SuperOz

Unfortunately, I have to take issue with your issues of the original film. In many ways, the film is still the benchmark of how superhero origin films are made and it touches all the bases brilliantly. Bearing in mind that when Donner was hired, he came to it with the understanding that Superman (then nearing his fiftieth anniversary) was Americana, part of the American mythology, I don't find the movie at all camp or ridiculous.

Lex wasn't being goofy, but you needed the contrast to the straight-laced Superman/Clark Kent that Chris Reeve was intent on playing. He was extremely mindful in many interviews that children were watching these movies and he never wanted to betray those views of Superman, whereas Hackman was allowed to be more over the top and extravagant as Lex, because that contrast served to highlight why one was the hero and the other the villain. And yes, it's deliberately played that way, because at the time you couldn't play for an PG-15 or M rating.

Superman 2 is hard to argue against, but when you bear in mind the horrendous nature of the dispute between the Salkinds and Donner, it's a miracle the film even made it to the cinemas. I can correct you on the goofy plot decisions (throwing the S-shield, etc) in that these were made post-Donner and if you go back and watch it again, you'll note very clearly the scenes where you can't see Gene Hackman or Margot Kidder, because they point-blank refused to work with Richard Lester. Hackman in particular was replaced with a body double, and you'll see this clearly in that version of the film (when the boxed set of the movies was released a few years ago, they included a far superior Donner cut of 2, which removes all the stuff he objected to). I refer you here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superma...ard_Donner_Cut to what was changed.

Superman Returns is something of a love letter to the past, unfortunately. The airplane sequence is outstanding and some of the visuals of Superman hovering above the earth and even setting down the out of control car (a visual homage to Action Comics #1) are lovely...but I agree with you, the plot with him becoming Super-stalker and the kid are drastically at odds with what you'd think a Superman story would be all about. I believe Singer was blinded by nostalgia, and it shows...but, I consider it a flawed piece of work rather than outrightly bad. We did at least see Superman as he could be represented on screen.


Moving on from there, I think the combination of Nolan as producer and Synder as director is a good one, because Nolan will typically have a stunning idea and direction for the piece, wheras Synder does action particularly well (as evidenced of course in 300 and the single fight scene in Watchmen), as well as having a surprisingly deft touch for characterisation.

I think the choice for actor is a moot one; I think whilst there could be some argument for Tom Welling in the role, he is however playing a Superman in a very different DC universe than the mainstream viewer would relate to. I think casting is the key; if the actor looks the part somewhat, and can play the character (I remember only knowing Christian Bale from his rave reviews of American Psycho and The Machinist and thought he'd never be able to play Bruce Wayne or Batman), then nationality isn't a factor.

Chris Reeve is remembered in the role because he took it seriously...he'd only been out of the Juliard Academy of Performing Arts for a few years and was a stage actor, a method actor. Look at how he visibly shifts his body posture from Kent to Superman and you can see someone dedicated to getting the characters right. His charisma shone through as Superman and I think that'll be key to getting Superman right. Whenever I think of 'classic Superman', I think to that iconic moment of the first film, where he's flying away and he smiles at the camera. It's a knowing nod to the audience, but I totally buy into the thought of him being Superman at that moment.

I think I have the opportunity to watch The Tudors and will do so now with interest....



S.

Noone knows what happened at the end of Revolutions. Aside from the poor denizens of MxO who realised it was their doom....


S.

Hm. My name got mentioned here, so personal bases (aka apartments):

Ideally, this would come with a series of 'theme' maps that you could cut down from existing mission maps. So you'd have offices, caves, ice caves, tech bases, and so on. This ties back into my idea about instanced 'neighbourhoods' for bases. A certain fantasy game that I play allows for three sizes of houses, being personal, deluxe and guild/Supergroup. You could extend that idea to themed neighbourhoods where these bases would blend in, perhaps.

I think that wouldn't be a bad way to go with my aforementioned system of free-standing hook points so you can have a level of customisation that then compliments the costuming excellence that we have. But above all, the amount of furniture items would need to be vastly expanded along with dispensing with the stack-building legacy we have now. It's pushed along the boundaries of creativity, but I'm sure a lot of base builders would love better tools.


G.

I don't have an exact photo, but this should help illustrate things.

Currently, the only thing showing of this structure is the triangular white roof at the front of the ramp. The pylons (which are concrete) have been ripped from their moorings in the river bed, and the grounds of the university are submerged past the trees you can see in the background to the left. It's quite possible by morning that will disappear.


S.

I saw that on tv, and it scared the hell out of me. Little did I know that the rain that made that happen would come this way. Toowoomba is north and west, which is the way the river system tracks with the only exit being the Brisbane river.


S.