SUPERMAN Pushed Back Comments - Mania.com



COMMENTS AND RESPONSES

Showing items 11 - 20 of 25
<<  <  1 2 3 >  >>  
wish 7/22/2011 7:12:39 AM

The only mistake they've made so far is trying to fast track this for a christmas release next year.  This is a "coming to thier senses" move and I have even more confidence now, this should have been a summer release all along.

Nice point about the hobbit wiseguy, nobody wants to go against that guaranteed monster hit.

vitieddie 7/22/2011 7:43:17 AM

i dont know why warner is not taking a leaf out of marvel studios book ... maybe its due to pride? ... plan ahead and include bits of the movies in a larger DCU ... it doesn't have to be exactly the same ... get good writers ... do some lower budget movies e.g. GA & BC, Flash ... build up towards WW ... include the big two and do a JLA down the line ... after that - expand to MM and aquaman ... but everything has its time ... for now it looks like a bumpy ride for DC ....

celt_6@yahoo.com_home 7/22/2011 8:34:17 AM

Wiseguy, are you at SDCC?

I share others' concerns that this is a sign of potential suckage.  But frankly, I'm very anti-DC as it is, now that they're doing that stupid DCU reboot in comics as well.

SarcasticCaveman 7/22/2011 8:55:15 AM

 Ah, I don't buy all the "this movie will suck because it's pushed back" talk.  Hell, Star Trek was pushed back a couple of times, and love it or hate it, it did wonders for the franchise.

SarcasticCaveman 7/22/2011 8:59:01 AM

 And yeah, WB, expand the universe a bit.  I read somewhere once that the reason they canned a Wolfgang Peterson - directed World's Finest movie is because they wanted to "keep the franchises separate" and not "confuse their audience."  Sorry, movie-goers at large, that's how much faith the suits have in you.

jackwagon 7/22/2011 9:33:15 AM

I thought Wolfgang Peterson's World's Finest film was cancelled strictly for the sheer cost of the project, not because WB/DC was concerned about confusing their audiences.  The only way I could see any confusion coming up was if Bale and/or Routh didn't portray their characters in the film as they had in Batman Begins and Superman Returns.  That would have been awkward for sure, but otherwise I thought it was simply too expensive a film to make.

redvector 7/22/2011 9:38:48 AM

Star Trek had an excuse, it got pushed back due to the writers strike. DC, however has none.

jackwagon 7/22/2011 9:44:49 AM

Star Trek was only pushed back because Paramount felt it would make more money as an early summer release than being released on Christmas.  I recall reading a quote from JJ Abrams that he was disappointed with pushing the release back because he had felt it would still have made a ton of money had it been released Christmas 2008 (I would tend to agree with him, but c'est la vie).  The writers strike had no impact on its production since the script was finished prior to the strike starting, except for Abrams thinking of line ideas while filming, only to ultimately not be able to include them because of the strike.

And I also think WB/DC is smart for pushing Superman back to Summer 2013, since the aforementioned Hobbit will own Christmas next year (though isn't The Hobbit being distributed by WB/New Line anyways?).

renderman72 7/22/2011 10:21:02 AM

Why is Mania always so late with their news? Found out about this yesterday!

XeroWarp 7/22/2011 12:09:24 PM

 I heard they are already planning a reboot/remake of Man of Steel. You know, just in case.

<<  <  1 2 3 >  >>  

ADD A COMMENT

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Please click here to login.