-
Interesting creative decision to place it after only the first movie. Granted, that means they don't have to deal with the Amnesia Kiss, the revenge fight in the restaurant and so on. They can't really do anything with the relationship with Lois unless they just use the first movie as a basis and then deviate from the movies. But maybe what they want is to create a Silver Age situation where the situation never changes.
I wish they could have done Superman '55 (George Reeves) but I like this idea. Looks like there won't be crossovers. If there are, it will hopefully be with Wonder Woman '77 and even Batman '66.
-
[QUOTE=Bored at 3:00AM;5383759]They have to negotiate with the actors in order to get the rights to their likenesses. It takes a lot of time.[/QUOTE]
Yes. I believe that's why Superman '55 never happened. They couldn't come to an agreement with the estate of George Reeves.
-
[QUOTE=manofsteel1979;5383896]They are definitely using Chris and Margot's likenesses but [B]I wonder if and when they ever touch on Lex Luthor if they will use Gene Hackman"s likeness. I somehow doubt they will given hes still alive and the asking price would likely be high.[/B] Same with Brandos estate and Jor-El.
I noticed on the Batman 89 they arent using exact likenesses of Alfred and Comish Gordon and are kinda doing a fusion of the comics version and their actors. Even Bruce/ Batman isn't a 1/1 likeness of Michael Keaton,although it is evocative of him. They gave him graying temples and fuller hair.[/QUOTE]
My guess is Luthor won't be appearing in this. And it's probably why we won't get an ongoing. Because how can you do a Superman comic without Luthor in it? Unless it took place after the fourth ([I]Returns[/I]? Anyone know what the new canon is?) movie and he had a face change or something. Which is a shame because if they made this an ongoing, I'd get a lifetime subscription. I suppose they could always do one about the Routh Superman that takes place after [I]COIE[/I] but no one is going to pay to use Spacey's likeness.
-
I don't think that you must have Luthor for Superman stories. Fletcher's Superman was great and it needed only Superman and Lois.
-
[QUOTE=superduperman;5384109]My guess is Luthor won't be appearing in this. And it's probably why we won't get an ongoing. Because how can you do a Superman comic without Luthor in it? Unless it took place after the fourth ([I]Returns[/I]? Anyone know what the new canon is?) movie and he had a face change or something. Which is a shame because if they made this an ongoing, I'd get a lifetime subscription. I suppose they could always do one about the Routh Superman that takes place after [I]COIE[/I] but no one is going to pay to use Spacey's likeness.[/QUOTE]
They could just do what they did with Batman '66. They could not find any estate for Neil Hamilton who played Commissioner Gordon or Alan Napier who played Alfred so they just didn't draw them to look like the actors, erring on the side of legal safety just in case an estate or a relative with some legal claim stepped forward.
Of course, since this is between the first two movies, Luthor would be in prison. Or is that exactly what he wanted us to think?
-
They can always have Luthor get out and get reimprisoned but I hope Venditti chooses to focus on other Rogues.
-
[QUOTE=Vordan;5384250]They can always have Luthor get out and get reimprisoned but I hope Venditti chooses to focus on other Rogues.[/QUOTE]
Agreed, although it would be kind of interesting to me if they could turn Hackman Luthor into more like comic Luthor (even if it wouldn't stick in [I]Superman II[/I]).
-
[QUOTE=Powerboy;5384028]Interesting creative decision to place it after only the first movie. Granted, that means they don't have to deal with the Amnesia Kiss, the revenge fight in the restaurant and so on. They can't really do anything with the relationship with Lois unless they just use the first movie as a basis and then deviate from the movies. [B]But maybe what they want is to create a Silver Age situation where the situation never changes. [/B]
I wish they could have done Superman '55 (George Reeves) but I like this idea. Looks like there won't be crossovers. If there are, it will hopefully be with Wonder Woman '77 and even Batman '66.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, these movies were actually pretty much status quo driven. Continuity-wise, the only lasting change over the course of the films is that Martha Kent dies off-screen at some point. Hell, even if you go with the 'Donner Cut' version, which had the 'death' of the Jor-El AI and the destruction of the Fortress of Solitude, Superman ends up going back in time and wiping out the movie's events anyway :p'
So, it doesn't really matter where in the timeline this fits in. Though I get the impression that they want to do a story around the time Superman first showed up, and the public reaction to him, which would explain the need to set it around the time of the first film.
-
[QUOTE=Frontier;5384268]Agreed, although it would be kind of interesting to me if they could turn Hackman Luthor into more like comic Luthor (even if it wouldn't stick in [I]Superman II[/I]).[/QUOTE]
Technically he [B]is[/B] comic Luthor, just the Pre-Crisis Luthor. That guy had Adolf Hitler and other mass murderer statues in his secret lair as his “idols” while also choosing not to commit crimes on Einstein’s birthday out of respect for the man. Dude was wacky and over the top while also being a very legitimate threat and that fits Hackman Luthor pretty well.
-
[QUOTE=Powerboy;5384028]Interesting creative decision to place it after only the first movie. Granted, that means they don't have to deal with the Amnesia Kiss, the revenge fight in the restaurant and so on. They can't really do anything with the relationship with Lois unless they just use the first movie as a basis and then deviate from the movies. But maybe what they want is to create a Silver Age situation where the situation never changes.
I wish they could have done Superman '55 (George Reeves) but I like this idea. Looks like there won't be crossovers. If there are, it will hopefully be with Wonder Woman '77 and even Batman '66.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=bat39;5384340]Yeah, these movies were actually pretty much status quo driven. Continuity-wise, the only lasting change over the course of the films is that Martha Kent dies off-screen at some point. Hell, even if you go with the 'Donner Cut' version, which had the 'death' of the Jor-El AI and the destruction of the Fortress of Solitude, Superman ends up going back in time and wiping out the movie's events anyway :p'
So, it doesn't really matter where in the timeline this fits in. Though I get the impression that they want to do a story around the time Superman first showed up, and the public reaction to him, which would explain the need to set it around the time of the first film.[/QUOTE]
Seeing as they are treating the Donner version as the canon one to this series, Superman 2 indeed happens within days of the first film. So technically even if set after the events of 2,it could still be around the time Superman is still considered a new thing. Even the Lester version of 2 was set fairly close to the events of Superman 1.
I think Lex will make at least a cameo in this series. One obviously based on Gene Hackman"s personality but probably not his likeness.But,of course for all we know they've struck a deal with Hackman to use his likeness.
Beyond Chris and Margot, any other exact likenesses aren't essential to use,say,Perry or Jimmy. As with Batman 66,we saw generic comic book Alfred and Gordon while whatever likenesses were focused on Adam West,Burt Ward and some of the villains.
-
[QUOTE=bat39;5383728]Agree completely. It needs to feel like a story that [I]could[/I] theoretically have been told in that universe as originally envisioned. Otherwise its just a modern Superman story with a '70's filter' :p
This was one thing which bothered me in the Batman '66/WW '77 crossover, as much as I loved it in every other aspect. I really don't think Dick should have been Nightwing in the 1977 chapter...as Nightwing was neither a concept that existed when the show was on air in the late 60's, nor did it exist in the comics of the 70's either!
One of the Batman'66 animated films had a couple of easter eggs to TDKR and played them for laughs...that kinda thing can work. But if this comic gives us a '70's remake' of Death of Superman, that's going to damage my immersion into this retro-world...[/QUOTE]
I don't think Robin growing up and not being Robin anymore would have been a concept in either '66 or '77. Anyway, that's how I felt about the Wonder Woman '77 special using Barbara Minerva version of the Cheetah. It should have been Priscilla Rich or they should have created their own Cheetah like the show created its own Wonder Girl.
-
[QUOTE=AdamFTF;5390324]I don't think Robin growing up and not being Robin anymore would have been a concept in either '66 or '77. [/QUOTE]Certainly a new costume for Robin was discussed in the letters pages in the 1970s 'Tec comics, where Robin was a college student. I can't quite recall if him not being Robin anymore was being floated (by letter writers) at the time or not. I want to say it was - but wouldn't bet money on it.
-
[QUOTE=bat39;5383728]Agree completely. It needs to feel like a story that [I]could[/I] theoretically have been told in that universe as originally envisioned. Otherwise its just a modern Superman story with a '70's filter' :p
This was one thing which bothered me in the Batman '66/WW '77 crossover, as much as I loved it in every other aspect. I really don't think Dick should have been Nightwing in the 1977 chapter...as Nightwing was neither a concept that existed when the show was on air in the late 60's, nor did it exist in the comics of the 70's either!
One of the Batman'66 animated films had a couple of easter eggs to TDKR and played them for laughs...that kinda thing can work. But if this comic gives us a '70's remake' of Death of Superman, that's going to damage my immersion into this retro-world...[/QUOTE]
The only thing I didn't like about the Batman '66/ WW '77 crossover was that, during those 11 years, the Joker basically started turning into the Post-Crisis Joker, murdered Alfred and Batman, in a fit of rage, killed the Joker. It's just not in keeping with the show. They pushed WW regularly a little beyond the 1970s shoe but this was way beyond.
I don't really mind characters showing up that didn't exist in the 1960s as long as they are done in the style of the Batman 1960s show. Bane and Harley Quinn were done nicely in a way that fit Batman '66.
The crossover, of course, had to be in 1977 since that's when WW returned to Man's World. If they were dealing with a real 11 years, I suppose Dick Grayson would be 25 and would be Nightwing. But I'd prefer that the Adam West Batman never be taken in that direction.
-
Probably the only new Superman thing on the docket for me to look forward to. Shame, we got Man and Superman and Superman Smashes the Klan, but not much of interest (for me, your mileage may vary) since.
-
[QUOTE=Vakanai;5390535]Probably the only new Superman thing on the docket for me to look forward to. Shame, we got Man and Superman and Superman Smashes the Klan, but not much of interest (for me, your mileage may vary) since.[/QUOTE]
Huh not even Red & Blue or Yang Batman/Superman interests you? For me the upcoming couple of months looks like we’ll have something for everyone. I do wish there was a big BL Superman project coming but we’ll see. I hope this series honestly never gets Clark and Lois married, I think there should be one Superman series out there featuring the unmarried status quo just to scratch that itch.