class=”alignleft size-thumbnail wp-image-12899″ style=”margin: 10px;” title=”superman_symbol” src=”https://www.heyuguys.com/images//2010/02/superman_symbol-220×150.jpg” alt=”” width=”220″ height=”150″ />When the recent list of contenders for director of the forthcoming Christopher Nolan produced Superman reboot Superman: Man of Steel was revealed, I found myself very uninspired.
Of the men named on the list, I only really found myself interested by the prospect of Duncan Jones’ Superman film. I immediately discounted Tony Scott, who really was the red herring on the list. I couldn’t really judge Matt Reeves, having only seen Cloverfield, which has a very definite style to it that doesn’t really carry over into any other type of movie, let alone a superhero one. Jonathan Liebesman’s name didn’t even register, to be honest.
Zack Snyder? I looked down my nose at his name, and had him down as a possible for the job, but for me, an unwanted one. I wanted Darren Aronofsky, a name I mentioned for the job eight months ago, and one that was subsequently mentioned as an addendum to the recent news story. This really did have me excited, and I pegged him in my mind as the man for the job.
Imagine my horror, then, this week when Snyder was confirmed as the chosen one. My voice screamed out in terror alongside so many others, as I immediately decried him as a terrible choice.
Then, I had a bit of time to think about it. What did I have against Zack Snyder for the job? A lack of substance in his back catalogue? An inability to get good performances out of his actors? An over reliance on digital trickery and slow-motion action set pieces? Well, yes. However, thinking through this list logically, I have not only come to terms with Snyder’s appointment, not only accepted it. I now find myself very excited about it.
Superman is the biggest comic book character in the history of the medium, and a global icon. Make no mistake, this news story is huge, and a Superman movie done the right way has the potential to be one of the highest grossing movies of all time. But what is the right way? What do we want from a Superman movie? The answer is, that we all want something different, which is why it is such a difficult property to handle.
There are those that want it to be faithful to the original comic. These people are split into sub-sections. Those that want it faithful to the actual original comic, those that want it to adhere to the period they enjoyed most, and those that want it to be faithful to what they think the original comic was, but is actually what was laid out in the original movie.
Which leads onto those that want it to follow the tone and canon of the original movies. Or the first two at least. Among these people you can count Bryan Singer, who actually provided the perfect example of why a new Superman project should NOT follow on from Richard Donner’s much loved films. There are also many still screaming out for Brandon Routh to come back. Seriously, no. You think he did a good job. He didn’t, he was blander than dry bread, and his lack of presence was a large part of why Singer’s misguided homage just didn’t work.
Considering as well that the biggest gripe about Snyder’s Watchmen adaptation was a slave-like adherence to the original source material, i think it is safe to assume that he will constantly be keeping one eye on the Superman mythos, and I am sure there will be plenty of nods to the character’s history. It will be a fresh film, but from what we have heard about Goyer’s screenplay it will remain true to the essence of what Superman stands for.
I think at this point it is important to remember that Superman is a comic book character. A medium which, by its very nature, is wholly visual. This is the first tick in Snyder’s column. He is known for visual flair. Singer’s muted colour schemes stripped away one of the essential elements of the comic book world. Superman is a primary coloured American hero. Comic books are all about bright flashy colours, and the thought of a Superman movie drawn in Watchman’s bold, stylish colour palette very much appeals to me. However much you dislike Snyder’s perceived over reliance on slow motion techniques, some of Superman’s powers will be best illustrated using this, and other digital techniques that more practical effects wouldn’t be able to match up to.
The biggest criticism I have heard in relation to Snyder’s appointment is the style over substance argument. I think that it was partly the substance within his Dawn of the Dead remake that made it one of the better remakes of our time. 300 was, by its very nature, lacking substance. It is difficult to build more into an action heavy swords and sandals epic, and even a filmmaker as talented as Stanley Kubrick was, for me, only partially successful at this in Spartacus. As far as Watchmen goes, it was an almost panel for panel adaptation of the graphic novel. Everything from the original story was there, so i don’t think you can blame Snyder for any shortcomings in story. I feel he did a very good job with it. It’ll be interesting to see what he has done with Sucker Punch.
I think that will give us a much better idea of what he can do with a story. Remember, the story was conceived by Christopher Nolan and David S. Goyer, not Snyder. Nolan, whatever you think of him, has attained a great reputation with his films, and if he has chosen to guide this project it means he really believes in the story that Goyer brought to him. It is Nolan’s reputation on the line just as much as Snyder’s, and i don’t think he’ll be happy to sign off on a shallow action movie.
My biggest concern with Man of Steel is one of emotional core. As a collaboration between Nolan and Snyder, two men not known for putting genuine emotion on screen, there is a real danger that a possible overabundance of story and action will mean that the emotional throughline of Superman’s story will not be suitably explored. Very little concrete information is known about the plot, but there are rumours that it involves a globetrotting Clark Kent. This makes sense as far as matching Nolan’s James Bond movie-style tendencies, and does suggest that personal human (or extra-terrestrial) drama may well be swept up in the kinetic nature of the story.
Now that a director has been named, there will now be the inevitable flood of casting rumours. Snyder’s appointment means that now there will be more fuel on top of the fire of the ‘usual suspects’ linked with any Nolan movie nowadays. So as well as Di Caprio as Lex Luthor we are probably facing rumours based around Jeffrey Dean Morgan as Zod and Jackie Earle Haley as Brainiac. There has been a lot of criticism of Snyder’s ability to get the best out of actors, and taking Watchmen as an example, there were some very wooden performances. The work by the two above-named Watchmen actors as The Comedian and Rorschach respectively does however suggest that if you hire great actors, their ability will shine through. One of Nolan’s biggest strengths is his ability to put a stellar cast together, so assuming the process between Producer and Director is collaborative in this respect, i don’t think this will turn out to be a major issue.
I am still in two minds about Superman: Man of Steel and Snyder’s appointment, but at the same time I find myself cautiously optimistic. I really hope that I have managed to allay the fears of at least some of the naysayers. I think that Zack Snyder (assuming he avoids any love scenes) is capable of bringing a great Superman movie together. If you do still feel distraught about the news, i have a couple of words of consolation for you – it could have been worse, we could have got McG.
Bazmann – You can follow me on Twitter at www.twitter.com/baz_mann
Wow. I agree with a lot of what you say there, but I think you’re wide of the mark on Routh. I don’t think he was at fault for the problems with Superman Returns. Personally, I loved it as a film but stylistically it was clearly intended as a sort of rose-tinted throw back and Routh’s performance fitted that. Having said that, I cannot see him fitting into a Snyder/Nolan Superman film at all and clearly the role needs to be recast.
I think the “style over substance” anxiety is well-founded and has been voiced by a number of people. I think Dawn of the Dead is Snyder’s saving grace as it shows he can do more than CG-augmented slo-mo. Nolan is becoming a little bit pre-occupied with story over heart, so I am not sure where that leaves Superman, tonally. An intricate story for Superman seems at odds with the core elements of the character. You can’t take Inception or Prestige levels of complexity and stick Superman in. It just won’t work.
Although it’s too much to hope that lightning will strike twice, we need another TDK. Epic, engaging, exciting, compelling, stylish, substantial. We can but hope.
I think Snyder is actually a good choice. When I saw his work on Watchmen I thought that especially with Nolan and Goyer on board with story/production he could do a pretty good job. Probably wouldn’t have been my first choice, but its a good choice nonetheless, and will take the franchise away from the Donner/Singer style, which while excellent, has come to a natural end. Routh I thought did an excellent job, especially since he was essentially playing Reeves version of Superman/Kent and wasn’t really able to put his own stamp on it. However, I think fresh casting is needed. Di Caprio as Luthor seems inspired to me – he has great depth and could do an incredible Luthor as a billionaire businessman who is up to no good behind closed doors, with a real dark side. Portman could do Lois – though I think that Anne Hathaway or Rachel McCadams could do it equally well. The next big question now the director has been chosen though is who will be playing the Man of Steel himself. Looking forward to this film…
Not a single iota of magic-realism exists in any of Snyder’s films – what is realistic magic you may ask, well, it is the art of superman, of course, something that was clearly absent in SReturns when compared to the first two Donner/Lester films, so much so I had to reach for the blue pill and erase the mind of such disturbing visual experiences. granted, Snider possesses film-making credentials, but he lack all of thenecessary arstic integrity needed for Superman; just compare his films – nothing feels real in any of his products, filmakers ought to be realmakers, that is to say they are architects of visual fiction that must be delivered with uncompromising reality; Spielberg, Cameron, the Scott bros. Donner, amongst a select few others, all understand this, for it is the sole reason their earlier films seem so REAL, example? Take the scenes in the first two Superman motion pictures and compare it with not only the sacrilege thrown up in superman returns, but also many of Snyder’s work – there are simply no people in his films; please let me explain Far too often directors – contemporary screenwriters are also guilty of this crime -neglect scenes of everyday life that add weight to realism, in favour of the main characters; it is gravely important that characters, especially those that belong in the comic book genre, are not overly concentrated on. Snyder and even Nolan do this time and time again. Okay Nolan gets away with it as Batman is less hyperbolic and sci-fi than the Man of Steel. But these f**king idiots better understand that in order to project a realistic and believable reincarnation of Superman, other people aside from the main characters need to be shown to exist. Again, I draw whatever attention you have left during my rant, to the first two Superman films and you will see a clear reality incorporated in the pictures because people unrelated to the main plots were always used to deliver the realism needed. Furthermore, the transition or morphing from Clark Kent to the man of Steal is at its best in these films – consider Mr. Reeves shirt-ripping moment where the buttons are heard popping or diving out of the daily planet window in the first film or his running down the alley and morphing into Superman in the opening of the second movie. one only has to watch these films again for the benchmark quality it preserves, so much so Sam – Spiderman – Raimi studied these films microscopically before engineering his own take on Peter Parker because he wanted to see how regular everyday folks and crowds are utilised to further cements in the reality needed for the superheroes to appear believable. Superman returns made me tea-bag the entire f**king auditorium. I’d say Singer go F*ck himself, were it not for the Unusual Suspects and his 2 X-man films, where he clearly demonstrated what is needed, but lord knows why the f*ck he chose to ignore this artistic approach to Sreturns, but f*ck it. Point is these elements are important in order to bring the necessary magic and realism that Snyder has never brought into to his own work. If he can’t do this, the rule is simple in its purity; if you can’t create something that’s not only better than good, but beyond the very best, expect to see my faeces being thrown at the cinema screen!!!
Not a single iota of magic-realism exists in any of Snyder’s films – what is realistic magic you may ask, well, it is the art of superman, of course, something that was clearly absent in SReturns when compared to the first two Donner/Lester films, so much so I had to reach for the blue pill and erase the mind of such disturbing visual experiences. granted, Snider possesses film-making credentials, but he lack all of thenecessary arstic integrity needed for Superman; just compare his films – nothing feels real in any of his products, filmakers ought to be realmakers, that is to say they are architects of visual fiction that must be delivered with uncompromising reality; Spielberg, Cameron, the Scott bros. Donner, amongst a select few others, all understand this, for it is the sole reason their earlier films seem so REAL, example? Take the scenes in the first two Superman motion pictures and compare it with not only the sacrilege thrown up in superman returns, but also many of Snyder’s work – there are simply no people in his films; please let me explain Far too often directors – contemporary screenwriters are also guilty of this crime -neglect scenes of everyday life that add weight to realism, in favour of the main characters; it is gravely important that characters, especially those that belong in the comic book genre, are not overly concentrated on. Snyder and even Nolan do this time and time again. Okay Nolan gets away with it as Batman is less hyperbolic and sci-fi than the Man of Steel. But these f**king idiots better understand that in order to project a realistic and believable reincarnation of Superman, other people aside from the main characters need to be shown to exist. Again, I draw whatever attention you have left during my rant, to the first two Superman films and you will see a clear reality incorporated in the pictures because people unrelated to the main plots were always used to deliver the realism needed. Furthermore, the transition or morphing from Clark Kent to the man of Steal is at its best in these films – consider Mr. Reeves shirt-ripping moment where the buttons are heard popping or diving out of the daily planet window in the first film or his running down the alley and morphing into Superman in the opening of the second movie. one only has to watch these films again for the benchmark quality it preserves, so much so Sam – Spiderman – Raimi studied these films microscopically before engineering his own take on Peter Parker because he wanted to see how regular everyday folks and crowds are utilised to further cements in the reality needed for the superheroes to appear believable. Superman returns made me tea-bag the entire f**king auditorium. I’d say Singer go F*ck himself, were it not for the Unusual Suspects and his 2 X-man films, where he clearly demonstrated what is needed, but lord knows why the f*ck he chose to ignore this artistic approach to Sreturns, but f*ck it. Point is these elements are important in order to bring the necessary magic and realism that Snyder has never brought into to his own work. If he can’t do this, the rule is simple in its purity; if you can’t create something that’s not only better than good, but beyond the very best, expect to see my faeces being thrown at the cinema screen!!!
Not a single iota of magic-realism exists in any of Snyder’s films – what is realistic magic you may ask, well, it is the art of superman, of course, something that was clearly absent in SReturns when compared to the first two Donner/Lester films, so much so I had to reach for the blue pill and erase the mind of such disturbing visual experiences. granted, Snider possesses film-making credentials, but he lack all of thenecessary arstic integrity needed for Superman; just compare his films – nothing feels real in any of his products, filmakers ought to be realmakers, that is to say they are architects of visual fiction that must be delivered with uncompromising reality; Spielberg, Cameron, the Scott bros. Donner, amongst a select few others, all understand this, for it is the sole reason their earlier films seem so REAL, example? Take the scenes in the first two Superman motion pictures and compare it with not only the sacrilege thrown up in superman returns, but also many of Snyder’s work – there are simply no people in his films; please let me explain Far too often directors – contemporary screenwriters are also guilty of this crime -neglect scenes of everyday life that add weight to realism, in favour of the main characters; it is gravely important that characters, especially those that belong in the comic book genre, are not overly concentrated on. Snyder and even Nolan do this time and time again. Okay Nolan gets away with it as Batman is less hyperbolic and sci-fi than the Man of Steel. But these f**king idiots better understand that in order to project a realistic and believable reincarnation of Superman, other people aside from the main characters need to be shown to exist. Again, I draw whatever attention you have left during my rant, to the first two Superman films and you will see a clear reality incorporated in the pictures because people unrelated to the main plots were always used to deliver the realism needed. Furthermore, the transition or morphing from Clark Kent to the man of Steal is at its best in these films – consider Mr. Reeves shirt-ripping moment where the buttons are heard popping or diving out of the daily planet window in the first film or his running down the alley and morphing into Superman in the opening of the second movie. one only has to watch these films again for the benchmark quality it preserves, so much so Sam – Spiderman – Raimi studied these films microscopically before engineering his own take on Peter Parker because he wanted to see how regular everyday folks and crowds are utilised to further cements in the reality needed for the superheroes to appear believable. Superman returns made me tea-bag the entire f**king auditorium. I’d say Singer go F*ck himself, were it not for the Unusual Suspects and his 2 X-man films, where he clearly demonstrated what is needed, but lord knows why the f*ck he chose to ignore this artistic approach to Sreturns, but f*ck it. Point is these elements are important in order to bring the necessary magic and realism that Snyder has never brought into to his own work. If he can’t do this, the rule is simple in its purity; if you can’t create something that’s not only better than good, but beyond the very best, expect to see my faeces being thrown at the cinema screen!!!
Considerating what Marvel and Sony are doing to their “pupil”, Spider-Man, the efforts of DC Comics about Superman is incredible. Christopher Nolan one of the best directors out there, and if he believes in Goyer’s story, that must mean that the story line is OK. As for Zack Snyder… well, he loves action scenes. Too much. But let’s just say that this will be great, because Goyer is one hell of a storyteller, Snyder can’t simply delete all he wrote down.
Oh!…that’s great helpful, it’s so right to me!
Million thanks for the article,