Uh oh…

Updated on August 4, 2011 By Ken Begg 32 Comments

Vinnie Barbarino is the Darkest Son of Krypton of them all!

I mean, I was never excited about this. I’m not even excited about the new Spider-Man movie, and I’m a Marvel guy. Hell, I’m not excited about the new Ghost Rider movie, and he’s like my favorite character ever (along with Blaxploitation Luke Cage and Safari Jacket Wonder Man), because he’s being played again by Nick Cage, who was simply atrocious in the first film.

Anyway, good news on the Superman movie: it’s being produced by Christopher Nolan. Bad news, it’s being directed by Zach Snyder. You can only hope Nolan’s is the hand on the wheel, because Yikes! Also, Superman is being played by a Brit because, I guess, there’s not a single actor in America who can pull off the part.

Pin It



Related Posts

  • Ericb

    Look on the bright side, at least it’s not Matthew McConaughey.

  • Rock Baker

    It’s official. I no longer give a tinker’s dam about DC’s superheroes. What ever happened to Truth, Justice, and The American Way? Oh, yeah, that isn’t considered PC anymore. Excuse me while I go throw up….

  • Flangepart

    Yup. Truth, Justice and the American way are lost ideals any more.
    This suit is a sure sign of the fall of…Nah. Can’t bring myself to say it…

  • PB210

    The phrase “the American way” did not appear early, they added that later.

    Remember Christopher Reeve’s last film, where he saved Soviet cosmonauts? Of course you do, Mr. Begg wrote a review of it. That film came out in 1987 from Cannon-one year before Cannon released Braddock: Missing in Action III and before the Soviets withdrew from Afghanistan.

    The early Superman stories showed him as primarily a social protestor who challenged the predatory authorities, not a patriot. Looking back at the early Superman stories (actually as late as the origin issue Superman#53) , many people find the social protester aspect of Superman surprising, considering how staid and stodgy the series grew later.

    Of course those Superman stories and precedents. Although Doc Savage and the Shadow did not operate in the manner of “Robin Hoods” for the common man the way Superman does in these stories, Leslie Charteris’ Simon Templar, the Saint, sometimes did. See the short story The Sleepless Knight and The Simon Templar Foundation. The Saint sometimes put pressure on war profiteers, such as those associated with Dr. Rayt Marius. Templar forced Marius’ associates to fund an organization for the families of soldiers. Zorro, of course, worked as a social protestor-despite what Judge Richard Shraniere thought, Zorro’s adopted a dual identity to protect himself from the authorities’ reprisal for his activities as a social protestor.

    So, the idea of Superman as patriot does not tally with the early version of the property.

  • PB210

    Actually, it seems that the radio show in 1942 interpolated the “American way” part. In the 1940’s cartoons, it just mentioned the first two parts.

  • tim

    looks like the new superman and spider-man were both shopping at sports authority to make their costumes.
    I thought ghost rider was ok, even with nic cage’s lousy performance. maybe he reins it in in the new movie. I’m giving it a chance.

  • Rock Baker

    Superman as a comic book character has changed greatly, yes. It was the War that turned him into one of the flag-wavers, out of a Depression era social crusader. But the larger picture is one of Superman in public conciousness, which is far more in line with the George Reeves version of the character. Uncle Sam, the version used to enlist men during the War, was orgiionally a peacenik one anti-war posters. But he has become a symbol of American might. So, to, has Superman.

  • Tim — Believe me, I’d like a better Ghost Rider movie, I’m just not expecting it. I REALLY wish they had replaced Cage, but I can live with him IF he drops the Elvis impression. They have got to provide a better script, though. The villains in the first film were boring and easily beaten and instantly forgettable.

  • PB210

    Rock Baker, I remind you of how Adam West dominated another franchise for decades.

  • PB210 — You’re technically correct, but originally Superman couldn’t fly, either, nor was he “faster than a speeding bullet,” etc. Kryptonite was added by the radio show, etc. The fact is, these are the things the mass audience, the one you require to make a zillion dollar movie successful, associate with the character. You frustrate audience expectations at your own peril, something Warners seems incredibly slow to get. People sure were pleased with that last Superman movie, the one where he had a illegitimate son, etc., weren’t they?

  • Mr. Rational

    About the “truth, justice, and the American way” bit not always being a part of Superman…what Ken said.

    I actually have some hopes for this one. Christopher Nolan having developed the story? (Think I read that somewhere.) Amy Adams as Lois Lane? And unlike Ken, I actually view Snyder’s involvement in a positive light. The man knows NOTHING about how to write a story, but he knows a hell of a lot about how to present one VISUALLY.

  • Mr. R — Are we talking “300” Snyder, though, or “Suckerpunch” Snyder? And does that style really suit Superman? They tried to ‘reinvent’ Superman last time, and nobody liked it. Maybe Superman doesn’t need to be reinvented. Maybe we just need a traditional Superman. It worked before.

    This is what Marvel gets. Tony Stark is a very sarcastic, ironic guy. Steve Rogers, not so much. Different characters require different approaches.

  • zombiewhacker

    Superman wasn’t reinvented last time. That’s what Jon Peters originally wanted, but Singer’s finished product was more of a half-and-half. Faithful enough to earlier Reeves films, yet sans the unbearable camp.

  • Frank Bauroth

    PB210, kudos on the Saint knowledge and assessment.

  • Mr. Rational

    I’m actually talking Snyder, period. I’m a big fan of his visuals, though more so in 300 and Watchmen (both of which worked just fine for me as both stories and eye candy) than Sucker Punch (which was a pretty piece of garbage that rotted my brain for an hour forty, but always held my interest).

    To be honest, I could sorta go either way. In 300 and Watchmen, he was working from images and stories that other people had created, and simply interpreted them. In Sucker Punch, it was his story, and the narrative was just an excuse for the visuals. This Superman movie is arguably like neither of those. It’s an original story based on a (very) established property, where the visuals aren’t set but where there also isn’t a ton of leeway in certain areas. I choose to be cautiously optimistic primarily because of Nolan and Goyer; they worked quite well together on the adventures of DC’s second-most important superhero, and I have faith that Nolan could find a way to rein in Snyder if necessary.

  • Mr. R — As I noted, Nolan is a plus. However (and I understand this isn’t true for you), each of Snyder’s films for me have been progressively worse than the previous one. I obviously like Nolan quite a bit, but even there it’s a legitimate question whether he can handle Superman, who is a markedly different character than Batman (see again Tony Stark and Steve Rogers). I feared Nolan would bring a similar ‘dark’ approach to Superman, which is inappropriate, and this initial publicity photo hardly allays my fears.

    Not saying it can’t or won’t work, just that it strikes me as increasingly dubious that it will, especially when you add in Warners’ track record on such films. I would be more than happy to be proven wrong.

  • Mr. Rational

    “…each of Snyder’s films for me have been progressively worse than the previous one.”

    No, that does hold true for me, actually. Dawn of the Dead was quite good, 300 was solid and engaging, Watchmen was a faithful but slightly dragging adaptation, and Sucker Punch was (as I said) really pretty eye candy that had only the barest amount of substance. “Progressively worse” seems about right. But they’ve also been filled to the brim with interesting images…which is why I think Snyder was hired in the first place.

    “…even there it’s a legitimate question whether he can handle Superman, who is a markedly different character than Batman.”

    Fair point. Nolan does like to do dark movies, and that’s never been the Man of Steel’s style. I suppose I’m simply placing my faith in the track record. I have never yet been disappointed in a Christopher Nolan film. It would be really sad if THIS were the one that broke the trend.

  • zombiewhacker

    “It would be really sad if THIS were the one that broke the trend.”

    Every successful director has a 1941 inside him that’s destined to come bursting out sooner or later.

  • Ha, ain’t that the truth.

  • Rock Baker

    Nolan is still doing the Batman movies, right? I just heard they’re going to play down the sexiness of Catwoman in favor of a more utilitarian ‘realistic’ take. I’m sorry, I thought this was a movie about a guy who fights crime dressed as a bat. Playing down the sexiness of a woman in a catsuit runs counter to including Catwoman in your Batman movie in the first place. Not really related to Superman, but another good example of DC is screwing itself by trying to be more PC.

  • Rock — I don’t know if that has anything to do with PC. I assume Nolan just thinks that angle with Catwoman has been done to death and wants to try something new. Batman and Catwoman haven’t always been flirty antagonists, so personally I don’t mind it, as long as it’s well executed. In other words, I don’t see this change (assuming its true) as altering anything intrinsic to either character.

  • PB210

    Mr. Begg

    “PB210 — You’re technically correct, but originally Superman couldn’t fly, either, nor was he “faster than a speeding bullet,” etc. Kryptonite was added by the radio show, etc. The fact is, these are the things the mass audience, the one you require to make a zillion dollar movie successful, associate with the character. You frustrate audience expectations at your own peril, something Warners seems incredibly slow to get.”

    Oddly enough, WB did not include Robin in most of their films, even though sales jumped up when Robin showed up. Robin stood as part of the franchise for 48 years when WB started their films, but they have ignored him (with two exceptions) in their theatrical films, including Mask of the Phantasm.

    “People sure were pleased with that last Superman movie, the one where he had a illegitimate son, etc., weren’t they?”

    Odd, in that followed from a scene in Christopher Reeve’s second film. (Chastity tends not to carry over to these adaptations. Iron Man, Daredevil, etc. Oddly enough, John Constantine stayed celibate for his film, although in the comic books, he stands as quite the libertine.)

  • PB — It’s fair to say, “Let’s show the realistic consequences of Clark having sex with Lois!” It’s also highly misguided, IF your goal is to market the film to the sort of mass audience needed to push a film with a $200 million plus budget to profit. To the extent that there is an appetite for a Superman movie these days, I remain convinced that people don’t want a ‘realistic’ grittier Superman who flies into space after impregnating Lois. I stand willing to be proven wrong, I just don’t think I will be.

    It should also be noted that the second movie Robin appeared in tanked. And even if it sold a lot of tickets, nobody really liked the third film; hence the failure of the next one. The absence of Robin hasn’t hurt Nolan’s films, obviously. And Batman is Batman with Robin or without him. He’s not fundamentally altered either way. A ‘dark’ Superman, though. I still don’t think there’s a huge worldwide audience for that.

    Iron Man and Daredevil always got tons of tail, so that didn’t really change any for the movies.

  • Rock Baker

    It was mostly that scene in Superman II that turned me off to the entire series. I’m not alone in finding it counter to the Superman persona. Even former playmate Margot Kidder (who has since become a Christian, for full disclosure) has decided that the scene really shouldn’t have done. There in lies the whole point. There are so few screen heroes who really live by a high moral standard, a clean, Christian hero, if you will. In many minds, that’s what Superman is. He’s supposed to be better than the average joe, and is so not because of his power but because of his moral straightness. Its really no surprise that modern Hollywood can’t wrap its brain around such a concept, but that, to some degree, is what the public expects from Superman.

    For the record, I do recall a stink being made over Batman (1989) because Robin wasn’t included, but no one expected the film Tim Burton delivered (the controversy was before the release). At the time, Adam West WAS Batman.

    I might also argue with the idea that no one liked the third film. Many of us felt it quite good, and were looking forward to the fourth film. It bombed because it was terrible, all on its own, I believe. Remember, at the time, there were still plans for a fifth film (I even recall a contest for which the prize was a walk-on in the next film), it was to feature Harley Quinn and Scarecrow. Batman Forever wasn’t a bad little flick. It was no masterpiece or anything, but I’m not sure anyone expected it to be.

  • Reed

    Actually, Batman and Catwoman have been flirty antagonists since literally her first appearance. Batman catches Catwoman (just called “The Cat” at the time) while she is trying to rob a cruise ship full of millionaires. Batman lets her escape at the end of the story simply because he finds her so alluring. If you are going to argue for not changing a character due to popular consciousness expectations, then I think you must also include Catwoman as an overtly sexual character. All Catwoman characterizations that I can remember have sold her sexuality up front, they have just done it more or less successfully.

    For me the issue would be how they handled the entire issue of Batman being attracted to Catwoman explicity because she appeals overtly to his dark side. There is an interesting story to be told there.

    One thing that can be said of Nick Cage is that he gave the director of Ghost Rider exactly the performace he was asked to give. I have no problem with the concept of Cage as Ghost Rider; it’s the execution that I worry about.

  • Rock Baker

    My beef wasn’t with tinkering with the sexuality of Catwoman (I really don’t see any executive thinking that needs to be toned down lest it offend someone), but the sexiness of the character. If you have a woman in a catsuit, making her more realistic and less aesthetically pleasing just seems weird.

    As for Cage and Ghost Rider, I don’t know. I wasn’t wild about the movie, but I don’t think that had anything to do with Cage. Cage has done some terrible movies, but I know I like him in his good movies. At least we’ll always have Con Air and Face/Off.

  • PB210

    “Superman in public conciousness, which is far more in line with the George Reeves version of the character”.

    Oddly enough, the first two seasons of the Reeves series had an almost noir feel. The later season grew sillier.

    Remember, though, Adam West once dominated another franchise.

  • Eric Hinkle

    “Even former playmate Margot Kidder (who has since become a Christian,
    for full disclosure) has decided that the scene really shouldn’t have
    done.”

    She did? I thought she was a hard-core atheist. Or so I’d been told, anyway. At the very least I heard she was supposed to be disgusted to find herself working on a movie adaptation of the truly dire ‘Left Behind’ books, though I certainly know my share of Christians who despise it too.

  • Rock Baker

    As of the late 90’s, she was a frequent guest on TBN programming, as well as the star of a couple of Christian movies. She was pretty up front about her faith. Admittedly, I haven’t kept up with her career/personal life since she did a guest spot on a Smallville episode. If she’s since given up her salvation, I’m not aware, but it was confirmed at one point.

  • Eric Hinkle

    Thanks. I suppose I could check Wikipedia or the like, but then how trustworthy is it?

  • Rock Baker

    About as trustworthy as a used car dealer in a third world country….

  • Eric Hinkle

    I remember my amusement at checking on a few books I own that are listed there and seeing the at-times INCREDIBLE inaccuracies about them. Which is a shame because depending on who did some of the pages they do have their good points (but boy do you need to ‘get’ the author’s biases to understand what to trust).