57 Comments

• 1. Jeff Martin replies at 24th July 2006, 11:29 am :

  I think the difference is that if “Superman Returns” was supposed to pick up where 2 left off, then seeing Zod in the 2nd and “4th” movies of the series doesn’t make sense. “Batman Begins,” however, was a reboot of the franchise that totally disregarded the other movies, and so a new treatment of the Joker is worthwhile. Personally, I’d like to see Zod, but that’s me playing devil’s advocate to the argument.

  My “hypocratic” moment isn’t one exactly…I just reviewed “Clerks II” and gave it four stars…and realized it’s the same rating I gave Oscar contenders. I keep a list of the reviews on my site’s sidebar, and it’s very strange to see Clerks up with the “artistic” movies. But the fact is, I really enjoyed Clerks II and stand by the rating. It’s the challenge of being a fanboy and a reviewer all in one.

• 2. Fender Strat replies at 24th July 2006, 11:30 am :

  Joker is a huge part of the Batman character and world. Batman Begins is a restart of the franchies. Joker will be a (hopefully) different kind of character then he was in Burtons Batman. Joker is also a huge part of the Batman persona and is possibly the greatest comic book villian ever created. Zod is not. It also doesnt help that The Joker was done terribly the first time around.

  Singers Superman movies are a continuation of Donners flicks. Thats what was disappointing about Superman REturns. It was a continuation but it felt like a complete rehash. Singer could easily choose from 3 or 4 other villians that would make for a completely new and fresh movie. Its time to give some of the other characters some attention. Doesnt matter if the mainstream knows them or not.

• 3. vijay replies at 24th July 2006, 11:34 am :

  Zod doesn’t come to mind when you say ‘Superman’. Joker does when you say ‘Batman’. Joker is somehow inherent to Batman in a way Zod is not.

  Maybe because even Superman comics and TV series’s haven’t had Zod as much as Joker has been featured in Batman.

• 4. hi replies at 24th July 2006, 11:51 am :

  I don’t want to see Zod cause he has been done so great already, and they are having Zod on Smallville right now. I know that is not a good reason. And like the other people here said this is the same continuity as the previous films.

  As for Joker i didn’t think Nicholsons version was that great. It’s just like hackmans Luthor i actually thought it pretty much sucked

• 5. Phil Gee replies at 24th July 2006, 12:06 pm :

  I think people just want to see a fresh villain for Superman. They are desperate to see Brainiac and Bizzaro and Doomsday. I’m guessing here but some think that there is nothing left to do with the Zod character, where as Joker has infinite possibilities.

  Sorry to hear about the ‘Lady in the Water’ controversy John. I’ve only just found out about it. If there’s one thing i’ve learned about opening a forum, it’s that you’ll get a lot of people shit slinging at ya (most of the time for just having an opion period). What’s the old saying:

  “You don’t have to be crazy to run a forum….but it helps”

• 6. Krazie835 replies at 24th July 2006, 12:08 pm :

  I think when the fans said they wanted Singer to stay true to the first two films I think they didn’t want him to rehash. I mean the kid did seem weird because why isn’t Lois shocked that she had Supermans child if he made her forget about their relationship at the end of part 2. Plus why isn’t that kid Cocky and constantly getting into trouble if he is Supermans kid why is he some weak creature?

  Batman Begins is a restart so they will reinvent the villians as well. The Joker wont be the same with Ledger he will be different than the Jack Nicholson version. If they bring Zod back in the sequel to Superman it would ZOD RETURNS and kind of silly I think plus it would be another rehashing of a character.

• 7. Varun replies at 24th July 2006, 12:10 pm :

  Jeff Martin hit the nail on the head with the reason for the inconsistency between Zod and Joker….

  Personally, I would like to see Zod again, but i would prefer Doomsday

  v

  Oh—- I dont count it has a hipocrisy, but I hate Lost In Translation and Garden State and everyone loves them

• 8. John replies at 24th July 2006, 12:16 pm :

  I think it’s a simple matter of Supes being a continuation, and Batman Begins being a reinvention. In Christopher Nolan’s Batman Joker has never appeared. Singer’s Superman is following Donner’s in which case Zod has appeared…at least thats how I see it.

• 9. nova replies at 24th July 2006, 12:19 pm :

  Fans want a lot, but at the end of the day, what we all want the most, is for the film not to suck.

  I loved Superman Returns. I felt it was very solid, but you gotta admit, it could’ve packed a little more punch. I would almost say that Superman Returns is Warner’s “Hulk”. Solid attempt, but give me SMASH.

  BTW, I wouldn’t be too quick to say that Superman Returns is a direct sequal to Superman 2. I think it’s a thematic successor, which means the look and the spirit are somewhat in line with what the earlier movies gave us, but you can clearly see where Singer took some liberties (esp. with the kid.)

• 10. Josh replies at 24th July 2006, 12:49 pm :

  Everybody on the planet is a natural born hypocrit. It comes with the ability to lie.

• 11. Nick Paramonte replies at 24th July 2006, 1:11 pm :

  That was Lester’s idea of the super-kiss not Donner’s. Well, Donner’s cut of Superman 2 is coming so I’m pretty sure it’s going to clear up some of the confusion that fans and general people have about 2.

• 12. ProbablyMe replies at 24th July 2006, 1:11 pm :

  A request:

  John: Could you PLEASE stop with the vainglorious pics of yourself in phony contemplative mode? Leave the finger-on-the-face shots to the pretentious authors who throw them on book-jackets.

  The discussion is on the relative merits of Superman for fucks sake, not problems with Hegelian dialectic.

  You have a great site. Just tone down the ego a bit, yeah?

• 13. Josh replies at 24th July 2006, 1:12 pm :

  To chime on the Zod vs. Joker.

  Having the Joker coming back and having Zod coming back IS THE EXACT SAME THING. Popularity doesn’t matter. People still know of Zod, though it may be due because of the movies and Smallville, but people still know of him.

  I have to admit, I saw this coming when I read the conclusion to John’s post. He shares his own hypocrisy about Star Wars and asks everyone to share their’s and what happens..they continue to bicker amongst themselves. It also should be known, that if you read John’s actual blog, that he was considering taking down the movie blog for this very reason a month or two ago.

  So, here is one of mine: “Tobey McGuire as Spiderman? That’ll never work!”"

• 14. John Campea replies at 24th July 2006, 1:18 pm :

  Hey ProbablyMe,

  When I do an editorial post, I put up a picture of myself… denoting it’s an editorial… not a news item. Same reason I put up the Audio Edition graphic when it’s an audio edition post.

  I’m not the only one who does that… and to me it makes sense. Sorry if you feel diferently.

• 15. Mr Stay Puft replies at 24th July 2006, 1:21 pm :

  At least post that picture of you with Keira Knightley sleeping at your feet.

• 16. John Campea replies at 24th July 2006, 1:28 pm :

  Hey Stay Puft,

  I actually had that one up earlier… but then Scarlett Johansson got jealous… and well… you know how it is.

  :P

• 17. miles replies at 24th July 2006, 1:30 pm :

  dear john:

  your new picture is totally gay.

  your buddy,

  miles

• 18. John Campea replies at 24th July 2006, 1:31 pm :

  Hey Miles,

  You only say that because I don’t let you suck my dick anymore.

  Your buddy.

  ~John

  :P

• 19. miles replies at 24th July 2006, 1:34 pm :

  also:

  i didn’t even read the other posts in here.

  fuck those idiots, thay are complaing for the wrong reason.

  the only valid reason to complain about said pic is because you look gay in it.

  remember gay is apparently hip these days, those jerks are probably just jealous because they don’t look very gay at all.

  or maybe they are gay and can’t get a guy who looks as gay as you.

  something interesting to speculate on…

• 20. steven replies at 24th July 2006, 1:37 pm :

  most of the people here said it already John. I personally didn’t like SR, but Zod coming back is just nonsense storywise, especially when you have 2 maybe 3 characters from Superman that would pose a greater threat. Brainanic (sp?) would be amazing if only to see superman react to something thats from his homeworld, and knows something about it that “no one” else knows?

  but to be totally honest, fans are rabid when it comes to things they “love” they prolly wanted a donner-version and when they SAW it they realized that that type of film was good for the 70’s not the 2000’s

• 21. devonroy replies at 24th July 2006, 1:38 pm :

  Its not that Superman Returns was like the first two Superman movies, its that Superman Returns and Superman the Movie are the SAME movie. Its one thing to pay homage but Returns was just a rehash of the first one. As for The Joker, Burtons Joker was just the comedic punch line for Batman, Hopefully with Nolan going into a better direction we will see more of a psycho in the Joker character. John you should read Miller’s Batman comics then to see what we have been missing with at the movies.

• 22. John Campea replies at 24th July 2006, 1:49 pm :

  Hey Devonroy.

  I disagree with you about the Superman stuff… but that’s cool.

  I SHOULD READ THE MILLER BATMAN STUFF?!?!?! Dude… I’ve been talking about the Miller Batman stuff on this site for YEARS. :)

• 23. Josh replies at 24th July 2006, 2:07 pm :

  I disagree. Superman Returns and the first Superman ARE NOT THE SAME MOVIE. Sure in both films he comes to earth, goes to metropolis, save Lois from an aerial disaster..but from there on different.

  Also, whoever said that they took major liberties and the kid was one of these major liberties is totally wrong. See, if you watch Superman 2, you’ll notice that one his powers come off..Lois and Clark fuck..thus producing the kid. Then soon after, Superman leaves, never noticing her pregnancy..although I guess he could have used his see-through vision, but thats just one of those things.

• 24. darren seeley replies at 24th July 2006, 2:13 pm :

  Probalymike: I disagree. It’s nice to see a less flattering picture of…

  …anyway, back on topic.

  I really can’t think of any except for *maybe* BattleStar Galactica the new series, where I was one of the folks who hoped it would fail, didn’t care for it when it started, but now that they have thier footing? It turns out not just to be a better show, I truly belive it was the final nail in the coffin for Star Trek…and, yes, it’s better than Star Trek…and sometimes…SG1.

  The other other one I can think of is currently pending. This is the on/off again remake of 1979’s “Warriors” {i think the project is dead by now, but y’ never know, they lie dormant then all of a sudden rise up to bite you in the rear} where it was, last time I checked, in development heck at MTV films and/or Paramount. I know they put out the video game…
  Anyway, the “new” film would take any all the metaphoic allegories to Homer’s “Odessey’ and make it a martial arts action flick with urban street gangs. Last I heard anyway.

• 25. darren seeley replies at 24th July 2006, 2:17 pm :

  Take them out///

• 26. Simon replies at 24th July 2006, 2:43 pm :

  Actually I Think the picture looks cool John, and I am not gay BTW, not that there is anything wrong with that.

• 27. HeroStew.com replies at 24th July 2006, 2:50 pm :

  My hypocrisy is simply being less critical of a Super Hero based movie. If I dont like it, I will still atleast buy it on dvd. I even have John Ritters Hero At Large.

• 28. Henrik replies at 24th July 2006, 3:17 pm :

  I don’t care much for Superman or Batman. I hate all the Superman movies (no. 2 is the best one though), and I don’t care for the Nolan Batman.

  Coming from a casual point of view I will say, that there has GOT TO BE some other villain for Superman. Lex Luthor and Zod were the villains of the first two? You want the exact same villains for the new two? He has to have at least one other villain??

  As for the picture, it did get a little bigger didn’t it? ;)

• 29. Mr Stay Puft replies at 24th July 2006, 3:27 pm :

  I just read through all these posts again and I don’t know if any of them answered John’s challenge, except HeroStew. Myself included.

• 30. HeroStew.com replies at 24th July 2006, 3:29 pm :

  I forgot to mention. For me Stamp owned that Zod role. I couldn’t see anyone else playing him. If Zod must return I would love to see Stamp come back. Grey hair and all. But we can’t see Zod and Supes flying around and throwing things at each other, again. I think we need a Brainiac or Doomsday (I am still praying for Darkseid) for him to team up with. I can’t see them using Brainiac because he is playing such a large role in Smallville right now.

  As far as Joker, like it was said before, Batman was a total re-boot. So I think it is more logical that a new joker would be easily excepted. And like said before, many COMIC FANS didnt like Jacks Joker. Even though the non comic reading public at large did. I did and I have over 15,000 comics.

• 31. HeroStew.com replies at 24th July 2006, 3:33 pm :

  Oh, sorry but I forgot to mention. When you have your own blog I think you should be able to put up any darn pic you want!

  I think its a good picture. But that doesnt mean I want to do John. But I am secure enough with my manhood to say its a nice pic and very appropriate.

• 32. Martin, UK replies at 24th July 2006, 3:34 pm :

  I’m always contradicting myself just because I enjoy arguing so much. If a group of people say a movie’s shit then I have to leap to its defence just because it’s more fun that way. And if a different group of people start kissing that film’s arse then I have to point out all the crap bits. I gotta entertain myself somehow and making people angry about movies is hilarious.

  Also, I’m always too bloody lazy to remember all the shit I’ve said.

• 33. HeroStew.com replies at 24th July 2006, 3:42 pm :

  Hey Martin,

  I think that is the state of my most ‘posters’ and the modern viewing audience in general. I think alot of people just want Supes to fail just because it is mainstream.

  Like the Lady In the Water flick. Some people will hate it just to hate it. Others will see it and just not like it (I think this is the case with John). I will still see it even though it has gotten alot of bad press. Reason being, I liked The Villiage, and I personaly do not know anyone else who did.

  Nothing wrong with not liking something. But I think online people hate just to hate and argue just to argue.

• 34. alfie replies at 24th July 2006, 3:58 pm :

  I don’t remember too many people yelling that singer had better stick to the first films…the main thing I remember is people just wanted him to stay loyal to the character most things I read people were surprised he was sticking so closely to them…SR felt at times like a rtemake…he hit all the same beats but with a total lack of humour.I think that is why superman has not set the box office on fire..he stuck way way too close to the originals …in fact I think how well you know the original films effects your enjoyment of this film……and the donner films had a sense of wonder and more importantly a sense of FUN which singers film was sorely sorely lacking…….
  what the next film needs is to let go of the past and freshen things

  As for The Joker…..he is a huge part of batmans entire mythos….he is arguably the most popular comic book villain of all time…..zod is a character from a movie 20 years ago that most people today ,aside from geeks, wouldn’t know. I personally would love to see the return of zod but to compare him to the joker returnss/reboot is silly…..I know the joker and you general zod are no joker…..

  and as for your star wars comparison….hey i wanted to see where anakin came from sure…..and if it had been done WELL I wouldn’t have complained at all but they hired a kid who couldn’t act and the story was just not all that interesting and in fact it got incredibly stupid (midichlorians…virgin birth etc etc) so that comparison you make john is completely ridiculous…do you think people would have complained had the story and the kid actually been any good?? of course not….it wasn’t the idea people complained about it…it was the execution…..

• 35. Dirk replies at 24th July 2006, 4:04 pm :

  I think that we all like John’s Blog, otherwise we would not be here. I have some observations though.

  Pros

  1. Good and relevant links and information pretty much up to date
  2. Daily Audio editions, where people talk about movie related events
  3. Website is neatly presented; Easy on the eyes
  4. Brings people into arguing interesting issues

  Cons

  1. Blogger makes plenty of mistakes when he argues
  2. Bit of an ego problem with John (he hates being corrected)

• 36. slybri replies at 24th July 2006, 4:46 pm :

  I’m okay with Nolan doing the Joker again because I’d like to see his take on the character. The Joker’s always been a villain with a lot of style and color. He’s a great arch-enemy for Batman because he’s so madcap happy and out of control while Batman is dark, angry, and focused. He’s probably the most interesting villain in Batman’s rogue gallery.

  But Batman and his villains are small in scale compared to the power of Superman. Clark kicks it on a whole different level. Superman simply has more potential for amazing visual effects. Giant Robots, Time Travel, Aliens..all that wacky sci-fi stuff. That’s Superman’s league. We’ve finally got the CGI technology to do Superman right.

  Zod would be interesting, but he’s just another guy with Superman’s powers. They could do that story on TV. Superman has better and more interesting villains. Singer has a 200 million dollar budget and 21st century digital effects that can render anything imaginable. 500 foot tall Brainiac trashing Metropolis! An Army of aliens! Dinosaurs! Apokalypse! Rogue asteroids! Metallo!

  I’d pay 10 bucks to see that.

  Somre guy (Jude Law) dressed in leather making people kneel in front of him? Not so much.

• 37. HeroStew.com replies at 24th July 2006, 4:59 pm :

  I agree slybri…

  I think Zod would make a good brains character to Doomsday or some one elses brawn.

• 38. Dre replies at 24th July 2006, 5:10 pm :

  i would just like to call Georgie Lucas out on his massive hypocrisy:
  back in a 1997 Playboy interview he said he was only going to direct the first Star Wars prequel to get the ball rolling & then he was gonna leave the following 2 for others to helm.
  does anyone know if there’s a Donner Cut of Clones or Sith? ;-)

• 39. HeroStew.com replies at 24th July 2006, 5:18 pm :

  I have articles where he said there were 9 films. Then only 6. Then in Time he said there would only be the 3 films.

  Point being. We all change our minds. And heck aren’t we allowed to?

• 40. Dre replies at 24th July 2006, 5:29 pm :

  i call that backtracking or covering up your fuck-ups. i also call it georgie’s napoleon complex. i think he forgot the only reason that IV succeeded was because it truly was a team effort a/k/a his editors pulling his fat out of the fire.

• 41. Rodney replies at 24th July 2006, 5:35 pm :

  My hypocracy was more of a “careful what you wish for” moment.

  I always thought it would be cool if they had a Robin in the Batman films. Unfortunately to make that happen they got Schumacher too.

  If I could turn back time, I’d gladly give up Robin to have him off the franchise.

• 42. DarkKinger replies at 24th July 2006, 6:28 pm :

  Hey, Campea…

  I just found out that Sam Raimi has confirmed that in Spider-Man 3, Harry Osborn will not be known as Green Goblin or Hobgoblin. So, what will his villain name be?

  I think this may cause some people to get upset, but a name change isn’t a big deal (since it really isn’t the Goblin). I wonder what kind of name Harry will get (please don’t be a corny one!).

• 43. DarkKinger replies at 24th July 2006, 6:29 pm :

  Hey, Campea…

  I just found out that Sam Raimi has confirmed that in Spider-Man 3, Harry Osborn will not be known as Green Goblin or Hobgoblin. So, what will his villain name be?

  I think this may cause some people to get upset, but a name change isn’t a big deal (since it really isn’t the Goblin). I wonder what kind of name Harry will get (please don’t be a corny one!).

• 44. 12 Monkeys replies at 24th July 2006, 7:15 pm :

  alfie…I agree with you and want to highlight Con #2.

• 45. Martin, UK replies at 24th July 2006, 7:22 pm :

  Hey Herostew. Arguing just to argue is fun though! As long as it doesn’t get personal or retarded and you actually talk about the movie you can learn a lot about your own and other people’s tastes, about what works and what doesn’t in even the greatest film. The problem is the people who just like saying “Fuck you, you’re stupid” and leaving it at that.

  By the way, I liked the Village too. No idea what to expect with Lady In The Water but I reckon I’ll wait for the DVD after John’s review. “Save yourselves and your money.” One for the poster, eh?

  And why are some people trying to turn this into some sort of Campea-bashing? It was an interesting post. What’s the problem?

• 46. HeroStew.com replies at 24th July 2006, 7:32 pm :

  Yeah I have to wonder about that to Martin. I think this was a good topic. I have to wonder what social issues some has when they bash a blogger but can’t stop posting. It seems to me that if you dont like a blogger, you move along. I dont know John from Adam. But I like this blog and like the topics here. Posting a pic of yourself has less to do with ego and more to do with ownership in my mind.

• 47. HeroStew.com replies at 24th July 2006, 7:33 pm :

  Oh and Martin, I agree with your comments.

• 48. Fredo Teabaggins replies at 24th July 2006, 7:40 pm :

  I don’t think being a fanboy and reviewer is as hard as you say. I review movies for the local paper and my philosophy has always been to watch a movie and give it credit for entertainment, creativity, story, acting, direction, the “look” and then only judge it against itself (for the most part). I find that allows me to give objective reviews. Yes, sometimes it’s hard when the anticipation for “Superman Returns” makes you want to wear a red towel and underpants in the privacy of your own home while humming John Williams’ soundtrack, but the actual movie leaves me underwhelmed.

• 49. Fredo Teabaggins replies at 24th July 2006, 7:48 pm :

  Also, I agree - if Superman had been redone completely, it might have faired better. On the other hand, and comic book nerds can correct me, but my understanding is the Batman franchise has been taken down many different paths in the comics, yet Superman seems to remain - for the most part - unaltered.

• 50. HeroStew.com replies at 24th July 2006, 7:51 pm :

  I with agree thedudeblog….I know when a movies bad. If I had to review movies (take them apart) I would dare say 90% of the comic movies I own SUCK! But the fan boy in me doesnt care. Superman Returns for me was the airplane rescue scene. When I get the dvd. I will most likely rewatch that scene more then anything. Its like a pizza. Who wants the crust? But something has got to hold the toppings :)

• 51. HeroStew.com replies at 24th July 2006, 7:57 pm :

  TheDudeBlog….yeah I think you are fairly right with Supes being basicly the same through his comic history. Thats in fact why I read him. I laughed when Supes died in the 90’s. I thought “they have already done that, it just got more press this time”…but people lost their butts investing in the DEATH OF SUPERMAN. The only major change in Supes was in the 80’s when Byrne did him for the Man of Steel series. And then that was just bringing him up to date. No more blue three piece suits and tennis shoes to work instead etc.etc.

• 52. Nick Paramonte replies at 24th July 2006, 8:33 pm :

  I remember when my old man came home from work and he had in his hand the white bag with the bleeding S shield on it, and last shot in the comic of Supes dieing in Lois’ arms I..WAS..SHOCKED.

• 53. Alesha replies at 24th July 2006, 11:08 pm :

  Well, I simply have this to say…no matter what was attempted in the film…no matter what could have been attempted…should have..would have..could have..blah blah blah…someone, somewhere would bitch about it, say its wrong, that it should have been done different. Like you said..a no-win situation. If they had of done Superman different, then people would ride someone’s ass that they marred the image of him as portrayed by Reeves..so whatever right.

• 54. Alesha replies at 24th July 2006, 11:12 pm :

  BTW..i think your pic is fine…ever since highschool..that is how you sat at a comp..its nothing but the reality of who you are…I know firsthand…i mean..what would peeps have you do? Cartwheels?..Geez…..

• 55. Conibear Trapp replies at 25th July 2006, 7:22 am :

  I have no movies inconsistencies. I am completely logical in all I say and do.

• 56. HeroStew.com replies at 25th July 2006, 4:51 pm :

  Yes Alesha. I don’t think I have ever seen a perfect movie. Or people who weren’t ready to bash it before even seeing it.

• 57. Poodle replies at 27th July 2006, 7:26 am :

  General Zod, UGH!! No way. He was a bad boy. Besides, didn’t he and his cronnies (female and big ape) get killed or something? Shoot. I forgot. It’s the movie. You can bring people back to life even if they are super….something.
  By the way John, I didn’t realize how handsome you are. Yeah, okay, I’m hitting on you. CHEERS!!

Leave a comment