Superman: Legacy

Telling Lois that he's Superman is a big deal.

She seems to know by the end of the movie. But it doesn't look like their romance is the dramatic center of the movie. So she probably already knows from the beginning.

It is a big deal, and I think... that's why J.G. is not going to deal with it here. It would be retreading old ground from the original 1970/80 films, the Henry Cavill Superman era, the Lois & Clark and Smallville TV shows, not to mention decades of comics. Better just to move beyond that point.

I THINK in all iterations of Superman, the big secret identity is closely tied to their romantic relationship. Either Clark and Lois were (becoming) a couple, and THEN he reveals his identity, or Superman and Lois were (becoming) a couple, and THEN he reveals his identity.

 
Not to de-rail this discussion of the upcoming film, but rather than start a new thread, I thought I would ask this Superman related question here.

In the 1978 Richard Donner Superman film, Lex Luthor hijacks 2 military warheads after their planned launch, as he has re-programmed them to new targets. So... why was the US Military launching these 2, ACTIVE WARHEAD 500 megaton bombs in the first place? For TESTING purposes??!! To test WHAT?! Where were the bombs ORIGINALLY supposed to target/detonate?


Space. Sure, let's go with that.

 
Asking why live warheads are belong launched is a very real world question. Why is this ever done? Science?

I don't think it's been done since the tests in the sixties. BUT... I just watched a Minuteman III rocket test the other day from my driveway out of Vandenberg Space Force Base, can be seen from hundreds of miles away. Wasn't as visually compelling from where I was as the becoming very regular Falcon 9 launches but it was a little taste of what WWIII might look like.
 
I don't think it's been done since the tests in the sixties. BUT... I just watched a Minuteman III rocket test the other day from my driveway out of Vandenberg Space Force Base, can be seen from hundreds of miles away. Wasn't as visually compelling from where I was as the becoming very regular Falcon 9 launches but it was a little taste of what WWIII might look like.

From Orlando/central Florida, you can see the launches from the Space Coast at Cape Canaveral.
 
From Orlando/central Florida, you can see the launches from the Space Coast at Cape Canaveral.
Yeah, I used to live in Sanford, you can see the launches from there too. I also saw two shuttle launches as far away as Miami, though they appear much lower in the sky. Nothing like a launch closer in, though, like a few miles away--you can feel the ground vibrate before you can hear the rocket.
 
Asking why live warheads are being launched is a very real world question. Why is this ever done? Science?

Depends on who is doing it.

images
 
Yeah, I used to live in Sanford, you can see the launches from there too. I also saw two shuttle launches as far away as Miami, though they appear much lower in the sky. Nothing like a launch closer in, though, like a few miles away--you can feel the ground vibrate before you can hear the rocket.
If you still lived in Sanford, I could have come over and played with your tricorder! :lol:
 
Finally watched the trailer. Saw blade lady really needs to get her a$$ kicked.
 
I’m just not saying much that represents anything “new”…beyond the “Wet Suit Costume” and the dog…

I see some of Superman Returns (angst for being Superman and the grandiose scene chewing by Lex Luthor)…some of Man of Steel (Jonathan Kent telling him he’s a special kind of guy because of his character and wheeping about it)…some of Batman vs Superman (being hated / blamed by the populace…etc.)…
 
Big franchise trailers are so heavily engineered these days. They can distort the movie's tone pretty badly.
 
The trailer played before Mission Impossible Final Reckoning at the cinema yesterday and it is probably the 4th time I've seen it now and it just doesn't make me want to see the film.
I understand it is meant to get a new generation into the Superman universe but Clark's broccoli top haircut just makes me think of every kid I pass on the street mindlessly glued to their phone.
The under powered Superman seems like an unusual choice.
The very cartoony style of the characters costumes, coupled with Nathan Fillion's dopey haircut just doesn't appeal to me.
The really weak interpretation of the Superman theme in the trailer also doesn't give me much hope that John Murphy is up to the task, especially after his weak interpretation of the Tyler Bates themes for his Guardians 3 score.

The Christopher Reeve films were a big part of my childhood and I am one of the few people who liked Superman Returns, having seen it at the cinema 6 times, partly for John Ottman's great score.
I've always been a massive fan of the MCU and nothing about this trailer is convincing me that DC can match the MCU even after it's retooling under James Gunn.
Pass.
 
Thevery cartoony style of the characters costumes, coupled with Nathan Fillion's dopey haircut just doesn't appeal to me.

Purists will say the haircut is “accurate” to the character…

IMG_9886.jpeg

IMG_9887.jpeg


…but if you can put the Green Lantern characters in “motorcycle gear”, instead of tights…

IMG_9885.jpeg


you can ditch the “bowl haircut”.

dumb jim carrey GIF
 
Last edited:
I still like the suit. Like many others have said, they should have used this pic first.

I truly hope it is an awesome movie.

My gut says it will be meh. Too many villains, other characters, comic book things that don't translate to live action, etc.. Some really cool parts, and some not so cool parts.

Praying I am wrong. The world needs a good Superman movie.


1748267405238.png
 
Seems to undercut your argument a bit when the comic book photo shows the character fillion is playing wearing, what essentially looks like, a motorcycle outfit.. :)
 
Back
Top