KnightWing Posted March 29, 2011 Report Share Posted March 29, 2011 They can always do color correction in post-production. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Man Posted March 29, 2011 Report Share Posted March 29, 2011 Uh, yeah, KnightWing but what I'm talking about happens during the design phase of pre-production. A film's visuals are designed to evoke overall tone and elicit an emotional response from the audience. Color is utilized like notes in a song. Slotted into the narrative to help tell the story. Story beats are emphasized by dramatic changes in color. character arcs are highlighted by gradual shifts in tone. Warms and cools provide contrast between heroes and villains. The best explanation of this process I can recommend is in the bonus features on the recent Astro Boy animated feature. Not the greatest movie, I know, but the director and the production designer clearly explain how they designed the film's color palette and how color can tell a story. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightWing Posted March 29, 2011 Report Share Posted March 29, 2011 They can always do color correction in post-production. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slothian Posted March 29, 2011 Report Share Posted March 29, 2011 They can always do color correction in post-production. And they probably will. Repeating the same post doesn't address the valid point that was put to you. I think bright primary colours (spell it properly, Yanks/Canucks) begin with Superman's costume and goes from there. Singer even managed to get that wrong by swapping the red out for more of a shade of maroon. But what Darryll said is important - the light/dark contrast is the great dynamic between Supes & Bats, so if the same exterior shots are likely to be used, then the colour pallet is vital. I'm guessing that due to Nolan's involvement with the film, the Superman film is unlikely to ape the exact same shots. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightWing Posted March 29, 2011 Report Share Posted March 29, 2011 I think the only point I saw in that was "color is important." Which I agree with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
You Know Who Posted March 29, 2011 Report Share Posted March 29, 2011 They can always do color correction in post-production. I think bright primary colours (spell it properly, Yanks/Canucks) begin with Superman's costume and goes from there. Singer even managed to get that wrong by swapping the red out for more of a shade of maroon. I wholeheartedly agree. I hated the bacon-red cape, boots, and underwear. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koete Posted April 10, 2011 Report Share Posted April 10, 2011 Warner Bros. Pictures and Legendary Pictures announced today that Michael Shannon will star in the role of General Zod in director Zack Snyder’s new Superman film, titled “Man of Steel.” Snyder stated, “Zod is not only one of Superman’s most formidable enemies, but one of the most significant because he has insights into Superman that others don’t. Michael is a powerful actor who can project both the intelligence and the malice of the character, making him perfect for the role.” As General Zod, Shannon will go toe-to-toe with Henry Cavill, who plays the new Clark Kent/Superman in the film. The main cast also includes Amy Adams as Lois Lane, and Diane Lane and Kevin Costner as Martha and Jonathan Kent. Michael Shannon was honored with an Academy Award® nomination for Best Supporting Actor for his role in Sam Mendes’ “Revolutionary Road,” with Leonardo DiCaprio and Kate Winslet. Shannon was most recently seen in the award-winning HBO drama series “Boardwalk Empire,” from executive producer Martin Scorsese. He will next be seen in Sony Pictures Classics’, “Take Shelter,” from director/writer Jeff Nichols. Charles Roven, Emma Thomas, Christopher Nolan and Deborah Snyder are the producers of the film. The screenplay is being written by David S. Goyer based on a story by Goyer and Nolan. Thomas Tull and Lloyd Phillips are serving as executive producers. “Man of Steel” will be distributed worldwide by Warner Bros. Pictures, a Warner Bros. Entertainment Company. Source Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dc20willsave Posted April 10, 2011 Report Share Posted April 10, 2011 General Zod And there went all my excitement for this movie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
You Know Who Posted April 10, 2011 Report Share Posted April 10, 2011 Yeah. Ushering in a new Superman franchise for the 21st century by bringing back the big villain of the 1980s. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightWing Posted April 10, 2011 Report Share Posted April 10, 2011 I dig the title. No "Superman:", no "The". Just "Man of Steel." While Zod definitely wasn't at the top of my list of hopeful villains, I'm really interested to see what they do with him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dc20willsave Posted April 10, 2011 Report Share Posted April 10, 2011 Yeah. Ushering in a new Superman franchise for the 21st century by bringing back the big villain of the 1980s. My problem isn't even just that. It's also that they have nothing to ramp up to after Zod. After Zod, the only other villains that can compare are possibly Brainiac, Doomsday, and Darkseid so it kinda ruins the sequel potential. Look at the original. You have Zod in the second and then third, the villain is a computer and evil Superman, and the fourth, the villain is Nuclear Man who is basically an evil Superman. If you start out with someone like Metallo or Parasite, then building up to Zod in the second film is a step forward. You move from Zod, someone who is on the same level as Superman, to Metallo, then even with the kryptonite heart, it's going to be a little underwhelming. So yeah, I'm a little ugh about Zod. Will Michael Shannon do a good job in the role? Hell yes. Will it be good for the potential franchise in the long run? I'm not going to be placing any bets. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightWing Posted April 10, 2011 Report Share Posted April 10, 2011 I think that's a little pessimistic. Like you said, they could go with Brainiac, Darkseid, or Doomsday (preferably with Lex involved in a subplot as well). Or, hey, they could always create a new villain. I doubt that this'll get more than two or three sequels max anyway, so it shouldn't be a problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
You Know Who Posted April 10, 2011 Report Share Posted April 10, 2011 I'd be fine with him for just being the main villain of the first film then being banished to the Phantom Zone at the end, rather than having a presence throughout the whole franchise. Do y'all think he should be assisted by Ursa and Non, or just be on his own against Superman? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slothian Posted April 10, 2011 Report Share Posted April 10, 2011 Yeah. Ushering in a new Superman franchise for the 21st century by bringing back the big villain of the 1980s. My problem isn't even just that. It's also that they have nothing to ramp up to after Zod. After Zod, the only other villains that can compare are possibly Brainiac, Doomsday, and Darkseid so it kinda ruins the sequel potential. Look at the original. You have Zod in the second and then third, the villain is a computer and evil Superman, and the fourth, the villain is Nuclear Man who is basically an evil Superman. If you start out with someone like Metallo or Parasite, then building up to Zod in the second film is a step forward. You move from Zod, someone who is on the same level as Superman, to Metallo, then even with the kryptonite heart, it's going to be a little underwhelming. So yeah, I'm a little ugh about Zod. Will Michael Shannon do a good job in the role? Hell yes. Will it be good for the potential franchise in the long run? I'm not going to be placing any bets. The way I see it, this could very much be like how Batman Begins handled Ra's - ie/ by tying him into the origin story. Get Zod over & done with, and Krypton as a whole, in the first film and it leaves Supes free to deal with either Earth-based villains (Metallo, Parasite) or the New Gods/Apokalips for the sequel. It's been a while since I've watched Supes I & II, but I'd probably have preferred it if the Zod storyline was resolved in the first film and Luthor was the main antagonist in the second film. Either way, Zod being the primary villain is fine with me. It isn't like he has to be the threat he was in the original film - he represents a past that Kal-El is unfamilliar with, but technically isn't any stronger than Superman. Luthor is a mental foil to Superman, Parasite could sap him with a single touch, metallo is imbued with Kryptonite and Bizarro's a danger to others. I think Supes' rogues gallery is more durable than you think without resorting to Doomsday/Darkseid/Brainiac (although I don't have a problem with seeing any of them). As long as the new series isn't all about Luthor, then it will be an improvement on the original franchise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackFetch Posted April 11, 2011 Author Report Share Posted April 11, 2011 I want to see villains that have never been in a movie. Having Zod and his cronies in it is a cop out because Superman II is loved by so many fans so there is a built in fan base. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Molly Posted April 11, 2011 Report Share Posted April 11, 2011 Zod could just be set up for the sequel. Zod could be on Krypton with Jor-El, sort of thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightWing Posted April 11, 2011 Report Share Posted April 11, 2011 Zod could just be set up for the sequel. Zod could be on Krypton with Jor-El, sort of thing. I think if that were the case, there wouldn't be a press release about him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Molly Posted April 11, 2011 Report Share Posted April 11, 2011 Zod could just be set up for the sequel. Zod could be on Krypton with Jor-El, sort of thing. I think if that were the case, there wouldn't be a press release about him. A man can dream, can't he? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackFetch Posted April 13, 2011 Author Report Share Posted April 13, 2011 Diane Lane: "I read the script under lock and key... I was locked in a room with the script and was only allowed three hours with it. I nailed it into my memory. I'm really excited. I'm really not allowed to talk much about it, I think, but it does cover the entire range of years, from infancy on." http://www.eonline.com/uberblog/marc_malkin/b236181_superman_locks_diane_lane_in_room_three.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightWing Posted April 13, 2011 Report Share Posted April 13, 2011 Put me in the "support" category for that. I think the origin needs to be touched upon, considering the 34-year gap between this movie and the last major Superman origin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Venneh Posted April 13, 2011 Report Share Posted April 13, 2011 Just don't make it Smallville the Movie, I'll be happy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delete Posted April 16, 2011 Report Share Posted April 16, 2011 http://www.bleedingcool.com/2011/04/16/is-this-the-officially-registered-plot-premise-for-the-man-of-steel/ The plot premise A young reporter named Clark Kent roams the world covering various news stories. When he is compelled to use his secret powers to intervene in a crisis in West Africa, he returns to Smallville to learn more about his origins and the hero he was born to be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dc20willsave Posted April 28, 2011 Report Share Posted April 28, 2011 German actress Antje Traue has been cast as Faora. The article raises an interesting idea of using the 90's General Zod who was a military dictator rather than a rogue Kryptonian. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackFetch Posted May 31, 2011 Author Report Share Posted May 31, 2011 Bizarre legal battle could result in TWO competing Superman pics By the time Man of Steel comes out in 2012, it will be six years since the last Superman movie. But thanks to a bizarre legal battle, there could be TWO Superman projects up and running by 2013. Man of Steel, directed by Zack Snyder and produced by Christopher Nolan, is scheduled to come out in December 2012. But less than a year after that, according to Variety, certain rights pertaining to the character will revert back to the families of Superman's original creators, Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster. Notice we said "certain rights." Not everything will belong to Siegel and Shuster's heirs. That's because, the way this has played out legally, everything that the pair invented for Superman before they began working for DC Comics will be owned by their families. Everything they came up with for the Superman mythology after DC starting paying them will still belong to the comics giant (which is owned by Warner Bros. Pictures). As a result, the Siegel and Shuster estates will own the rights to Superman's costume, as well as his ability to "leap tall buildings in a single bound." Other iconic aspects, like his ability to fly and most of his rogues' gallery, including arch-nemesis Lex Luthor, came into being under the DC Comics umbrella and therefore belong to the company. Now, this is where the Variety article gets deep into the legal weeds, but the bottom line is that theoretically, starting in 2013, the families and Warner Bros./DC could both proceed with their own Superman movies. However, a Siegel/Shuster movie would essentially be based around elements created in 1938, before they began working for DC, while a Warner Bros. movie would be based on what the article calls the "modern Superman." A 1938 movie could not show Superman flying, while a "modern Superman" film would not have access to the classic costume. So can't Warner Bros./DC cut the families a nice fat check and get everyone on board together? That's not so easy either. The lawyer for the Siegels and Shusters, Marc Toberoff, is aggressively pursuing an appeal to establish who owns what, while WB/DC is suing him, claiming that he has destroyed the relationship between the company and the families (the dealings between Warner Bros. and Toberoff have the makings of a legal thriller on their own, according to a separate article at the Hollywood Reporter). So unless this gets sorted out somehow, Man of Steel could be the last "true" Superman movie we ever see. Sequels may or may not be able to feature Kal-El in his trademark costume, while a separate set of movies could introduce a costumed Superman in 1938, unable to fly, battling whatever criminals Siegel and Shuster created before DC starting cutting their paychecks. http://blastr.com/2011/05/could-there-be-competing.php Lawyers make everything worse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stavros Posted May 31, 2011 Report Share Posted May 31, 2011 It'll never happen. If it does I'll be interested to see the results, but it'll never happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.