Make us proud, Henry!
"MAN OF STEEL" TRAILER IS HERE!
|by Anonymous||reply 139||05/22/2013|
Superman's shirt burns off of his body.
Thank you, gay screenwriter!
|by Anonymous||reply 1||12/11/2012|
I remember being much more excited for the Routh reboot.
|by Anonymous||reply 2||12/11/2012|
My gut tells me this movie is going to be awful.
|by Anonymous||reply 3||12/11/2012|
The director sucks.
Warner/DC ONLY made this film for legal reasons.
|by Anonymous||reply 4||12/11/2012|
It looks stupid.
|by Anonymous||reply 5||12/11/2012|
Boring! It seems so worth and introspective, but introspective in a really Hallmark low-brow way.
|by Anonymous||reply 6||12/11/2012|
NO MORE SUPERHEROS
|by Anonymous||reply 7||12/11/2012|
yeah, the poetic, introspective shit is annoying. I'm all for depth. But give us a sense of the grand scale of this thing. And the action. And the conflicts therein.
All that ruminating is so indulgent and boring.
|by Anonymous||reply 8||12/11/2012|
[quote]All that ruminating is so indulgent and boring
You just described all of Zack Snyder's films in a nutshell
|by Anonymous||reply 10||12/11/2012|
With that LOTR-esque music I half expected Liv Tyler to pop up speaking Elvish. They should have got Cate Blanchett to narrate the thing and be done with it.
|by Anonymous||reply 11||12/11/2012|
I'd have to say that the reason the Marvel films have been entertaining is that they are about adventure and very little mopey introspective bullshit.
Nolan's Batman trilogy is good cinema but nowhere near as much fun as the first two Tim Burton Batman movies.
Jesus Christ man, you are wearing tights and fighting crime, you can FLY! Quit yer bitchy moping and have some fun.
|by Anonymous||reply 12||12/11/2012|
|by Anonymous||reply 13||12/11/2012|
If you pause @ 2:11 you can see Henry's chest hair peeking out from his Superman suit.
Hottest thing ever.
|by Anonymous||reply 14||12/11/2012|
[quote]Warner/DC ONLY made this film for legal reasons.
Oh, please. They need a franchise to replace "The Dark Knight," AND they're wanting to spin off a "Justice League" trilogy. "Man of Steel" is essential to both plans.
|by Anonymous||reply 15||12/11/2012|
The Lifetime version will be "Woman of Kleenex: The Lois Lane Story."
|by Anonymous||reply 16||12/11/2012|
Immediately after Zack Snyder was hired to direct the upcoming Superman reboot Man of Steel, there was already speculation that one of the main reasons he’d landed the gig was that Warner Bros. thought he’d be able to complete the film with minimal turnaround time.
David Goyer’s script evidently had some serious issues that still needed to be addressed, but it was of paramount importance that Man of Steel be ready to hit theaters in the summer of 2012.
The studio’s now or never attitude stems from DC Comics’ ongoing legal battle with the heirs of Superman creators Jerry Siegel & Joe Shuster. If a settlement can’t be made by 2013, some of the most fundamental aspects of the character’s mythology revert back to the estates of Siegel & Shuster. That obviously puts Man of Steel in the clear – but what would this mean for potential sequels and future cinematic adaptations?
It’s an unbelievably complicated matter and Variety has a detailed breakdown of the situation. In a nutshell, the heirs of Siegel & Shuster would retain the rights to the character’s iconic costume and his ability to “leap tall buildings in a single bound” while DC Comics would own the rights to most of Superman’s villains (including Lex Luthor) and the character’s ability to fly.
Variety points out that after 2013, Warner Bros. would still be able to “exploit the Superman projects it’s already made, but under the Copyright Act, the company could not create new ‘derivative’ works based on Action Comics No. 1 and other properties held by the heirs.” Therefore, the studio would be able to produce sequels to Man of Steel, but they would be prohibited from using elements owned by Siegel & Shuster that hadn’t already been utilized in previous films. This arrangement would effectively make another big screen reboot of the property impossible.
In fact – if the rights are split, audiences could be subjected to two separate franchises.
In a recent article published in the Columbia Journal of the Law & the Arts, Anthony Cheng writes that 7th Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Richard Posner’s decision in Neil Gaiman’s suit against Todd McFarlane “could provide the rationale for both parties to continue legally exploiting” Superman. Posner determined that Gaiman’s “Medieval Spawn” was “sufficiently distinct” to justify a separate character copyright from the original Spawn.
Essentially, there would be two distinct interpretations of the character – a 1938 Superman owned by Siegel & Shuster and a modern Superman owned by DC Comics. Both parties would then be free to create new works based on these separate versions. This probably wouldn’t be an ideal situation for the Siegel & Shuster estates, however, DC would still own all of the trademarks and international rights – not to mention the fact that their modern version of Superman is the one that’s more firmly ingrained in pop culture.
As messy as things are bound to get if both sides can’t come to some sort of an agreement, the reality is that it’s just not that simple. Marc Toberoff, the heirs’ attorney, is currently appealing the original court ruling that led to this debacle in an attempt to receive a more definitive answer on who owns what specifically. Meanwhile, DC Comics is pursuing a lawsuit against Toberoff claiming that he “poisoned their relationship with the Siegels and Shusters.”
Ironically, the reason for splitting the rights in the first place was to encourage both sides to come together by giving each of them vital components of Superman lore. Otherwise, each party is left with something reminiscent of, but not completely, Superman.
With something so lucrative at stake, there’s certainly still hope that a mutually beneficial arrangement will be made. If not, then Man of Steel could conceivably be the last true Superman movie that fans see for a very long time.
Man of Steel is tentatively scheduled to reach theaters by December of
|by Anonymous||reply 17||12/11/2012|
Okay, seriously? I realize that Richard Posner is the best-known circuit court judge in the country, and he's certainly a great writer (although I don't agree with many of his opinions), but nevertheless his opinions under no circumstances define American law as a whole. They only cover the Seventh Circuit, in fact (which is in the Midwest; California's in the Ninth Circuit, which is much more liberal than Posner). I really can't believe the lawyers here are taking Posner's opinion as the "final word" on copyright.
Also, two separate studios doing Superman films? Are you fucking KIDDING me? No studio, large OR small, would ever make that kind of move against Warners.
|by Anonymous||reply 18||12/11/2012|
Won't be the same without the iconic John Williams theme.
|by Anonymous||reply 19||12/11/2012|
Too "method" for Superman. It looks like "Field of Dreams", but with the Kal-El backstory! Nope. Nuh uh.
|by Anonymous||reply 20||12/11/2012|
They know their audience, R14. Not complaining, though!
|by Anonymous||reply 21||12/12/2012|
They're trying to make Superman into a darker, emo character, and that's not who he is. It just doesn't seem like Superman. I don't trust Zach Snyder, either, since his films tend to have good trailers, then don't quite jell on camera. And why are they hiding Amy Adams? She's hardly been seen in either trailer. She's a popular and talented actress and should be an asset in selling the film.
Directors and writers also need to stop doing a new origin film every time they reboot a series. People know the basic backstory and don't need a constant primer, and at some point, they just want to get on with the fighting and rescuing and blowing shit up.
|by Anonymous||reply 22||12/12/2012|
Christopher Nolan is behind this film.
|by Anonymous||reply 23||12/12/2012|
"I don't want any depth or a story! I want CGI fighting!"
I see two decades of Michael Bay films has finally done its work.
|by Anonymous||reply 24||12/12/2012|
I love how they feel they have to tell this target audience that Christopher Nolan is the director of The Dark Knight Trilogy. Like they don't fuckin' know.
|by Anonymous||reply 25||12/12/2012|
I wish Henry was in red underpants.
|by Anonymous||reply 26||12/12/2012|
What is up with the no red speedos??!
|by Anonymous||reply 27||12/12/2012|
R27 see R17
|by Anonymous||reply 28||12/12/2012|
I don't "do" cinema -- b-o-r-i-n-g!
It's like admitting,
"My life is so dull and drab that I willingly pay good money to sit in the dark with a bunch of mobile phone users and talkers/eaters to live vicariously through the people/plot on the screen!
And I am proud of this!!"
|by Anonymous||reply 29||12/12/2012|
R29 has paid $18 to post on an internet message board.
|by Anonymous||reply 30||12/12/2012|
Well, I'm sure if nothing else, we'll get to see plenty of action shots that are slowed down, and then sped up, and then slowed down again.
I think what bugs me the most is some of the casting. I think Diane Lane as Martha Kent is a great idea, but that's probably the only one that is. I like Amy Adams, but she's not the Lois Lane type. Russell Crowe as Jor-El is just...no. And Kevin Costner as Jonathan Kent...I honestly can't decide if I think that's more or less corny than John Schneider playing him on Smallville. And Henry Cavill's body is amazing, but I'm at best agnostic on him.
|by Anonymous||reply 31||12/12/2012|
The problem with Henry is that he can't act.
|by Anonymous||reply 32||12/12/2012|
I honestly don't think I've ever seen him act.
I hate to say this, but just like all an actor playing Batman really needs is a chin, all an actor playing Superman really needs is to look good in the suit. If you end up accidentally casting Christopher Reeve, that's a bonus.
Also, Superman is not tortured and ponderous. Batman, yes. Superman, not so much.
|by Anonymous||reply 33||12/12/2012|
I think it looks fantastic, can't wait to see it
|by Anonymous||reply 34||12/12/2012|
[quote] "My life is so dull and drab that I willingly pay good money to sit in the dark with a bunch of mobile phone users and talkers/eaters to live vicariously through the people/plot on the screen!"
|by Anonymous||reply 35||12/12/2012|
In the Tudors he was painfully to watch.
|by Anonymous||reply 36||12/12/2012|
He wasn't much of a leading man in The Immortals also.
|by Anonymous||reply 38||12/12/2012|
[quote][R27] see [R17]
Where? I see nothing.
|by Anonymous||reply 39||12/12/2012|
Long story short, when DC rebooted itself last year, part of Superman's updated wardrobe was a lack of red undies.
They're being consistant with that.
|by Anonymous||reply 40||12/12/2012|
[quote]In the Tudors he was painfully to watch.
|by Anonymous||reply 41||12/12/2012|
"It’s an unbelievably complicated matter and Variety has a detailed breakdown of the situation. In a nutshell, the heirs of Siegel & Shuster would retain the rights to the character’s iconic costume and his ability to “leap tall buildings in a single bound” while DC Comics would own the rights to most of Superman’s villains (including Lex Luthor) and the character’s ability to fly."
The iconic costume is owned by Siegel and Shuster. In other words, no more red trunks.
|by Anonymous||reply 42||12/12/2012|
At least Henry is familiar with that position.
|by Anonymous||reply 43||12/12/2012|
[quote]The iconic costume is owned by Siegel and Shuster. In other words, no more red trunks.
That's not entirely accurate, and the Siegel/Shuster heirs and Time Warner are going to fight about this until the end of time.
|by Anonymous||reply 44||12/12/2012|
R 41 Haha, in that case not so painful.
|by Anonymous||reply 45||12/12/2012|
But no one can use the costume until everything is settled
|by Anonymous||reply 46||12/12/2012|
We need another Superman movie just like we needed another Batman or Spiderman movie.
In other words, NOT.
|by Anonymous||reply 47||12/12/2012|
How many times are they going to make a movie about Superman? They already did four of them with Reeve and only two were worth watching.
Superman Returns was a total bore fest. Now Man of Steel is coming up (with yet another origin retelling?) and who is going to see it?
I think it will flop[
|by Anonymous||reply 48||12/12/2012|
[quote]We need another Superman movie just like we needed another Batman or Spiderman movie.
You do realize those Batman movies were a hugely successful trilogy both critically and commercially? Even Spiderman reboot did pretty okay though I stayed away from that one.
If the public keeps having an appetite for them they will keep making them, and there is an appetite for a modern, good Superman movies. The classic ones are old now. We'll see if this is actually good though.
|by Anonymous||reply 49||12/12/2012|
Hi! I'm R48! I don't know why popular, iconic characters have multiple movies made about them!
|by Anonymous||reply 50||12/12/2012|
Although the Reeve movies were good (well, only the first two) for their time, anyone who watches them nowadays can appreciate how hokey and outdated most of the effects have become.
The effects in Superman Returns were a huge improvement; the movie just suffered from a lame storyline. Routh was fantastic and looked incredible in the suit, and the movie wasn't that bad, but the plot could've been much better.
Man of Steel will be something else entirely. I think the effects will be mind-blowing, the plot will be solid, and of course gorgeous Henry's intensity will tie it all together. From the trailer, there appears to be some gay Easter eggs, which I'm more than willing to hunt down. Come back to this comment next year because I'm telling you now: this movie will be a huge [bold]blockbuster[/blockbuster].
Cavill will be everywhere after this. He will be at the top of the new crop of A-list Hollywood actors. He'll be a megawatt superstar.
And can you imagine what a mega-budget Justice League movie will mean? I can't effin' wait!
Okay, I'm done slobbering.
[By the way, Superman, let me help you with that pesky button...]
|by Anonymous||reply 51||12/12/2012|
The new Spiderman was surprisingly good considering the subject matter is getting played out.
|by Anonymous||reply 52||12/12/2012|
Henry's intensity???? That's the best joke of the day.
|by Anonymous||reply 53||12/12/2012|
Superman will need to save us from the Asteroid that's threatening to smack into Earth.
|by Anonymous||reply 54||12/12/2012|
R48 actually Superman III is a very underrated and enjoyable superhero film, featuring Reeves best performance in the series. I don't think that Warners or any other major studio would make a superhero movie as comical and campy as Superman III these days. All superhero movies have to be so serious and depressing and dark and emo and all that crap nowadays.
|by Anonymous||reply 55||12/12/2012|
[quote]Nolan's Batman trilogy is good cinema but nowhere near as much fun as the first two Tim Burton Batman movies.
I'd say the first two Batman movies are good cinema and Nolan's are poop. He just asks himself what Michael Mann would do with Batman then makes the paint by numbers version of that.
|by Anonymous||reply 56||12/12/2012|
The original Superman films and the Burton Batman films don't hold up very well. Too "comical and campy".
I thought it was a great trailer. And the further they get from the original Donner films the better. My biggest problem with Superman Returns was that it tried too hard to be an homage to the Donner films. It should have tried to be it's own film.
It missed a huge opportunity, I think, to really consider what Superman means, the same way the Nolan films tried to consider what Batman means.
|by Anonymous||reply 57||12/12/2012|
|by Anonymous||reply 58||12/12/2012|
Henry's chest hairs struggling to break free
|by Anonymous||reply 59||12/12/2012|
They need to stop doing origin stories over and over. We KNOW how Superman got here and about his upbringing. There are decades of other stories from the comics available to tell. It's absolutely frustrating.
|by Anonymous||reply 60||12/12/2012|
Thanks, R59. That's seriously sexy stuff.
|by Anonymous||reply 61||12/12/2012|
Good analysis of the trailer. This being EW of course they notice Henry's big feets.
|by Anonymous||reply 62||12/16/2012|
|by Anonymous||reply 63||01/20/2013|
Superman is taking itself waaaaay too seriously now.
|by Anonymous||reply 64||01/20/2013|
I can't stand this fucking take on Superman. As someone pointed out, he's NOT tortured. The films should be light, not live in the darkness like the Batman films did.
|by Anonymous||reply 65||01/20/2013|
|by Anonymous||reply 66||01/28/2013|
Krypton has the same decorators as The Cheesecake Factory.
|by Anonymous||reply 67||01/28/2013|
This was so funny and so true about the MOS trailer.
Click on link. You won't be disappointed.
|by Anonymous||reply 68||01/29/2013|
First still of Amy as Lois
|by Anonymous||reply 69||01/29/2013|
I am rely looking forward to seeing Adams take on the Lois Lane role.
|by Anonymous||reply 70||01/29/2013|
Oh boy! I am really asking for it with the spelling on that one.
|by Anonymous||reply 71||01/29/2013|
New super art
|by Anonymous||reply 72||02/12/2013|
Supposedly, some people have seen an early screening of MOS.
Here is what someone tweeted:
@amazingjr87 Varying opinions. One said he was fine but "easily replaceable" another that he was painful to watch. Others said he did ok.
@Poni_Boy @Poni_Boy Seems many found Cavill's performance lacking. CG was a bit overused but no complaints about the slow motion. And no Justice League tie-in.Out of the people I've spoken to only one is a pro critic (her reaction was the most negative). Also heard the Zimmer score isn't done yet.
@Poni_Boy Hearing a good variety of reactions to Man of Steel. Lots of praise for Micheal Shannon & Russell Crowe. Action is plentiful.
|by Anonymous||reply 73||02/20/2013|
[quote]Henry Cavill is Superman to me now. I like his take on the character. I don't really care necessarily how Superman/Clark Kent is in the comics. But Henry has a really good performance and brings a new Superman for the modern era. One who is powerful, strong, and inhumane in ability, yet also relatable and earns our sympathy.
|by Anonymous||reply 74||03/05/2013|
What does his butt look like in the film?
|by Anonymous||reply 75||03/06/2013|
Lois & Clark!
|by Anonymous||reply 76||03/11/2013|
Brandon Routh was the best part of Superman Returns.
Spacey's Luthor acted like he just wanted to screw him.
|by Anonymous||reply 77||03/11/2013|
Yes, Brandon Routh deserved(-s) another chance. He made a stunning Superman, and he's a truly great guy.
I hope Henry has a much better outcome in his turn as Superman. He seems to be a genuinely kind and humble soul, and people like that deserve kind fortune in return.
|by Anonymous||reply 78||03/12/2013|
Are you looking forward to Henry turning up with his beard to the Premiere, R78?
|by Anonymous||reply 79||03/12/2013|
Unfortunately, R79, the Hollywood machine gives gay actors very little choice: either they play by the rules and enjoy a shot at super-stardom, or they out themselves and enjoy mediocrity (at best) or fade into obscurity (at worst).
The old goats at the top of the food chain need to...pass on (to put it gently)...before the real changes start to happen.
|by Anonymous||reply 80||03/12/2013|
Why can't Henry just show up single? If they don't want him to bring a boyfriend, fine. But why bring a beard?
|by Anonymous||reply 81||03/12/2013|
It's the new Hollywood ploy to sell tickets, R81. The Robert Pattinson/Kristen Stewart shomance, which purposely paralleled their Twilight relationship, was a multi-million dollar ploy to generate buzz and ticket sales on a monolithic scale.
Haven't you noticed this trend to pair (straight) movie co-stars immediately before a movie's release, and then have them "break up" shortly after the movie is released?
Henry and Gina's showmance is intended to set up the Superman/Wonder Woman arc of the upcoming Justice League movie. How long this showmance lasts depends on the ultimate success of the movie(s).
Don't feel so bad for Henry. It's just another acting gig for him. I'm sure he has plenty of time for *real* romance in his free time.
|by Anonymous||reply 82||03/12/2013|
[quote]The Robert Pattinson/Kristen Stewart shomance, which purposely paralleled their Twilight relationship, was a multi-million dollar ploy to generate buzz and ticket sales on a monolithic scale.
Well that's not going to happen here. Gina is not in the movies. And this relationship won't attract that sort of attention.
|by Anonymous||reply 83||03/12/2013|
R83, the plan is for MOS to be a lead-in to a Justice League movie, which is tentatively scheduled for 2015. Gina is supposedly in the running for Wonder Woman. The hope is that the more "real" their romance appears to be, the greater the public anticipation will be for the proposed JL movie. If that doesn't happen, then you can bet Henry and Gina will be happily single once again.
|by Anonymous||reply 84||03/12/2013|
What a disgusting spectacle. My opinion of Henry has certainly gone down a lot lately. I will not be seeing this film.
|by Anonymous||reply 85||03/12/2013|
[quote]What a disgusting spectacle. My opinion of Henry has certainly gone down a lot lately. I will not be seeing this film.[/quote]
Lately? HC has had beards before -- even a fiance, he wasn't seen with in pictures.
|by Anonymous||reply 86||03/12/2013|
R85, how did you manage to type that with your little hands on your hips?
All of Hollywood and celebrity culture is a disgusting spectacle. You might as well boycott all forms of entertainment.
|by Anonymous||reply 87||03/12/2013|
Good god, several years of publicity for a movie that stays in the theatres for five to six weeks tops and then gets sold as a DVD or Blu Ray for a bargain price just to boost premier release sales.
No wonder movies cost so much to make them these days. For every dollar that goes into producing the product three dollars go into promoting the shit out of it.
|by Anonymous||reply 88||03/12/2013|
Superbear! I want him in me, quite deeply!
|by Anonymous||reply 89||03/12/2013|
R88 the only way movies can make money is through audience creation. They have to identify the audience, promote the shit out of the movie and get them into theaters the opening weekend.
Even hit movies might only make a modest profit from the theatrical release after production, distribution, P&A, exhibitor and gross player points are deducted. The actual value in the movie for the studio is in home entertainment and television rights sales, and merchandising.
|by Anonymous||reply 90||03/12/2013|
Was all this promotion done for movies back in the old days, or even as recently as a few decades ago? I don't remember the advertising being so excessive.
|by Anonymous||reply 91||03/12/2013|
Yes. Movie promotion has always been important but became especially vital when television destroyed the weekly theatergoing audience. Movies like "Cleopatra", "Doctor Zhivago" and "The Sound of Music" had enormous promotional campaigns.
How old are you?
|by Anonymous||reply 92||03/12/2013|
This whole genre of films encourages libertarian idiots. I think it should be banned! Unless there is man on man action of course.
|by Anonymous||reply 93||03/12/2013|
New image with Meloni visible in the background
|by Anonymous||reply 94||03/25/2013|
What's the point of putting Superman in handcuffs? Unless they are made of kryptonite, they are symbolic only.
|by Anonymous||reply 95||03/25/2013|
Most likely he is cooperating to show that even though he is superpowered he respects the authority of the law.
|by Anonymous||reply 96||03/25/2013|
So blah, if that's how the film is going to go. So far, it seems too introspective.
Don't get me wrong, I think a story should come first before action, but I'm getting a feeling this deep thinking stuff will drag the story.
|by Anonymous||reply 97||03/26/2013|
Any chance they are setting up Meloni as John Corbin/Metallo?
That would be hot!
|by Anonymous||reply 98||03/26/2013|
Cavill is in Japan promoting this thing, which is 3 months away, and it won't debut in Japan until August. So much effort to get this thing off the ground if you ask me.
|by Anonymous||reply 99||03/27/2013|
[quote]Yes, Brandon Routh deserved(-s) another chance. He made a stunning Superman, and he's a truly great guy.
Eh. He wasn't *terrible* as Superman, but he was clearly just mimicking Chris Reeve. I'm curious to see how an actor with far more gravitas, if not the same height and muscle as previous actors in the part, handles it. That said, the worst part about "Superman Returns" was the producers expecting the audience to buy 23-year-old anorexic Kate Bosworth as 35-year-old Lois Lane with a six-year-old child. I've said it before, but Parker Posey should've gotten the role of Lois instead of Lex's disposable slut du jour.
I also don't mind the idea of an "origin" story for Superman ... IF DONE CORRECTLY (and Snyder has ample chance to fuck it up). Considering his origins were covered to some extent in the original film, and to substantial extent in "Smallville," Snyder's going to have to dig deep to find some new ground to cover. I'm actually *not* encouraged by him using Zod as the villain, given the extent to which it was covered in the original two films as well as on "Smallville." (That said, if anyone can pull off a new take on Zod, it's the brilliant Michael Shannon.)
|by Anonymous||reply 100||03/27/2013|
DL is still butthurt that Henry Cavill's gay face is the face of Man Of Steel and not Matt Bomer's gay ass.
|by Anonymous||reply 101||03/27/2013|
Viral campaign starting on the official site.
|by Anonymous||reply 102||04/12/2013|
Is Henry still making the rounds with his beard?
|by Anonymous||reply 103||04/13/2013|
Yes, R103, from Tokyo to London and places between.
|by Anonymous||reply 104||04/13/2013|
R85 I agree. This bearding shit is disgusting. The best thing we can do is refuse to waste our money on people who want to take from our community, but don't want to contribute it.
|by Anonymous||reply 105||04/13/2013|
He will surly drag her out for the MTV awards in which he is a presenter.
|by Anonymous||reply 106||04/14/2013|
It's so obvious fakey-fake. Now, he can't be seen without her. Yet, during the time of his "engagement", he was never seen with his fiance.
Something smells engineered to me.
|by Anonymous||reply 107||04/14/2013|
Something is up, he's was a no-show at the MTV awards.
His PR folks are saying his name was listed as a presenter, when he never confirmed it.
I say that's a bit fishy. These events are planned months in advance. It's odd that he never got around to telling them no or they just assumed he would do it. Doesn't make sense. I'm sure he had to sign on the dotted line somewhere.
|by Anonymous||reply 108||04/15/2013|
Will you shut up?
|by Anonymous||reply 109||04/15/2013|
Does Cavill have a nice ass? What does it look like?
|by Anonymous||reply 110||04/15/2013|
R110, Cavill has a deliciously thick and full ass. He also has a tight British foreskin.
|by Anonymous||reply 111||04/15/2013|
Meh ... Superman as Heathcliff. Boring. I'm tired of them trying to turn all these heroes into Wagnerian anti-heroes with tormented souls.
If you can fly to outer space and back in a split second, walk through fire and deflect bullets with your flesh, and see through anything you want with x-ray vision, you really have no fucking right to whine.
|by Anonymous||reply 112||04/15/2013|
R110, how can you be the only person with an internet connection who has not seen screen captures of Henry's glorious ass?
WTF is wrong with you?
|by Anonymous||reply 113||04/15/2013|
New trailer is UP and I have just CAME EVERYWHERE
|by Anonymous||reply 114||04/16/2013|
Very interesting. I didn't "come everywhere," but it was interesting to get a fuller picture of the visual palette for Krypton/Metropolis/etc. Apparently Superman is the only one who gets to wear a non-neutral color!
Russell Crowe looks shockingly good as Jor-El, too - much less husky than even in Les Mis.
|by Anonymous||reply 115||04/16/2013|
New trailer now online!
|by Anonymous||reply 116||04/16/2013|
Cavill looks gorgeous, but his voice over at the end, is weak. Especially when he says "Convinced". You can just tell the director said "really emphasize that word Henry".
I hope he proves me wrong, but I just don't think he has all that much talent.
|by Anonymous||reply 117||04/16/2013|
Russell looks HOT!
|by Anonymous||reply 118||04/16/2013|
@ 2:18 you can see the Lexcorp logo on one of the skyscrapers!
|by Anonymous||reply 119||04/16/2013|
It's interesting that the kid who plays young Clark, Dylan Sprayberry, also played Young Cooper on GLEE. Cooper Anderson (tee-hee) is Blaine's older brother and he was played by none other than Matt Bomer, who was in contention for MAN OF STEEL.
|by Anonymous||reply 120||04/16/2013|
Bomer was in contention for Superman Flyby, not Man of Steel.
|by Anonymous||reply 121||04/16/2013|
So many tween boys are going to realize they are gay watching this movie, it's not even funny.
|by Anonymous||reply 122||04/16/2013|
[quote]He also has a tight British foreskin.
|by Anonymous||reply 123||04/17/2013|
[quote]I hope he proves me wrong, but I just don't think he has all that much talent.
I don't think so either. He belongs in small supporting roles. He doesn't have the talent to be a lead and carry a film on his own.
|by Anonymous||reply 124||04/17/2013|
Any pics from the trailer of Cavill's ass?
|by Anonymous||reply 125||04/17/2013|
I think this looks great. Even Amy Adams seems right on with her version of Lois Lane.
|by Anonymous||reply 126||04/17/2013|
I'm still curious about the sort of earthly razor that can cut a super-beard.
|by Anonymous||reply 127||04/17/2013|
I never understood the love story between Superman and Lois Lane.
If he fucks her, her pelvis would shatter and her internal organs would be crushed.
If he came inside her, the speed and invulnerability of his ejaculate would shoot through the top of her head like a bullet.
Is she made of Kryptonite and he loses his powers when they do it?
|by Anonymous||reply 128||04/17/2013|
You clearly did not pay attention to anything that happened in Superman II, R128.
|by Anonymous||reply 129||04/17/2013|
...and I came.
|by Anonymous||reply 130||04/18/2013|
R128, you need to read "Man of Steel, Woman of Kleenex" written by Larry Niven. It's amazing.
|by Anonymous||reply 131||04/18/2013|
|by Anonymous||reply 132||05/21/2013|
OMG! The trailer is so good!!
|by Anonymous||reply 133||05/21/2013|
Yeah, promos for this film have included the best trailers I've seen in a long time. Even the original, cryptic teasers had the intended effect. Definitely got me interested.
|by Anonymous||reply 134||05/21/2013|
The movie cost over $200 million to make. Of COURSE the trailers are going to be impressive.
|by Anonymous||reply 135||05/21/2013|
I shot my wad just now watching this trailer. And I'll shoot my other wad going to see this 3 or 4 times in the cinema!
|by Anonymous||reply 136||05/21/2013|
"Man of Steel" is already getting Oscar buzz!
|by Anonymous||reply 137||05/21/2013|
|by Anonymous||reply 138||05/21/2013|
This is so cool.
|by Anonymous||reply 139||05/22/2013|