Man of Steel--Fate of Your Planet trailer

[Ken from Chicago]

Just when you thought MAN OF STEEL couldn't be more awesome, this happens:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NlOF03DUoWc

-- Ken from Chicago

[Wayne Garmil]

On Wed, 22 May 2013 07:55:04 -0500, "Ken from Chicago"
<kwicker1...@comcast.net> wrote:

>Just when you thought MAN OF STEEL couldn't be more awesome, this happens:
>
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NlOF03DUoWc

This trailer came out months ago. This is the second trailer I saw
for the movie, about two weeks after the original trailer with Clark
on the fishing boat. This trailer came out before the one with Pa
Kent saying young Clark should have let his classmates die when the
bus crashed into the river that caused such a controversy.

Why is this trailer suddenly a big deal now? It's not new.
--
Never apply a Star Trek solution to a Babylon 5 problem.

[Ken from Chicago]

"Wayne Garmil" <wga...@theworld.com> wrote in message
news:knlmja$j6e$1...@speranza.aioe.org...

It didn't come out in America. This is the first MAN OF STEEL trailer where
Urza actually speaks.

> --
> Never apply a Star Trek solution to a Babylon 5 problem.

-- Ken from Chicago

[Russell Watson]

I had not seen it until you posted this link, nor had anyone I shared it
with.
Looks good. Lifelong comix nerd but the biggest Superman fan, largely
because I gave up the actual comics years ago when they got into too
many multi-title story arcs and then started with the Infinite Earths
crap where they killed off and retconned them all (which they have since
done again with this New 52 thing) and the movies have never been
anything to jazz me up and keep me interested. No disrespect to Chris
Reeve and what he has come to represent to people due to his injury and
subsequent death, but "Superman II" is the best of the original series
and that is allowing for some serious flaws, some of which were due to
the Donner/Lester schism and some which were just because the producers
didn't take the material seriously in the least. Maybe if I had been a
child when the first one came out in Dec '78 I may remember them more
fondly, but I was only a month shy of my 20th birthday and it simply
didn't do much for me. So THIS actually looks like the Superman movie I
have always wanted to see.

[Red Cloud]

On May 22, 5:55 am, "Ken from Chicago" <kwicker1b_nos...@comcast.net>
wrote:

> Just when you thought MAN OF STEEL couldn't be more awesome, this happens:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NlOF03DUoWc
>
> -- Ken from Chicago

I thought Super Man is Dead!

[Madlove]

Hmmm... Dunno where you saw it, but I never saw it until now.
Looks good!

[Dimensional Traveler]

He got better.

--
The 'Enterprise' crew in the 2009 Star Trek are adrenaline addicted,
hyper-active teenagers with ADD whose Ritalin got replaced with
methamphetamine, displaying a level of discipline that a Somali pirate
wouldn't tolerate.

[Guardsman]

>>>>> Ken from Chicago writes:
[...]

> It didn't come out in America. This is the first MAN OF STEEL trailer
> where Urza actually speaks.

Apparently, she's called "Faora" in this movie.

--

[Madlove]

Ken from Chicago writes:
> It didn't come out in America. This is the first MAN OF STEEL trailer
> where Urza actually speaks.

Guardsman wrote:
> Apparently, she's called "Faora" in this movie.

Ursa is a different character. Faora is Zod's wife.

[Paragon]

"Madlove" <mad...@arkham.dc> wrote in message
news:knvct3$v8r$1...@speranza.aioe.org...

That's new. In older times, she was a man-hating mass murderer. Um,
murderess. And a master of horu-kanu (think that's it).

[Bill Steele]

In article <knmkh3$mrf$1...@dont-email.me>,

Russell Watson <russell...@comcast.net> wrote:

> some of which were due to
> the Donner/Lester schism and some which were just because the producers
> didn't take the material seriously in the least.

Read a book a few years ago -- I forget the exact title; something like
"Superman vs. Hollywood" -- that reviewed all the deliberations
producers went through. Nearly all of it, as I recall, was about various
producers, writers, directors having their own "vision" of the
character. I don't think anybody ever said "Let's do it the way it is in
the comics. That was a big success."

Someone else once said "Everybody in Hollywood is a genius," meaning
they always think they can do it better.

[Russell Watson]

On 5/28/2013 1:22 PM, Bill Steele wrote:
> In article <knmkh3$mrf$1...@dont-email.me>,
> Russell Watson <russell...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> some of which were due to
>> the Donner/Lester schism and some which were just because the producers
>> didn't take the material seriously in the least.
>
> Read a book a few years ago -- I forget the exact title; something like
> "Superman vs. Hollywood" -- that reviewed all the deliberations
> producers went through. Nearly all of it, as I recall, was about various
> producers, writers, directors having their own "vision" of the
> character. I don't think anybody ever said "Let's do it the way it is in
> the comics. That was a big success."

Even the very successful '50s TV show would have made a decent template.
Or the Fleischer cartoons from the '40s. Neither of which made the
mistake of depicting Clark Kent as a bumbling, wormy geek. Hell, he
wasn't even that "mild-mannered" of a reporter, but the belief that he
was human (and a pair of glasses) was all that was really needed to
differentiate between him and his alter-ego.

>
> Someone else once said "Everybody in Hollywood is a genius," meaning
> they always think they can do it better.
>

Read the chapter of Adam Carolla's _Not_Taco_Bell_Material_ where he
talks about trying to cast and shoot a pilot for a sitcom he came up
with. It's a wonder anything ever gets on the air, and absolutely no
wonder that so much of it is crap.

[Ken from Chicago]

"Bill Steele" <ws...@cornel.edu> wrote in message
news:ws21-F2C14C.1...@70-3-168-216.pools.spcsdns.net...

But WHICH way in the comics? Even aside from the various universal reboots
DC has averaged once a decade since the 1980s, various writers had
different takes on Superman simultaneously in different books. I remember in
the 1990s that in solo books Superman (not Clark) was fairly reasonable but
in team books, ala JLA, he was written as a bit of an arrogant jerk.

-- Ken from Chicago

[Russell Watson]

Good point. I always felt that the folks who made the first couple of
films (and maybe even the other two, to some extent) in the Chris Reeve
series felt they were doing justice to a certain version of the comics.
However, it was one that I didn't particularly care for. More of a
'50s/early '60s "funny book" take on the character at a time when the
comics had already on taken a more serious tone a couple of years
earlier in response to the shellacking they were taking from Marvel's
more "realistic" approach. This new one looks much more like a version I
can relate to than any of those.

[Madlove]

Bill Steele wrote:
> Read a book a few years ago -- I forget the exact title; something like
> "Superman vs. Hollywood" -- that reviewed all the deliberations
> producers went through. Nearly all of it, as I recall, was about various
> producers, writers, directors having their own "vision" of the
> character. I don't think anybody ever said "Let's do it the way it is in
> the comics. That was a big success."
>
> Someone else once said "Everybody in Hollywood is a genius," meaning
> they always think they can do it better.

It is better... for the person making the change.
But not for the audience.

[Wouter Valentijn]

Ken from Chicago wrote:
> Just when you thought MAN OF STEEL couldn't be more awesome, this
> happens:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NlOF03DUoWc
>

Looks good!
Thanks for the link Ken.


--
Wouter Valentijn http://www.j3v.net

Kirk: "My God, Bones... what have I done?"
McCoy: "What you had to do. What you always do: turn death into a fighting
chance to live."

Star Trek III: The Search for Spock.

liam=mail