MrCipher's forum posts

#1 Posted by MrCipher (276 posts) - - Show Bio

@fantasgasmic:

This for sure! I've tried to be positive in my posts but I have to agree here. Lois calls him Clark in front of like 6 different people and he tells everyone he's from Kansas. The whole alternate identity thing is moot at this point.

Jor El was the traitor (he stopped Zod from saving Krypton). Why did Dances with Wolves need to die? What was the point? Plus other crap...

#2 Posted by MrCipher (276 posts) - - Show Bio

OK first of all; the producers/writers/director blew their wad on this movie. The sci-fi aspect of Superman was front and center. The movie was a huge spectacle - visually and philosophical.

To bring Lex in as a direct threat would be lame. He is a mere mortal and they've established mortals can't touch Supes. The "using kryptonian tech to make a weapon" angle is good, and could involve Star Labs, Cadmus, etc. along with Lex funding it. There would need to be an establishment for why Lex dislikes Supes in this incarnation though.

Brainiac was essentially already done with the two ships on either side of the planet. He (or his ship) would lprobably look something like those things with the metallic tendrils and beam weapons etc. Already saw this in the 1st movie - done.

Mongul is a fantastic choice as he preserves the sci-fi aspect and doesn't have to rehash anything we've already seen - Warworld tech could be very different than kryptonian tech. Warworld would be an interesting thing since it's very presence in orbit would screw up tides and weather patterns.

Metallo is also an awesome idea. Plenty of left over kryptonian tech around, a great way to introduce kryptonite, and a villain that could have ties to Lex, Cadmus, Star Labs etc. Also he's a single threat with added associated threats so something for Supes to directly focus on, and then peripheral stuff for Lois to investigate and to create sub-plots - also put her in danger and in need of rescuing.

#3 Posted by MrCipher (276 posts) - - Show Bio

OK first of all; the producers/writers/director blew their wad on this movie. The sci-fi aspect of Superman was front and center. The movie was a huge spectacle - visually and philosophically.

To bring Lex in as a direct threat would be lame. He is a mere mortal and they've established mortals can't touch Supes. The "using kryptonian tech to make a weapon" angle is good, and could involve Star Labs, Cadmus, etc. along with Lex funding it. There would need to be an establishment for why Lex dislikes Supes in this incarnation though.

Brainiac was essentially already done with the two ships on either side of the planet. He (or his ship) would lprobably look something like those things with the metallic tendrils and beam weapons etc. Already saw this in the 1st movie - done.

Mongul is a fantastic choice as he preserves the sci-fi aspect and doesn't have to rehash anything we've already seen - Warworld tech could be very different than kryptonian tech. Warworld would be an interesting thing since it's very presence in orbit would screw up tides and weather patterns.

Metallo is also an awesome idea. Plenty of left over kryptonian tech around, a great way to introduce kryptonite, and a villain that could have ties to Lex, Cadmus, Star Labs etc. Also he's a single threat with added associated threats so something for Supes to directly focus on, and then peripheral stuff for Lois to investigate and to create sub-plots - also put her in danger and in need of rescuing.

#4 Posted by MrCipher (276 posts) - - Show Bio

@illo_29:

You have a fantastic idea. Allowing other characters to be introduced, and integrated into the universe. Unfortunately the universe the newest batman belongs too and the universe this superman belongs too don't seem so compatible. Adding magic (Wonder Woman) seems like just another incongruous aspect to confuse things further.

#5 Posted by MrCipher (276 posts) - - Show Bio

That trailer was confusing. We are talking about computer programs right? So is Beck actually Beck, Or is Beck Tron? Because Tron is a computer program uniquely created with it's own features. And Beck is a different computer program. So how can one computer program be called another name without being a virus or some other sort of malware?

Or is Beck a User like Flynn or his kid Sam? In which case the "rules" wouldn't apply to him.

#6 Posted by MrCipher (276 posts) - - Show Bio

@ZZoMBiE13: Absolutely. Very good point.

#7 Posted by MrCipher (276 posts) - - Show Bio

The whole "breaking the 4th wall" thing is pretty annoying. I know Spidey is a smart @$$, but he's not supposed to talk to the kids at home....

All I can say is thank god for Young Justice and Earth's Mightiest Heroes.

#8 Posted by MrCipher (276 posts) - - Show Bio

Honestly, the only time it's OK for someone to make you breakfast wearing their underwear, is if you've just had "relations" with them. Which begs the question; Are Pete and Johnny playing for the other team now?

#9 Posted by MrCipher (276 posts) - - Show Bio

@InnerVenom123 said:

@MrCipher said:

Is anyone else freaked out that he used the word "sexy" twice in referring to Kilmer and Batman in general? This coupled with the whole Bat-Nipple thing makes me squeamish and a little concerned about Shumacher's perceptions of what makes a "best Batman". And of course the pic above of Kilmer is overly-dramatic and more than a little fruity for Bats.

You do realize Schumacer's gay, right?

Absolutely. But gay or straight, there's a certain level of professionalism and ethical concern that should pervade a serious artist/producer/director...or whatever the hell he calls himself. Especially when the movie is being marketed to kids. The fact that he was flaming all over the media and openly asserting his highly sexualized opinion of Batman and doing his best to make Batman "sexy" tells me his priorities are messed up.

One of the things almost assumed when working with a cultural icon/image is that the artist will take the property seriously. Schumacher's movies were not supposed to lampoon Batman but his tastes, his perceptions, and the choices he made for the character turned his movies into a laughing stock. His 2 movies are the worst representations of the franchise I've seen and I'm sure plenty of people agree.

Coming out and essentially admitting he's got the hots for Batman and feeling that he "needs to be sexier, so let's sculpt his body armor to be anatomically correct" comes off as Joel Schumacher "getting his rocks off". And that's not material for public consumption.

I have several gay friends who find it perfectly normal not to insert their sexual preference into every aspect of their life and do not use their work as a forum to assert their preferences and sexual desires. Of course unless their work DOES have to do with their sexuality, but I don't know anyone who has work like that. So anyone (gay or straight) who does so is, to me, an attention-whore and a sensationalist bordering on the perverse.

#10 Posted by MrCipher (276 posts) - - Show Bio

Is anyone else freaked out that he used the word "sexy" twice in referring to Kilmer and Batman in general? This coupled with the whole Bat-Nipple thing makes me squeamish and a little concerned about Shumacher's perceptions of what makes a "best Batman". And of course the pic above of Kilmer is overly-dramatic and more than a little fruity for Bats.