rookiebatman
Rookiebatman
rookiebatman

And I think it's only been good for Marvel to be forced to get creative and pull ideas from their back catalog rather than just cashing in on existing popularity.

I know for a fact that she was cut out by the studio because they didn't end up liking the way she acting in the role. They are recasting the role.

You deserve more stars.

Hmm that may be true, but I don't understand the sense of urgency they seem to have with cranking out these proposed 4 other titles. I'm sure they have more than a couple years before the rights revert.

I do like the idea of keeping him visually distinct from SirPatStew.

As I recall reading, Stewart started to go bald at 19. And in the comics, Charles Xavier was completely bald by 16, as a side effect of his mutation. One more reason Stewart was born to play the role?

I wonder how he'll lose it. Will he just show up and be bald? Will it be because of regular old aging, or because his telepathic powers are so strong they push the hair out of his head? Will it be cause of some sort of lab accident with Superboy causing him to vow vengeance against the Man of Steel?

If I may be a firestarter, what it means to me is that the scientific method isn't as objective or irreproachable as some would like us to think.

Yep. In spite of the movie being a mishmash, I will love it eternally for this, and the Rhino, and every scene with Peter and Gwen.

That reminds me of how I felt about Spider-Man 3. It really felt like three or four episodes of a Spider-Man TV show edited together and dropped in the theater.

I think it also suffered from the "Iron Man 2 Problem" of trying to force too much franchise setup into an already busy story.

Yeah, I did think it was strange how Jamie Foxx kept saying in all those interviews, "I'm definitely not playing Khan!" even though nobody was asking him.

That's Marc Evan Jackson and Paget Brewster. They're both awesome in Thrilling Adventure Hour.

SPARKS NEVADA IS BATMAN'S DAD??

But you're not giving any specifics of why this Superman is somehow completely different from the tv and comics and films and cartoons that came before it.

I really want to give this show a chance, but I just hate prequels so much. And, for me personally, the main reason I'd want to watch a show based on a comicbook is because I like superheroes, so a comicbook show without any superheroes leaves me very indifferent.

You're argument would be that because x might not be good simply because the creator wanted to make you cry that no other film can be judged based on what they wanted to do to.

We're not talking about a director who wanted to make a Superman film that made you puke constantly, we're talking about someone who wanted to make a dramatic film which is a generally accepted style of film making.

Wow, that is far uglier than I thought was possible.

For myself, I agree with you, but those big stakes still did exist, so we can't presume they weren't part of the appeal.