of his "comfort zone" and hires some decent writers that have a decent knowledge of who Superman is. However I'm not sure what difference that's going to make since the issues with the first film are so far engrained into the universe that was created that to ignore them now would be an even bigger joke than the first film.

Gift suggestions from Sci-Fi Magazine

2006-10-28T10:05:00.000-07:00

The cover of Sci-Fi Magazine's December 2006 issue sports its 2006 Gift Guide for the upcoming holiday season.

Excerpted from the Editor's Log on page 6, Editor-in-Chief, Scott Edelman offers suggestions for holiday presents that a few individuals in the biz really need:

For Bryan Singer: A simple script, one with no superheroes, and not part of any franchise. Keyser Soze would approve.

For Brandon Routh: A personality. Because this year you weren't using yours. You just borrowed the one that belonged to Christopher Reeve. We're pretty sure you have one of your own buried under that Superman Returns performance, because we watched you work the talk-show circuit, but in case of emergency, feel free to unwrap ours.

Summing up a $260 million dollar film in 75 words or less should be harder than that, but Mr. Edelman did have easy material to work with.

Well Isn't That Convenient

2006-10-27T21:20:00.000-07:00

We stopped looking at theater counts for Singerman here a long while ago since they really haven't been relevant once the film left general theater distribution. However in just so happening to look at the theater counts for the upcoming weekend, this stuck out like a sore thumb. The turtle that was Singerman FINALLY passes the big $200 million mark after 17 long weekends, and NOW it looks like Warners is finally letting it die in peace.

It dropped 262 theaters this weekend and will only be playing in 41, a reduction of a whopping 86.5%. That seems like a bit of an extreme drop compared to its previos weekends. Which now leaves us wondering just how much exactly "Big Brother" paid TO exhibitors to keep the film running in their dollar theaters so the film could reach $200 million? Since now that its hit the mark, its getting dropped like it has the plague.

While we still dont think a potential sequel hinged on that $200 million amount, it appears obvious there was some incentive on the studios part to hit that milestone, if only to save face perhaps.

Box Office Update: Took You Long Enough

2006-10-24T13:29:00.000-07:00

While we've had some fun the past couple weeks looking at some of the film's ancillary revenue forms, we thought we'd peek in at the numbers that really matter once again. In it's 17th weekend at the domestic box office (i.e. a couple hundred dollar theaters), Singerman took in $173,300 and FINALLY broke the $200 million mark for a grand total of $200,006,305 year to date. Granted we fully admit that before the IMAX totals came out, we didn't think it would break that mark, but you'd be hard-pressed to find a supporter of this film that saw that one coming either.

But before Singer and Co. go throw another Halloween party, is their really any significance in hitting the $200 million mark now? Does this latest $173K really make a difference other than being able to say they hit a milestone of a nice round number? In actuality, no, not really, especially not after this length of time. We know there was speculation by some sources that the film hitting $200 million domestic was some "magic number" for a sequel, but that was largely passed off as being inaccurate by certain people in the industry. When you take into account the cost of the film to produce ($209 million) and market ($100 million), it's still glaringly obvious that the film fell well short of expectations (Alan Horn even admitted this). Whether it made $198 million or $202 million the film still has yet to make back it even come close to breaking even. MovieWeb has an interesting look at the situation:

"Superman Returns finally crossed the $200 million plateau! Congratulations. Oh yeah,the bad news. It took 117 days for it to cross that mark, 8th slowest all-time,and, oh yeah, the flick still has $70 million to go before it reaches a profit.Good luck hitting that mark, you idiots."

While we're not exactly sure who the "idiots" are, it does bring up a good point. The film still has a long way to go before it even thinks about breaking even, and even though its now hit $200 million it took almost twice along as films like Batman Begins (who it still sits over $5 million behind) and cost almost $100 million more to make and market. And since some of you have been asking, Singerman also took almost six times as long as contemporary X-men: The Last Stand (who it sits over $34 million behind domestically) and cost just slightly more to make and market.

Looking at those factors, I'd say the status of the future of the "franchise" hasn't changed over the last weekend, and still won't be determined until long after Singerman has been collecting dust on DVD shelves.

Nobody Wants to Play with Singerman

2006-10-20T09:49:00.000-07:00

Apparently, Mattel didn't do any favors for Singerman's perceptions of "manliness." -->

A bit of a merchandise update for those of you that have been asking. A recent Variety article, gives us some details on movie-related toys that have been hot sellers and ones that are expected to be come Christmas season. The article states:

"With the latest bigscreen incarnations of Batman and Superman taking darker and more complex turns, the toy lines they inspired have taken some hits.
So went the buzz at last week's Toy Wishes Holiday Preview -- a mini lead-up to February's major Toy Fair event. "You have to have the box office," says Jim Silver, editor of Toy Wishes magazine. "But then the story and the theme has to be applicable to translate into the toys and into play."

Hmm, looks like there is a relation between the box office and merchandising.

"'Superman Returns' was a bit of a disappointment with respect to toys. It was more of a love story. If it had had more action it probably would have done better in the toy aisles."
This Christmas, instead of traditional toy staples like superhero lines, look for more whimsical properties to dominate kids' toy lists.
Merchandisers at the Toy Wishes confab were talking penguins and pirates.

Looks like Singer's problems do in fact carry over into the merchandising aspect of the film. After all, who wants to play with a hero who sits around and pouts about his girlfriend that he left, and throws big rocks? (especially when it looks like a young Liberace doll.) Sounds an awful lot like what we heard about the Halloween costumes.

Perhaps they should've used some of our merchandising ideas that were more in line with the film's plot?

Thanks to Christopher for the heads up.

Was the Singerman video game purposefully distanced from the film?

2006-10-14T20:19:00.000-07:00

Recently Electronic Arts, who you may know as the video game company that ruined the Golden Eye franchise and who produces countless repetitive Madden NFL Football sequels, held a media day for the upcoming video game based on Singerman. Although the decision to release the game almost 5 months after the film it's allegedley based on unspooled seems a bit weird at first. But after reading a few of the reports on the game from a few of the different gaming sites, this may have been done somewhat intentionally, as it appears the release dates weren't the only things distanced from one another with these two entities.

According to GameZone, it seems that certain things that were problematic about the film were intentionally left out of the game, and things the movie lacked were added in, as EA seems to have taken a few creative liberties with the license in order to beef up the content.

"First off, EA is not using the John Ottman’s score or John Williams’ theme from the film. What a travesty! EA has all this money and can’t dish out the dough for integral parts to keep it authentic to the video game. Wait a minute, maybe this isn’t a bad thing after all. Tiburon can continue to distance themselves from the movie with not using licensed music, which will be a good thing when everything is said and done. Tiburon knows that the movie wasn’t action oriented and was geared more towards Clark Kent stalking Lois Lane like a maniac."

That's interesting to say the least. How many times have you played a licensed game that doesn't use the film's score? Can't say I can think of many. Looks like EA agrees with us that Ottman's score was lame, and Singerman hanging outside of Lois' house spying on her was downright creepy.

"Now that we know that Tiburon is moving away from the drama and inserting the action, what else could they have done to boost the game in a whole new direction? It’s easy to see, just from screenshots of Metallo – Tiburon is putting forth new villains and telling new stories the movie never did. One example would be before the movie, when Superman went to search for Krypton, he was on his way back when Mongul warps him to his WarWorld. Mongul puts Superman through a series of battles with his greatest gladiators until you finally meet up with him to battle."

That actually sounds somewhat interesting. Singer can't be happy with this at all. He's probably furious there's no "stalker mode," "emo-level meter," or final battle with a large, rocky land mass.

CBR also sheds some light on who's really responsible for scheming out the game:

"But while Singer & Co. were involved in the development of the game, another very special writing force was behind much of the game's story and underlining philosophy. "We worked very closely with Marv Wolfman," said Associate Producer Sergio Bustamente.

The results of this synthesis of projects and collaborators are most impressive. While the game's Superman, Lois, Jimmy, Lex and Kitty are modeled after and voiced by their film counterparts, the game plays and feels like that of a very original experience, one that invokes the core mythology of Superman without confining players to the film's vision."

Well now, that sure explains why the game sounds somewhat interesting to me. Marv Wolfman's work on Crisis of Infinite Earths was probably some of the best I've read. He knows far more about the character than what came out of the Richard Donner films. I'm glad to hear the game isn't confined to the film's "vision" or lack thereof, and from what I read it sounds like other than the voice actors the 2 properties don't have much else in common. Though I'm sure Bosworth will still suck virtually.

Some gaming sites claim that Singerman doesn't even look like Brandon Routh, and is more of a cell-shaded cartoon.

I may actually have to give this a rental once I've beaten Justice League Heroes.

WB: 'Hey We had Cheaper Flops Too!'

2006-10-09T09:13:00.000-07:00

Today's Defamer takes a humorous look at an article from today's New York Times about Warner Bros.' awful summer box office, where WB execs, Alan Horn and Jeff Robinov, use some REALLY odd logic when trying to explain why WB is sitting in sixth place for total box office this year, when just months ago they appeared to be primed for a second straight summer of big box office grosses. In the Times story, Robinov and Horn lament that people have harped on their higher-profile disasters, while ignoring all the money they've proudly lost on lower-budgeted projects??

"Studio executives say it will make a profit. But in bringing in only $389 million at the worldwide box office, “Superman Returns” failed to live up to prerelease expectations. If Superman had done twice what it did, the whole summer would havelooked different," said Mr. Robinov. "It's as much about perception as reality.Even with the failure of a movie like 'Poseidon,' we've had much smaller movieswe've lost as much on."

Mr. Horn agreed. "I've seen movies that cost $15 million lose as much as $20 million,he said. "But when event movies don't perform well, it is very high profile."

And IF the Queen had balls she'd be King, Jeff. And what are these guys really saying? That it's easy to lose a bundle on supposed "can't miss" superhero franchise like Singerman, but only a select few individuals like themselves can lose big time on a much lower budgeted film?? With people like this making the call on the Singerman franchise, no wonder we got the film that we did. If you own any Time Warner stock, now might be a good time to sell those babies.

Miscellaneous Bits 10/6

2006-10-06T07:51:00.000-07:00

<-- sometimes no caption is necessary. We've got a few miscellaneous news bits from around the web relating to Singerman from the past week, that I didn't care enough about to give them their own postings.

WB is trying to undercut piracy in China by selling the Singerman DVD for under $2 (I still say that's too much), which may in turn wind up costing the rest of us more in the long run, assuming we were going to use them for decorative coasters or something. Recent reports are that pirates are still undercutting their prices.
After their bad summer slate, the pressure is on at WB Studios this weekend with the release of The Departed.
If you adjust for inflation the domestic grosses of all superhero films, Singerman would rank 13th, far behind Superman ($377 M) and Superman II ($256 M), as well as every Batman film except Batman & Robin, and Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles.
Pirates Halloween costumes are flying off retail shelves. Singerman not so much.
Speaking of costumes, Kate Bosworth apparently wants to be a skeleton this Halloween.
We guess Kevin Spacey now has a thing for playing hackneyed villains.
Not sure how we missed this one: A conservative female reviewer who thinks Singerman was an emasculated metrosexual? Go figure.