Serving up this steaming pile of
Celebrity Gossip
Gay Politics
Gay News
and Pointless Bitchery
Since 1995


Make us proud, Henry!

by Anonymousreply 13905/22/2013

Superman's shirt burns off of his body.

Thank you, gay screenwriter!

by Anonymousreply 112/11/2012


I remember being much more excited for the Routh reboot.

by Anonymousreply 212/11/2012

My gut tells me this movie is going to be awful.

by Anonymousreply 312/11/2012

The director sucks.

Warner/DC ONLY made this film for legal reasons.

by Anonymousreply 412/11/2012

It looks stupid.

by Anonymousreply 512/11/2012

Boring! It seems so worth and introspective, but introspective in a really Hallmark low-brow way.

by Anonymousreply 612/11/2012


by Anonymousreply 712/11/2012

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 Anonymousreply 812/11/2012

R2-R7 = Simon Halls

by Anonymousreply 912/11/2012

[quote]All that ruminating is so indulgent and boring

You just described all of Zack Snyder's films in a nutshell

by Anonymousreply 1012/11/2012

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 Anonymousreply 1112/11/2012

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 Anonymousreply 1212/11/2012

gospel, r12!

by Anonymousreply 1312/11/2012

If you pause @ 2:11 you can see Henry's chest hair peeking out from his Superman suit.

Hottest thing ever.

by Anonymousreply 1412/11/2012

[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 Anonymousreply 1512/11/2012

The Lifetime version will be "Woman of Kleenex: The Lois Lane Story."

by Anonymousreply 1612/11/2012

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.

Variety explains:

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 Anonymousreply 1712/11/2012

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 Anonymousreply 1812/11/2012

Won't be the same without the iconic John Williams theme.

by Anonymousreply 1912/11/2012

Too "method" for Superman. It looks like "Field of Dreams", but with the Kal-El backstory! Nope. Nuh uh.

by Anonymousreply 2012/11/2012

They know their audience, R14. Not complaining, though!

by Anonymousreply 2112/11/2012

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 Anonymousreply 2212/11/2012

Christopher Nolan is behind this film.

by Anonymousreply 2312/12/2012

"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 Anonymousreply 2412/12/2012

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 Anonymousreply 2512/12/2012

I wish Henry was in red underpants.

by Anonymousreply 2612/12/2012

What is up with the no red speedos??!

by Anonymousreply 2712/12/2012

R27 see R17

by Anonymousreply 2812/12/2012

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 Anonymousreply 2912/12/2012

R29 has paid $18 to post on an internet message board.


by Anonymousreply 3012/12/2012

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 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 Anonymousreply 3112/12/2012

The problem with Henry is that he can't act.

by Anonymousreply 3212/12/2012

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 Anonymousreply 3312/12/2012

I think it looks fantastic, can't wait to see it

by Anonymousreply 3412/12/2012

[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!"

Bitch, please.

by Anonymousreply 3512/12/2012

In the Tudors he was painfully to watch.

by Anonymousreply 3612/12/2012

[quote]Make us proud, Henry!

He's not 'us.' He ain't gay, Mary.

by Anonymousreply 3712/12/2012

He wasn't much of a leading man in The Immortals also.

by Anonymousreply 3812/12/2012

[quote][R27] see [R17]

Where? I see nothing.

by Anonymousreply 3912/12/2012

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 Anonymousreply 4012/12/2012

[quote]In the Tudors he was painfully to watch.

Um, no.


by Anonymousreply 4112/12/2012

From R17:

"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 Anonymousreply 4212/12/2012

At least Henry is familiar with that position.

by Anonymousreply 4312/12/2012

[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 Anonymousreply 4412/12/2012

R 41 Haha, in that case not so painful.

by Anonymousreply 4512/12/2012

But no one can use the costume until everything is settled

by Anonymousreply 4612/12/2012

We need another Superman movie just like we needed another Batman or Spiderman movie.

In other words, NOT.

by Anonymousreply 4712/12/2012

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 Anonymousreply 4812/12/2012

[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 Anonymousreply 4912/12/2012

Hi! I'm R48! I don't know why popular, iconic characters have multiple movies made about them!

by Anonymousreply 5012/12/2012

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 Anonymousreply 5112/12/2012

The new Spiderman was surprisingly good considering the subject matter is getting played out.

by Anonymousreply 5212/12/2012

Henry's intensity???? That's the best joke of the day.

by Anonymousreply 5312/12/2012

Superman will need to save us from the Asteroid that's threatening to smack into Earth.

by Anonymousreply 5412/12/2012

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 Anonymousreply 5512/12/2012

[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 Anonymousreply 5612/12/2012

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 Anonymousreply 5712/12/2012


by Anonymousreply 5812/12/2012

Henry's chest hairs struggling to break free

by Anonymousreply 5912/12/2012

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 Anonymousreply 6012/12/2012

Thanks, R59. That's seriously sexy stuff.

by Anonymousreply 6112/12/2012

Good analysis of the trailer. This being EW of course they notice Henry's big feets.

by Anonymousreply 6212/16/2012

Lego version!

by Anonymousreply 6301/20/2013

Superman is taking itself waaaaay too seriously now.

by Anonymousreply 6401/20/2013

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 Anonymousreply 6501/20/2013

Oh yeah.

by Anonymousreply 6601/28/2013

Krypton has the same decorators as The Cheesecake Factory.

by Anonymousreply 6701/28/2013

This was so funny and so true about the MOS trailer.

Click on link. You won't be disappointed.

by Anonymousreply 6801/28/2013

First still of Amy as Lois

by Anonymousreply 6901/29/2013

I am rely looking forward to seeing Adams take on the Lois Lane role.

by Anonymousreply 7001/29/2013

Oh boy! I am really asking for it with the spelling on that one.

by Anonymousreply 7101/29/2013

New super art

by Anonymousreply 7202/12/2013

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 Anonymousreply 7302/20/2013


[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 Anonymousreply 7403/05/2013

What does his butt look like in the film?

by Anonymousreply 7503/05/2013

Lois & Clark!

by Anonymousreply 7603/11/2013

Brandon Routh was the best part of Superman Returns.

Spacey's Luthor acted like he just wanted to screw him.

by Anonymousreply 7703/11/2013

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 Anonymousreply 7803/11/2013

Are you looking forward to Henry turning up with his beard to the Premiere, R78?

by Anonymousreply 7903/11/2013

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 Anonymousreply 8003/11/2013

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 Anonymousreply 8103/11/2013

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 Anonymousreply 8203/11/2013

[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 Anonymousreply 8303/11/2013

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 Anonymousreply 8403/11/2013

What a disgusting spectacle. My opinion of Henry has certainly gone down a lot lately. I will not be seeing this film.

by Anonymousreply 8503/11/2013

[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 Anonymousreply 8603/11/2013

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 Anonymousreply 8703/12/2013

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 Anonymousreply 8803/12/2013

Superbear! I want him in me, quite deeply!

by Anonymousreply 8903/12/2013

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 Anonymousreply 9003/12/2013

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 Anonymousreply 9103/12/2013

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 Anonymousreply 9203/12/2013

This whole genre of films encourages libertarian idiots. I think it should be banned! Unless there is man on man action of course.

by Anonymousreply 9303/12/2013

New image with Meloni visible in the background

by Anonymousreply 9403/25/2013

What's the point of putting Superman in handcuffs? Unless they are made of kryptonite, they are symbolic only.

by Anonymousreply 9503/25/2013

Most likely he is cooperating to show that even though he is superpowered he respects the authority of the law.

by Anonymousreply 9603/25/2013

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 Anonymousreply 9703/25/2013

Any chance they are setting up Meloni as John Corbin/Metallo?

That would be hot!

by Anonymousreply 9803/25/2013

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 Anonymousreply 9903/26/2013

[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 Anonymousreply 10003/26/2013

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 Anonymousreply 10103/26/2013

Viral campaign starting on the official site.

by Anonymousreply 10204/12/2013

Is Henry still making the rounds with his beard?

by Anonymousreply 10304/12/2013

Yes, R103, from Tokyo to London and places between.

by Anonymousreply 10404/13/2013

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 Anonymousreply 10504/13/2013

He will surly drag her out for the MTV awards in which he is a presenter.

by Anonymousreply 10604/13/2013

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 Anonymousreply 10704/13/2013

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 Anonymousreply 10804/14/2013

Will you shut up?

by Anonymousreply 10904/15/2013

Does Cavill have a nice ass? What does it look like?

by Anonymousreply 11004/15/2013

R110, Cavill has a deliciously thick and full ass. He also has a tight British foreskin.

by Anonymousreply 11104/15/2013

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 Anonymousreply 11204/15/2013

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 Anonymousreply 11304/15/2013

New trailer is UP and I have just CAME EVERYWHERE

by Anonymousreply 11404/16/2013

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 Anonymousreply 11504/16/2013

New trailer now online!

by Anonymousreply 11604/16/2013

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 Anonymousreply 11704/16/2013

Russell looks HOT!

by Anonymousreply 11804/16/2013

@ 2:18 you can see the Lexcorp logo on one of the skyscrapers!

by Anonymousreply 11904/16/2013

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 Anonymousreply 12004/16/2013

Bomer was in contention for Superman Flyby, not Man of Steel.

by Anonymousreply 12104/16/2013

So many tween boys are going to realize they are gay watching this movie, it's not even funny.

by Anonymousreply 12204/16/2013

[quote]He also has a tight British foreskin.

Link please.

by Anonymousreply 12304/16/2013

[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 Anonymousreply 12404/16/2013

Any pics from the trailer of Cavill's ass?

by Anonymousreply 12504/17/2013

I think this looks great. Even Amy Adams seems right on with her version of Lois Lane.

by Anonymousreply 12604/17/2013

I'm still curious about the sort of earthly razor that can cut a super-beard.

by Anonymousreply 12704/17/2013

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 Anonymousreply 12804/17/2013

You clearly did not pay attention to anything that happened in Superman II, R128.

by Anonymousreply 12904/17/2013

...and I came.

by Anonymousreply 13004/18/2013

R128, you need to read "Man of Steel, Woman of Kleenex" written by Larry Niven. It's amazing.

by Anonymousreply 13104/18/2013

New trailer!

by Anonymousreply 13205/21/2013

OMG! The trailer is so good!!

by Anonymousreply 13305/21/2013

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 Anonymousreply 13405/21/2013

The movie cost over $200 million to make. Of COURSE the trailers are going to be impressive.

by Anonymousreply 13505/21/2013

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 Anonymousreply 13605/21/2013

"Man of Steel" is already getting Oscar buzz!

by Anonymousreply 13705/21/2013


by Anonymousreply 13805/21/2013

This is so cool.

by Anonymousreply 13905/22/2013
Need more help? Click Here.

Follow theDL catch up on what you missed

recent threads by topic delivered to your email

follow popular threads on twitter

follow us on facebook

Become a contributor - post when you want with no ads!