'Man of Steel' preview footage so good it brought tears to the eyes of fans
Michael Santo
July 15, 2012

"Man of Steel" footage presented Saturday in Hall H at the Warner Bros. presentation was so good it brought tears to the eyes of at least one fan, according to a report. "Man of Steel" is the second reboot of the Superman franchise; 2006's "Superman Returns" was the first.

Director Zack Snyder and star Henry Cavill were in attendance for the "screening." According to the report, one fan was "reduced to a blubbering mess as he said how much he loved it [the footage]. Another said, “Any doubt I had was gone with that trailer."

The footage showed Clark Kent both as a boy and as an adult, with Cavill wearing the iconic Superman costume. It also gave fans glimpses of co-stars Amy Adams (Lois Lane) and Russell Crowe (Superman's Krytonian father, Jor-El).

Don't expect a reprise of John Williams original score. Snyder said, “We had to act as if no film has been made. When we approached it, we had to say 'this is Superman for the first time,'. And you can’t say, ‘Oh, now let’s steal a little music.’ So yes, it’s awesome music but Hans [Zimmer] is going to do something awesome.”

Considering that Christopher Nolan co-wrote the story with David S. Goyer and is one of the producers of the film, the involvement of his composer of choice, Hans Zimmer, is no surprise.

Snyder said that the new film less makes Superman of a "big blue Boy Scout." It's something that the hero has been derisively called by villains in the comics, too.

"The big challenge, of course, is if you can make people feel, 'What would you do it you were Superman? How would you feel?' How to make it personal, I think that's the thing we went after."

The Superman trailer will be shown before "The Dark Knight Rises" when it premieres this coming Friday, which brought a comparison from Snyder, who when asked who would win between Batman and Superman said, "I love Batman. He is awesome — like, literally awesome — but, really?"

http://www.examiner.com/article/man-of-s...he-eyes-of-fans

The emotions talked about above probably had a lot to do with the music. Where have I heard this score before? Something about John Williams???


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AhBBWBa_-5M

Story by:
Christopher Nolan
David S. Goyer

Directed by Zack Snyder


Talk about a stacked cast...

Henry Cavill
Russell Crowe
Amy Adams
Kevin Costner
Diane Lane
Michael Shannon
Christopher Meloni
Laurence Fishburne


http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0770828/

I hope this turns out good.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F8q3ZFCMhpY

The above trailer is the Kevin Costner teaser. He plays Superman's earth father. Below is the Russell Crowe version. He plays Jor-El.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eWP4LFJdx2E

You know I hope this is pretty good. The cast is great, I'm always in the mood for a good Superman movie, my only concern is Snyder himself. I just don't like his movies, but hey who knows maybe he'll surprise me?

I don't want my cynicism rewarded.

EDIT - If it's any consolation, the cinematography looks gorgeous, Malick-esque almost.

maybe with nolan as producer he may make the movie better. but, yea with superman i am iffy with it because i really dont care for superman (batman is my fav superhero). the first two christopher reeves were good...every movie after that was either 'eh' or terrible. the movie looks kind of dark which is always positive.

I don't know about anyone else but I really liked Superman Returns. A lot of people didn't. But what did it for me was the obvious Christ analogy in the film.

Snyder hasn't done many movies but I won't write him off. I liked 300 a lot. The Watchmen was interesting. But even Emily Browning couldn't save Suckerpunch. Dawn of the Dead was mediocre.

As for this one, Snyder has said he approached it like there has never been another Superman movie. So he's really starting fresh. And, as one article said, and the trailers imply, Clark/Superman being good isn't a "done deal." Instead of being inherently good, he has to make the choice. It's my understanding that he's also portrayed as a more rough and tumble Superman. Somebody who can beat your head in. Less polished, if that makes any sense.

My problem with SUPERMAN RETURNS (which had good intentions) was that it might've made the mistake of trying to explore Superman's full pathos. You can do that with Batman because that's part of his gimmick and it's endlessly fascinating, what with his rogues gallery representing slices of his psychology. (Not to mention I didn't think RETURNS had an interesting story quite honestly.)

Superman...I think is much more a symbolic myth, which has attracted most filmmakers who've tackled him. Created by two Jewish cartoonists, his origin was heavily inspired by Moses, and well he was born in 1938 and well in historical context it adds even more fascinating value. (Worth checking out online is a cartoon Siegel/Shuster did for I think Life magazine where Superman swooped in and captured both Hitler and Mussolini and presented them to the League of Naions for trial. This not-so-subtle propaganda got Superman banned in Nazi Germany.)

I like to think that if Batman broods naturally, Superman seems to hold it on his sleeve. If Batman is a night creature who shys away from the public, Superman is all public and daylight, no mask. Superman can get away with fighting the ridiculous giant monsters/aliens while it never seems right Batman doing it. The same with those Superman mythos elements like Supergirl, Krypto the Super Dog, the bottled city of Kandor, all those different types of Kryptonite, etc. Ridiculous sure, but it fits a fairy tale figure like Superman like a glove.

I disagree with the contant complaint that Superman is "boring," it's just you have to present him a good, captivating, entertaining story and context. If you ask me, I really loved what Grant Morrison did with his All-Star Superman comics from recent years. Definately worth reading.

I even liked the cartoon from the 1990s that were made by the same people behind BATMAN: THE ANIMATED SERIES. They actually produced a Superman that was truely highly entertaining and exploited his mythos.

Well, from the looks of it, we may just get an even fuller exploration of Superman's pathos in Man of Steel. Which is fine with me if it is done right.

I think what WB should worry about with MAN OF STEEL isn't the movie, but the damn nerds. So many of them online are so bitchy about how TDKR should be more "light" like AVENGERS or whatever nonsense they're believing at the moment, those reactionary little morons.

I mean if that attitude carries to a Nolan-produced Superman movie next summer, I can believe them pre-emptively not giving it a chance at all and really get themselves carried away with trivial complaints when missing the big picture.

Watched both MOS trailers, and honestly I think I prefer the one with the narration by Jor-El, using lines that I'm pretty certain were taken verbatim from Morrison's ALL-STAR SUPERMAN and delivered with chilling power by Crowe.

EDIT - I was right.

That's true, Ronnie. These Comic-Con type geeks can make or break a movie a year before it's released. They have entirely too much say.

Oh and Superman 75 years ago today made his first appearance in Action Comics #1 on April 18, 1938. (Lois Lane also made her debut in that issue.)

Hopefully MAN OF STEEL is the perfect birthday present.

Never really have been a superman fan, but I have started reading the new 52 comics of it. I did like the first two superman movies with Christopher Reeve. I am looking forward to Man of Steel, and hope that it will be great.

Another question is, are they going to try and make the justice league movie. If they do, I honestly can't see it being good.

Why not?

Its not so much that but that they think they matter more than they really do. Its like a political campaign. You want to capture independent, centrist swing voters but also don't want to lose your party "base." For these sorts of movies, its general moviegoers who might or might not have ever read a single comic book while the base are the hardcore fans who you can depend on to go see (unless they're pissed off.) You need both groups.

Or worse, they aren't open to the idea of diversity in a genre. I mean look at westerns. John Ford made many good ones. So did Sergio Leone of a different generation with differnet filmatic standards and political concerns. Genres thrive on diversity of talent, stagnation of ideas and filmatics leads to genres dying. Like the western.

Christopher Nolan and Marvel can't produce every single Comic Book/Superhero/Fantasy/Sci-Fi property out there. And not every single one of them can be a universal audience friendly summer blockbuster. Superman is not Batman, X-Men is not Batman, Fantatsic four is not X-Men, and so forth. (A reason if you ask me why GREEN LANTERN flopped a few years back: It basically ripped off BATMAN BEGINS and IRON MAN, but added nothing to the filmatic narrative for itself.)

Consider last year. THE AVENGERS and THE DARK KNIGHT RISES were both in my book great summer blockbuster spectacles. Both different takes on what is a "universal-friendly" superhero movie. Whedon's movie was fueled by humor and paying off a larger than life universal "cross-over" event. Nolan's movie was run by psychology and down to Earth yet still fantastical angle. Both produced to sell toys and lunchboxes.

Then we also got DREDD, based off the Judge Dredd comics from the U.K. Those filmmakers understood that a big screen Dredd film can only work if its incredibly over the top R-rated violent. Really a throwback to the 1980s action film. They also knew that the character himself is the least interesting, most bland element The "stars" are the metropolitan environment of this bleak dystopic future, and the fantastical adversaries and obstacles (usually satirical) for Dredd to prevail over. He exists simply to kick ass, nothing more. That movie wasn't made to sell lunchboxes. Very good movie.

And to give Nolan/WB and Marvel credit, they understand the stagnation concern. That's why they're planning to expand themselves to untapped territories if you will. WB is rumored to finally get ready to produce a Wonder Woman movie, which I actually think can absolutely work. (It can totally backfire as well, but that's the same concern for any property adaptation.) Marvel is planning to do Guardians of the Galaxy and Black Panther and Dr. Strange and Ant-Man and Ms. Marvel and so forth.

Running Time: 2 hours 23 minutes

http://www.comicbookmovie.com/superman_movies/news/?a=79586

Able to leap tall buildings with a single bound.......only George Reeves will be Superman in my mind. I had a mini-crush on Lois Lane.

Really starting to get into the mood for this movie...

http://glyphcreator.manofsteel.com/

Snyder directed this.