Superman Returns Singer Interview: Editing Returns & Sequel

Showtime

Your Friend In Time
Joined
May 10, 2005
Messages
41,476
Reaction score
24
Points
58
http://www.mediablvd.com/magazine/Magazine-Home/MBMag_20060420237.html

By Christina Radish
Courtesy of Media Blvd.



MediaBlvd. Magazine> Can you talk about the next Superman film? Do you have a title or anything?
Bryan Singer> No, I have nothing. I only have ideas.


MB> Can you share any of those?
BS> I can’t.


MB> Just a little hint?
BS> Just that I know that there were certain things that were established in Superman Returns, like certain aspects of the characters, the relationships of the characters, certain reveals, and a great sense of unresolve in the romantic dilemma that Superman faces. And, now that the character is established, I’d like to take an opportunity to bring in, perhaps, a more threatening, foreboding, terrible element to the story.


MB> Someone from Krypton perhaps?
BS> Perhaps.


MB> Is it hard to walk the line between pleasing the fans of the old Superman and pleasing the new fans?

BS> I would probably take the characters, as they are established now, in Superman Returns and move from there. Having things that are referential and nostalgic are very special and very important to those of us who grew up with the Richard Donner film, as well as George Reeves’ interpretation of it, and the comic book. There will always be a place in my heart for that. But, this will be the starting place. Like with the first X-Men, I had to find a place to begin to educate people who weren’t familiar with that universe. Here, there’s a whole generation not familiar with Superman, and there was a lot of value in having him return to a version of the Donner universe, but yet still continue it forward. It’s always a delicate balance, particularly with a character this steeped in history and this ubiquitous. He means something to so many people, all over the world.


MB> Why did you end up cutting out the great James Karen?
BS> Because, in the final moments, I looked at those sequences, as they were in the picture, between he and Martha Kent and, although they were a wonderful concept -- the notion that Martha Kent, Superman’s mother, had moved on, like Lois Lane. It was just too much happening on the Kent farm, and I wasn’t getting to the Daily Planet fast enough for my taste. And so, what I ended up doing, in the final weeks before the opening, was removing three key scenes that existed on the farm between Martha Kent, Clark and, ultimately, James Karen, and adding that scene that’s in the movie and doing a different transition than I had planned. Originally, I was going to transition from a baseball to the Daily Planet and just cut to the city.


MB> Were you surprised at the grief you picked up over the “Truth and justice” line that Clark says in the film?
BS> No, not at all. Particularly now, because we’re at war and the United States is under a lot of scrutiny, people said, “Oh, wow, you had him say ‘Truth and justice,’ but you didn’t have him say ‘The American way.’” I had him say the lead in, so I felt that was very patriotic. I’m fiercely patriotic. And, I also have to remind people that, even in 1978, when Superman said, “I’m here to fight for truth, justice and the American way,” they did make humor of it. Lois said, “You’re going to end up fighting every politician in Washington,” and he said, “You don’t really mean that, Lois.” I think he’s a global superhero. We’ve opened the picture in various countries and it’s been extraordinary. If you just say, “Truth, justice and the American way,” it’s going to sound strange to people in other parts of the world.


MB> How is the film being received overseas?
BS> It’s playing huge, unexpectedly. We’ve only opened in 65% of our territories outside of the United States, and we’ve already crossed the $100 million mark. We had one of the largest openings in China. It’s a phenomenon in countries in Europe and Asia. We did not expect that, and that’s been exciting. It broke records and made history with $19,000 at the IMAX theater in China, in one day. They ran it around the clock.


MB> Why do you think the characters resonate so well outside of the United States, particularly in China?
BS> Because Superman is the first super hero and he is the ultimate immigrant and because he’s, ultimately, a really cool character with great powers, who flies and is very virtuous, and he’s been around for 70 years. Something about his iconography has grown. I’d like to say there’s some Judeo-Christian allegory that also is in play, but that wouldn’t explain the success in Asia, as much as it has in Europe. He’s just gotten more famous, over the years.


MB> With all of these super hero characters, like Spider-Man and Batman, back in films at the same time, is there any chance that their worlds might collide?
BS> Eventually, but not now. Not yet. You’re not ready to do that yet. The worlds are so distinct and so different. Sam Raimi has created such a distinct world with Spider-Man, Chris Nolan has re-created such a distinct world with Batman, and we tried to do the same here with Superman, and also, with X-Men. Right now, I wouldn’t want to mush those universes together. I think you’d dilute them.


MB> Were you told to cut the scene where Clark Kent returns to his home world of Krypton?
BS> I was never forced to cut out anything. Everything I cut and added was my own choice, in terms of editing. I’m afforded that kind of freedom now, for better or worse. I had the sequence where Clark returns to the shattered remains of his home world. There were some symbolic moments in it. It’s a very majestic sequence that somehow, in stepping back from it and seeing it in the context of the whole film, as wonderful and neat as it was, it felt like it belonged in some kind of 3-D IMAX incarnation of the movie. I didn’t feel that it served the central story and thrust of the movie that you saw, so I cut it, very late in the game. I just pulled it out.


MB> Will it be on the DVD?
BS> I don’t know if I want to put that on the DVD. I may want to try to re-release the film, possibly in IMAX, in a year, and maybe have them do a more elaborate 3-D process on other aspects that they didn’t have time to make 3-D, and then 3-D that sequence as well. That would be a personal fantasy. Whether the numbers make sense or not, we’ll see. It’s very expensive to create those IMAX prints. They’re complicated. But, if we can pull it off, what I would do is create more 3-D material and add that sequence. If you saw the sequence, it’s just crying out to be 3-D IMAX. It’s got fragments of planets and things and a crystal ship and Brandon Routh in a different outfit. Also, it wasn’t the first way I wanted to show Superman, either. I stepped back from it and thought it was troublesome enough to have him be so weak and to fall into his mother’s arms, but for us to see him in this way first was weakening to me and I didn’t want to do that. I wanted to hold you out there, have you get to know Clark, and then have that happen.


MB> It seems like you made a lot of last minute changes to the film.
BS> Very often, I do make radical changes. I believe a film is written three times, once on the page, once on the set, and a third time in the editing room. This film, frankly, was very much together, in the cutting room. I spent about the last three months of shooting, every night, going into the cutting room, and I had a pretty solid version of it. It was just this beginning part of it, with the return to Krypton and too much at the farm. And, there was a subplot that I removed, which was very small, throughout the rest of the picture. But, the picture was moving pretty well. I had a two hour and 45 minute version that I screened for a bunch of friends and family, and that was when I stepped back and said, “This movie is front heavy.”


MB> What was that subplot?
BS> The subplot was that Lex Luthor was somehow responsible for Superman leaving the Earth, and it involved Kal Penn’s character a lot more. It broke my heart to cut it because Kal Penn was great, and I had to remove some elements of Kal. These were tiny pieces, but once you removed them all, it kept the story cleaner. There was a different discovery on the farm. And, originally, he didn’t read the article in the Daily Planet about why the world doesn’t need Superman. Originally, he read it in the basement. So, I think that scene might be on the DVD.


MB> Will you have time to make another film before the Superman sequel, or is your entire focus on that now?
BS> I’m going to try to make a small film before that. I did the TV series House. Not only did I direct the pilot for House, but I’m an executive producer on it and I directed the first episode, to break in the L.A. crew. House was not a full feature, but it was like a small feature undertaking.


MB> Would you like to return to TV at all?
BS> Yeah, I absolutely would love to. I might make a deal to develop some television, and I’d like to go back and direct some House episodes.



MB> And idea when Superman 2 might come out?
BS> It will be released sometime in 2009.


MB> What did Richard Donner and Tom Mankiewicz think of Superman Returns?
BS> They were very moved, and felt like the torch had been past.
 
This just proves Singer has an ego the size of the Universe and he deeply believes the ****ty concept and ideas he has for Superman.

I guess if we want a real Superman movie, we'll have to wait another 20 years, fellas.

Sadly.
 
Is this idiot still lobbying to keep his job? I wisht these *****ebags would stop asking him about sequels so we wouldn't have to hear anymore of his bull****. He's done for ****s sake move on.
 
What do you mean? He's saying his stuff. I don't see any ego trip there.

Nice interview.
 
ChrisBaleBatman said:
What do you mean? He's saying his stuff. I don't see any ego trip there.

Nice interview.

Some people will twist words just to get out the obligatory

'Singer is an idiot...needs psychiatric help...massive ego....killed Superman...has no respect for the fans....etc' rants. It's sad and predictable what this place has turned into.
 
Singer is an arrogant idiot.

Poor man,he still thinks he will direct the sequel,LOL.
 
Showtime029 said:

MB> Were you told to cut the scene where Clark Kent returns to his home world of Krypton?
BS> I was never forced to cut out anything. Everything I cut and added was my own choice, in terms of editing. I’m afforded that kind of freedom now, for better or worse. I had the sequence where Clark returns to the shattered remains of his home world. There were some symbolic moments in it. It’s a very majestic sequence that somehow, in stepping back from it and seeing it in the context of the whole film, as wonderful and neat as it was, it felt like it belonged in some kind of 3-D IMAX incarnation of the movie. I didn’t feel that it served the central story and thrust of the movie that you saw, so I cut it, very late in the game. I just pulled it out.


MB> Will it be on the DVD?
BS> I don’t know if I want to put that on the DVD. I may want to try to re-release the film, possibly in IMAX, in a year, and maybe have them do a more elaborate 3-D process on other aspects that they didn’t have time to make 3-D, and then 3-D that sequence as well. That would be a personal fantasy. Whether the numbers make sense or not, we’ll see. It’s very expensive to create those IMAX prints. They’re complicated. But, if we can pull it off, what I would do is create more 3-D material and add that sequence. If you saw the sequence, it’s just crying out to be 3-D IMAX. It’s got fragments of planets and things and a crystal ship and Brandon Routh in a different outfit. Also, it wasn’t the first way I wanted to show Superman, either. I stepped back from it and thought it was troublesome enough to have him be so weak and to fall into his mother’s arms, but for us to see him in this way first was weakening to me and I didn’t want to do that. I wanted to hold you out there, have you get to know Clark, and then have that happen.

What a dumbass. :down

Atleast, the movie was awesome.
 
Guys, you've gotta point em out to me. I read the article, where does he come off like an ass?

As for sequel talk......what do you expect? For him to fire himself? WB hasn't fired him so.......he's still in the chair till then.
 
I didnt think he sounded arrogant at all, were are you people getting this from?
 
Seriously. People here are getting pretty cloudy when it comes to anything regarding Singer.

SR wasn't the return of Superman that we were all expecting, and I'm sure that garners a bit of distaste, but at least learn to respond when it's warranted. This interview gave no such hint of arrogance at all.
 
E-Mack said:
Seriously. People here are getting pretty cloudy when it comes to anything regarding Singer.

SR wasn't the return of Superman that we were all expecting, and I'm sure that garners a bit of distaste, but at least learn to respond when it's warranted. This interview gave no such hint of arrogance at all.

Totally agree with you, i hate arrogant people, and whether i liked the movie or not i would say Singer was arrogant if he appeared that way to me, but he never has.

And is that Rosario Dawson in your avatar?
 
ChrisBaleBatman said:
Guys, you've gotta point em out to me. I read the article, where does he come off like an ass?
Well, he's not an "ass," but the logic behind the decisions he makes is questionable. This whole part really bugged me...

MB> Is it hard to walk the line between pleasing the fans of the old Superman and pleasing the new fans?

BS>I would probably take the characters, as they are established now, in Superman Returns and move from there. Having things that are referential and nostalgic are very special and very important to those of us who grew up with the Richard Donner film, as well as George Reeves’ interpretation of it, and the comic book. There will always be a place in my heart for that. But, this will be the starting place. Like with the first X-Men, I had to find a place to begin to educate people who weren't familiar with that universe. Here, there's a whole generation not familiar with Superman, and there was a lot of value in having him return to a version of the Donner universe, but yet still continue it forward. It's always a delicate balance, particularly with a character this steeped in history and this ubiquitous. He means something to so many people, all over the world.
See the irony? The idiotic assumptions? The reasoning behind what would turn out to be a very BAD decision, not to mention the potential for getting worse?

I'm SO done with Singer. Whoda thunk such a creative director would slip so far into derivative mediocrity? He really does underestimate his audience FAR too much.
 
check out the superman returns seqeul FAQ thread...link is in my sig
 
boywonder13 said:
check out the superman returns seqeul FAQ thread...link is in my sig

It all sounds good except for Zod, i dont want him in any sequel.
 
BS> I was never forced to cut out anything. Everything I cut and added was my own choice, in terms of editing. I’m afforded that kind of freedom now, for better or worse. I had the sequence where Clark RETURNS to the shattered remains of his home world. There were some symbolic moments in it. It’s a very majestic sequence that somehow, in stepping back from it and seeing it in the context of the whole film, as wonderful and neat as it was, it felt like it belonged in some kind of 3-D IMAX incarnation of the movie. I didn’t feel that it served the central story and thrust of the movie that you saw, so I cut it, very late in the game. I just pulled it out.

This is not a valid explanation. Superman RETURNS. That scene (and some of the others he said he cut) would've benefitted the film. Not only Superman Returned to his home planet (or it's remains) but it would've been a great build up for his Earth return. Donner's pacing in STM is brilliant. He slowly builds up the story before the big bang with Superman's first appearance.

As for Singer's pacing and editing, it sucks. It gives me the impression he rushed post-production.
 
^I agree, if I had one major complaint about the film, it's the cutting of the return to Krypton scenes and the cutting of the Smallville scenes. He needed more downtime with Martha, and to me, it wouldn't have been redundant to have her with Ben either.

Singer didn't come off like an ass in that interview, he's just confident in his abilities. There's a difference.
 
^^ I'll second that notion. You couldnt really care that Superman was "returning" if you never saw him leave or saw him gone. He keeps stating that we have some sort of empathy for these characters now, but we really dont. We know them now for the film, but one of the biggest complaints you hear is that it was hard to care about the characters b/c Singer never took the time to build that up, he assumed we would already care from having scene Superman and Superman II.

As for Singer, compared to his other Newsarama and AICN interviews, this one is pretty tame. At least here he's not blaming this issues on the marketing department or the fact that POTC2 was in theaters. I did get a laugh out of his take on the Int'l BO however. Calling it a "phenomenon" is a bit much, the film has played well in smaller territories but in the "big money" foreign markets like the UK it's been a disappointment. As for China, is he really going to get excited about $19 grand at an IMAX theater?
 
Showtime029 said:
MB> Just a little hint?
BS> Just that I know that there were certain things that were established in Superman Returns, like certain aspects of the characters, the relationships of the characters, certain reveals, and a great sense of unresolve in the romantic dilemma that Superman faces. And, now that the character is established, I’d like to take an opportunity to bring in, perhaps, a more threatening, foreboding, terrible element to the story.

Lol. I sat through 2 hours and 40 minutes of sobbing over lois for nothing. Will it be Zod again?:)



MB> Someone from Krypton perhaps?
BS> Perhaps.

Zod.:)

MB> Is it hard to walk the line between pleasing the fans of the old Superman and pleasing the new fans?

BS> I would probably take the characters, as they are established now, in Superman Returns and move from there. Having things that are referential and nostalgic are very special and very important to those of us who grew up with the Richard Donner film, as well as George Reeves’ interpretation of it, and the comic book. There will always be a place in my heart for that. But, this will be the starting place. Like with the first X-Men, I had to find a place to begin to educate people who weren’t familiar with that universe. Here, there’s a whole generation not familiar with Superman, and there was a lot of value in having him return to a version of the Donner universe, but yet still continue it forward. It’s always a delicate balance, particularly with a character this steeped in history and this ubiquitous. He means something to so many people, all over the world.

Please don't move from here. Many changes are needed before you start moving anywhere. First cut this silly umbilical cord you have connected yourself to donner with and do your own thing. X-men wasn't a vague sequel! If it's some kind of origin story it's of course going to be the one to lay the foundation. You assume we already had a collective conscious of the character set up and somehow thought that conscious was dominated by donner's version, and that we wanted to see donner's wacky game show host lex or all this super-stalker sillyness that's not even from anybody's conscious, man... get in touch with Paul Dini, quick. :(

How can you say smallville being popular already covers the basics of an origin and then say there's a whole generation unfamiliar with superman? I do not understand this. The only value in returning to donner's universe is you got to use old brando footage in your movie for a minute. Which was cool, but it's limiting. Brando's dead. Which interestingly you have spacey allude to in that scene... I guess that's why you had the crystals flung into space with new krypton. no more jor el because there's no more brando.



MB> Why did you end up cutting out the great James Karen?
BS> Because, in the final moments, I looked at those sequences, as they were in the picture, between he and Martha Kent and, although they were a wonderful concept -- the notion that Martha Kent, Superman’s mother, had moved on, like Lois Lane. It was just too much happening on the Kent farm, and I wasn’t getting to the Daily Planet fast enough for my taste. And so, what I ended up doing, in the final weeks before the opening, was removing three key scenes that existed on the farm between Martha Kent, Clark and, ultimately, James Karen, and adding that scene that’s in the movie and doing a different transition than I had planned. Originally, I was going to transition from a baseball to the Daily Planet and just cut to the city.

Yeah it's obvious a lot was cut. and there are like five establishing shots of the farm in about the time of a minute. There must have been a lot going on there for a while. I hope we see it some day, and not in a re-release. *cough(dvd)cough*


MB> Were you surprised at the grief you picked up over the “Truth and justice” line that Clark says in the film?
BS> No, not at all. Particularly now, because we’re at war and the United States is under a lot of scrutiny, people said, “Oh, wow, you had him say ‘Truth and justice,’ but you didn’t have him say ‘The American way.’” I had him say the lead in, so I felt that was very patriotic. I’m fiercely patriotic. And, I also have to remind people that, even in 1978, when Superman said, “I’m here to fight for truth, justice and the American way,” they did make humor of it. Lois said, “You’re going to end up fighting every politician in Washington,” and he said, “You don’t really mean that, Lois.” I think he’s a global superhero. We’ve opened the picture in various countries and it’s been extraordinary. If you just say, “Truth, justice and the American way,” it’s going to sound strange to people in other parts of the world.

So what. I don't think you're that patriotic as Donner... The joke was directed at politicians not superman standing for his american values. Your joke is a way of censoring him to make him more internationally marketable. that's not the american way... oh well...


MB> Were you told to cut the scene where Clark Kent returns to his home world of Krypton?
BS> I was never forced to cut out anything. Everything I cut and added was my own choice, in terms of editing. I’m afforded that kind of freedom now, for better or worse. I had the sequence where Clark returns to the shattered remains of his home world. There were some symbolic moments in it. It’s a very majestic sequence that somehow, in stepping back from it and seeing it in the context of the whole film, as wonderful and neat as it was, it felt like it belonged in some kind of 3-D IMAX incarnation of the movie. I didn’t feel that it served the central story and thrust of the movie that you saw, so I cut it, very late in the game. I just pulled it out.

You've got to be kidding me.



MB> Will it be on the DVD?
BS> I don’t know if I want to put that on the DVD. I may want to try to re-release the film, possibly in IMAX, in a year, and maybe have them do a more elaborate 3-D process on other aspects that they didn’t have time to make 3-D, and then 3-D that sequence as well. That would be a personal fantasy. Whether the numbers make sense or not, we’ll see. It’s very expensive to create those IMAX prints. They’re complicated. But, if we can pull it off, what I would do is create more 3-D material and add that sequence. If you saw the sequence, it’s just crying out to be 3-D IMAX. It’s got fragments of planets and things and a crystal ship and Brandon Routh in a different outfit. Also, it wasn’t the first way I wanted to show Superman, either. I stepped back from it and thought it was troublesome enough to have him be so weak and to fall into his mother’s arms, but for us to see him in this way first was weakening to me and I didn’t want to do that. I wanted to hold you out there, have you get to know Clark, and then have that happen.

Please, just put it on dvd.


MB> It seems like you made a lot of last minute changes to the film.
BS> Very often, I do make radical changes. I believe a film is written three times, once on the page, once on the set, and a third time in the editing room. This film, frankly, was very much together, in the cutting room. I spent about the last three months of shooting, every night, going into the cutting room, and I had a pretty solid version of it. It was just this beginning part of it, with the return to Krypton and too much at the farm. And, there was a subplot that I removed, which was very small, throughout the rest of the picture. But, the picture was moving pretty well. I had a two hour and 45 minute version that I screened for a bunch of friends and family, and that was when I stepped back and said, “This movie is front heavy.”

Still is. Get people who aren't family and friends to test screen for the next one.


MB> What was that subplot?
BS> The subplot was that Lex Luthor was somehow responsible for Superman leaving the Earth, and it involved Kal Penn’s character a lot more. It broke my heart to cut it because Kal Penn was great, and I had to remove some elements of Kal. These were tiny pieces, but once you removed them all, it kept the story cleaner. There was a different discovery on the farm. And, originally, he didn’t read the article in the Daily Planet about why the world doesn’t need Superman. Originally, he read it in the basement. So, I think that scene might be on the DVD.

No problem with that. All I'm wondering is if there was a scene about going to get some whitecastle. If so... THAT MUST BE PUT ON DVD OR YOU DIE.


MB> And idea when Superman 2 might come out?
BS> It will be released sometime in 2009.

:up::) Wrath of Zod?

MB> What did Richard Donner and Tom Mankiewicz think of Superman Returns?
BS> They were very moved, and felt like the torch had been past.

I think it was stolen.
:(
heh
 
But Singer is right, if you've read the entire screenplay. The beginning of the film is very front heavy, even in written form.

He could've pulled a Batman Begins and waited a full hour before Superman actually had an action sequence but the difference is between that film and this film is that Singer had more story to tell after Superman's plane rescue sequence than the rest of Batman Begins.

There is a way to include the Return of Krypton and the rest of the Smallville scenes but he would have to edit somethings at the very beginning and at the very end to make it work....and one of those things would have to be the opening credits that everyone loves so much.

But, the sign of a good director is the fact that, late in the game, he can look at his work that he feels is completely finished and make even more edits to make it work for the theatrical experience and that's all he did.

Superman Returns, more than likely, works better in its longer form and I'm sure he knows that. But that interview shows that he wanted to make it more accessable to the entire audience and to him that meant cutting down more.

His "returning" is still apart of the film but not as much as it would have been had the Return of Krypton and the rest of the Smallville scenes been included as well.

It makes sense what he says if you can get pass bias opinions about the film and the director.
 
AVEITWITHJAMON said:
I didnt think he sounded arrogant at all, were are you people getting this from?

See, I don't get this. Why exactly does everyone who feels that way about BS have to justify it to you? Obviously more people share their opinion than yours, so maybe YOU need to justify why you feel the need to "Defend" him everytime someone posts their opinion of the guy?

And as for the interview, there comes across a very "smug-like" quality to it. And keep alluding to Zod, BS. You'll "convert" EVERYONE with another weak re-tread.
 
Dogs,

It's opinion and all but he doesn't come off arrogant or smug. He's very confident in the decisions he's made. I agree partly with what he's done because I understand what he had to do to get the film ready for the cinema. I'm completely positive that he feels Superman Returns works better in its long form.

But, he had to do what was right for the theatrical experience. In script form, Superman Returns had a lot of story and theme that all gelled together as one at the end. He just focused on one or two more than the other.

With film such as this, telling alot of story, it does happen in the editing room alot...focusing on one aspect of the story more than the other knowing that you might hurt the film.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"