Lois Lane Cast for Superman Reboot...

[Miss I.]

Originally Posted by sirhcyennek81

1. My apologies.

2. Meghan "hammer thumbs" Fox...I think she is indicitive of the factory that is hollywood. They want specific body types. Same goes for the male actors. You could honestly switch out some of these actors and it would be the same exact part. Its very rare to see someone you can expect to be acting in 30 years.

Well Amy Adams can act at least. The guys may not like her, but she's certainly a step above that nimrod in the last superman movie, man she was freaking awful. I just hope they don't make this Lois a neurotic head case who whines a lot. They seem to do that a lot. I couldn't stand the Lois in the last reboot, Terri Hatcher or Margot Kidder for those reasons. I like the one on Smallville because she is feisty, pretty, smart and she is tough, the way the character is written and performed is at any rate. I hope they don't shortsell Lois in this one and go with the weepy I had Superman's baby routine again.

[sirhcyennek81]

Originally Posted by Miss I.

Well Amy Adams can act at least. The guys may not like her, but she's certainly a step above that nimrod in the last superman movie, man she was freaking awful. I just hope they don't make this Lois a neurotic head case who whines a lot. They seem to do that a lot. I couldn't stand the Lois in the last reboot, Terri Hatcher or Margot Kidder for those reasons. I like the one on Smallville because she is feisty, pretty, smart and she is tough, the way the character is written and performed is at any rate. I hope they don't shortsell Lois in this one and go with the weepy I had Superman's baby routine again.

Amy Adams can act. I think an actor or actress is better when they have a flaw. I'm tired of perfect. Awesome. The dude with the perfect cheekbones is saving the girl with the ridiculous rack. Yay. I have to wonder about the standards now. Would any of the "great" celebs from the 50s and 60s get a break now? Elizabeth Taylor probably would have been called too fat or too shrill. John Malkovich, Phillip Seymour Hoffman, Paul Giamatti are great actors stuck to a niche. They play bizzarre people. They never star in anything where they save the day.

Anyway, rant over.

[UltimateHoboW/Shotgun]

Originally Posted by sirhcyennek81

Amy Adams can act. I think an actor or actress is better when they have a flaw. I'm tired of perfect. Awesome. The dude with the perfect cheekbones is saving the girl with the ridiculous rack. Yay. I have to wonder about the standards now. Would any of the "great" celebs from the 50s and 60s get a break now? Elizabeth Taylor probably would have been called too fat or too shrill. John Malkovich, Phillip Seymour Hoffman, Paul Giamatti are great actors stuck to a niche. They play bizzarre people. They never star in anything where they save the day.

Anyway, rant over.

Really? Do you really want Phillip Seymour Hoffman to Hit Lois Lane in the head with his gut as he flies over to try and rescue her.

[sirhcyennek81]

Originally Posted by UltimateSoldier

Really? Do you really want Phillip Seymour Hoffman to Hit Lois Lane in the head with his gut as he flies over to try and rescue her.

I'll clarify. The actor should fit the part. Hoffman is no superman. But superman does not need to be the nazi model of the perfect human being. People who are perceived as perfect rarely are, and these people are considered rolemodels.

[UltimateHoboW/Shotgun]

Originally Posted by sirhcyennek81

I'll clarify. The actor should fit the part. Hoffman is no superman. But superman does not need to be the nazi model of the perfect human being. People who are perceived as perfect rarely are, and these people are considered rolemodels.

Ok. But part of movie making is story telling. Part of story telling is taking short cuts to tell that story. Its called "Superman", he needs to look like a "Superman". The only thing that I agree with you is the "Bad Guy". The bad guys always look like the bad guy. Short of the "Hitler's", "Stalin's" of the world bad guys never look like the bad guys. Think of the serial killers of the world. They blend into society so well, but they kill people with almost nobody noticing. But again this is more melodrama than drama and the "bad guys" need to be more easily identifiable as being "bad".

[Blueflame]

Originally Posted by sirhcyennek81

Amy Adams can act. I think an actor or actress is better when they have a flaw. I'm tired of perfect. Awesome. The dude with the perfect cheekbones is saving the girl with the ridiculous rack. Yay. I have to wonder about the standards now. Would any of the "great" celebs from the 50s and 60s get a break now? Elizabeth Taylor probably would have been called too fat or too shrill. John Malkovich, Phillip Seymour Hoffman, Paul Giamatti are great actors stuck to a niche. They play bizzarre people. They never star in anything where they save the day.

Anyway, rant over.

I dunno... I think John Malkovich just might do a very good job starring as a guy who used his brain to save the day (a role like the math genius in "Numbers") ... he's so versatile he could believably play just about any role he chooses.

[ShutDownPoster]

Yes, I would prefer Rachel McAdams

[Kaylore]

Originally Posted by UltimateSoldier

Megan Fox use to be my favorite, but she had to go and get all that plastic on her, then she had to run her mouth off instead of being greatful for a role of a life time.

I would have like to see: zooey deschanel

or Malin Akerman


and she's not afraid to go full frontal.

Both are horribly overrated. Both as "hot girls" and actresses. I don't understand the cult following Zooey (not Zoey?) has.

I'm willing to give Amy Adams a try. She's a good actress and while some might find her not hot, she's way hotter than Lois Lane's normally are and as was said, at least she wasn't chosen because the director wanted to pork her (see: Brian Singer movie.)

[jhns]

What is it about internet nerds and hating hot chicks? You can post a list of the 5 best looking women and a bunch of nerds that have never been with anything a tenth as hot as them, will claim they aren't good looking. It makes me laugh. We get it, you don't like females.

[Drunk Monkey]

I could see Jessica Biel in that role. Hot and can pull off the intelligent look. Also, I never said Amy Adams was not attractive, just not who I would pick for this role.

[jmz313]

Amy Adams is good casting. She can Act, is Great Looking, and again.... can act.

Yet I prob still Wont see the Movie... Hollywood is so outta ideas they just constantly Reboot movies? the last reboot was what? 4 years ago? i didn't bother with that either.

On tap next, a tomb raider reboot? WTF?

[Miss I.]

Originally Posted by jmz313

Amy Adams is good casting. She can Act, is Great Looking, and again.... can act.

Yet I prob still Wont see the Movie... Hollywood is so outta ideas they just constantly Reboot movies? the last reboot was what? 4 years ago? i didn't bother with that either.

On tap next, a tomb raider reboot? WTF?

Well they say, really there are only 7 original stories and everything else is just a reworking of the same 7 concepts, but even if that is true, do they have to keep remaking/rebooting/making sequels to everything? Batman's reboot was actually good. I don't know that I can say the same about any of the others. And Spiderman and Tomb Raider are also being redone and I don't really know why frankly. Oh and to make things worse, I read that either 2011 or 2012 is the year of the most sequels at 22 due to be released. I think that's very bad. Good sequels are the exception not the rule. I really think all series should be limited to 3 and then be done and reboots should not happen for at least 10 years have gone by since the last film was made. And also, no more Twilight movies, but that might be just be my Twilight hate talking.

That said, I love Henry Cavill and therefore I will see the movie despite the fact that I think Superman has more than been covered in Smallville.

[Kaylore]

Originally Posted by jmz313

Amy Adams is good casting. She can Act, is Great Looking, and again.... can act.

Yet I prob still Wont see the Movie... Hollywood is so outta ideas they just constantly Reboot movies? the last reboot was what? 4 years ago? i didn't bother with that either.

On tap next, a tomb raider reboot? WTF?

While I can agree with your overall points (Spiderman being rebooted so soon after the last series is ridiculous) I can make a case for both this Superman and Tomb Raider.

Superman returns wasn't a reboot. It was a really crappy sort-of sequel. They basically decided that instead of the Richard Prior Superman 3, they were going to re-cast everyone. It just didn't work. Blond Lois Lane was bad, but you can't re-capture the 80's cast and it just felt fake.

This Superman is a true re-boot and the franchise needs this. The last SM franchise started in the 70's so I think we're ok.

As for Tomb Raider, the game company that owns the rights to Tomb Raider is rebooting the franchise and making her look more vulnerable and real. Here is the re-imagined tomb raider: http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=...0&tx=117&ty=93

Since the game company is re-imagining the character as less or caricature and making her more "real" and since it has been a decade (12 years when the movie releases) since the original movie, they want to build a new mythos around Lara Croft. I am fine with all of this. 10-15 years is acceptable for a reboot for me, especially when you are going in another direction.

[Beantown Bronco]

Originally Posted by Miss I.

Well they say, really there are only 7 original stories and everything else is just a reworking of the same 7 concepts, but even if that is true, do they have to keep remaking/rebooting/making sequels to everything? Batman's reboot was actually good. I don't know that I can say the same about any of the others.

For me, it's Batman and 007. Absolutely love what they did and are continuing to do with those two.....and I was hugely skeptical of the Daniel Craig pick when I first heard about it. I don't mind admitting I was dead wrong about that one. He's awesome.

Looks like the latest reboot (or pre-quel, really) just leaked the first bit of casting news this weekend: Wizard of Oz. Looks like they're doing a big screen interpretation of Wicked with Mila Kunis as the Wicked Witch of the West. I'm not a big Wizard of Oz fan, but she's worth the price of admission alone IMO.

[Miss I.]

Originally Posted by Beantown Bronco

For me, it's Batman and 007. Absolutely love what they did and are continuing to do with those two.....and I was hugely skeptical of the Daniel Craig pick when I first heard about it. I don't mind admitting I was dead wrong about that one. He's awesome.

Looks like the latest reboot (or pre-quel, really) just leaked the first bit of casting news this weekend: Wizard of Oz. Looks like they're doing a big screen interpretation of Wicked with Mila Kunis as the Wicked Witch of the West. I'm not a big Wizard of Oz fan, but she's worth the price of admission alone IMO.

I concur with the Batman and 007, love Daniel Craig. He's bad ass. He reminds me of the inherent badassness of Sean Connery more than any of the others, blonde or no, I love him.

Really, the Wizard of Oz? that's dangerous territory I think. Now if they are casting a Wicked movie based on the Broadway musical, that I can see. Mila would be really really good, assuming she can sing, as the Wicked Witch. But to remake Wizard of Oz, well that's just a bad idea. That film is such a piece tied to its period it really shouldn't be remade/rebooted or anything else (did you see the Wiz, that was painful). It's not my favorite movie either but I do appreciate it's iconic status in film history alongside Gone with the Wind and Casablanca.

[jmz313]

Originally Posted by Kaylore

While I can agree with your overall points (Spiderman being rebooted so soon after the last series is ridiculous) I can make a case for both this Superman and Tomb Raider.

Superman returns wasn't a reboot. It was a really crappy sort-of sequel. They basically decided that instead of the Richard Prior Superman 3, they were going to re-cast everyone. It just didn't work. Blond Lois Lane was bad, but you can't re-capture the 80's cast and it just felt fake.

This Superman is a true re-boot and the franchise needs this. The last SM franchise started in the 70's so I think we're ok.

As for Tomb Raider, the game company that owns the rights to Tomb Raider is rebooting the franchise and making her look more vulnerable and real. Here is the re-imagined tomb raider: http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=...0&tx=117&ty=93

Since the game company is re-imagining the character as less or caricature and making her more "real" and since it has been a decade (12 years when the movie releases) since the original movie, they want to build a new mythos around Lara Croft. I am fine with all of this. 10-15 years is acceptable for a reboot for me, especially when you are going in another direction.

It's cool and all, But with all the Crying over box office takes you'd figure Hollywood would start accepting that they just aren't earning our Dollars.

[sirhcyennek81]

Originally Posted by Miss I.

I concur with the Batman and 007, love Daniel Craig. He's bad ass. He reminds me of the inherent badassness of Sean Connery more than any of the others, blonde or no, I love him.

Really, the Wizard of Oz? that's dangerous territory I think. Now if they are casting a Wicked movie based on the Broadway musical, that I can see. Mila would be really really good, assuming she can sing, as the Wicked Witch. But to remake Wizard of Oz, well that's just a bad idea. That film is such a piece tied to its period it really shouldn't be remade/rebooted or anything else (did you see the Wiz, that was painful). It's not my favorite movie either but I do appreciate it's iconic status in film history alongside Gone with the Wind and Casablanca.

Its my understanding the Oz thing is a prequel.

[Beantown Bronco]

Originally Posted by jmz313

It's cool and all, But with all the Crying over box office takes you'd figure Hollywood would start accepting that they just aren't earning our Dollars.

Are you serious? How many of those Superhero movies, remakes/reboots, sequels or pre-quels have lost money in the last 10 years? You can count them on one hand.

Hollywood is making a TON of money on these things. If they weren't, they wouldn't keep shoving them down our throats.

[UltimateHoboW/Shotgun]

Originally Posted by Kaylore

Both are horribly overrated. Both as "hot girls" and actresses. I don't understand the cult following Zooey (not Zoey?) has.

I'm willing to give Amy Adams a try. She's a good actress and while some might find her not hot, she's way hotter than Lois Lane's normally are and as was said, at least she wasn't chosen because the director wanted to pork her (see: Brian Singer movie.)

Isn't the reason any director puts in an actress their movie. haha

[broncocalijohn]

Originally Posted by elsid13

She not that pretty.

You ar enuts and she is perfect. She can act the tough sob like her role as Earhart in Night at the Museum 2 or pretty and proper as she was in Enchanted. Hot red head.

[UltimateHoboW/Shotgun]

Originally Posted by broncocalijohn

You ar enuts and she is perfect. She can act the tough sob like her role as Earhart in Night at the Museum 2 or pretty and proper as she was in Enchanted. Hot red head.

She looks fine. Its her voice I can't stand.

[bendog]

I understand Hollywood makes movies for money, and this will make money. But to take on this franchise after how Christopher Reeve fit the role so perfectly, and the resulting sequels .... mind numbing. The graphics are dated, but that series was freaking franchise. Margo was perfect for the time. She was a stone cold b****, but that wasn't really the comic book character. But the film was made at the end of the first wave feminist era, and women had to be Linda Lovelace/Gloria Steinham. Amy Smith fits the comic character.

I could sort of see a remake of 3:10 to Yuma. It failed in comparison, because showing the brutality is not necessarily more scary than making an audience imagine it. It was like Cape Fear ... well done, but impossible to follow Glen Ford or Robert Mitchum stepping out to play a villan. Nobody can top it. This idea Screams failue. This is like Get Smart.

Remake good ideas that were poorly done. Or at least remake films when technology offers great advantages. Like Battlestar .... but don't torture them to death.

[BroncoMan4ever]

Originally Posted by broncocalijohn

You ar enuts and she is perfect. She can act the tough sob like her role as Earhart in Night at the Museum 2 or pretty and proper as she was in Enchanted. Hot red head.

isla fisher was in enchanted.

too many people are mixing these 2 up.

isla fisher is hot and kind of just an ok actress

amy adams is talented actress but has just ok looks.


ISLA FISHER


Amy Adams

[BroncoMan4ever]

Originally Posted by UltimateSoldier

She looks fine. Its her voice I can't stand.

again. annoying voice is Isla Fisher.

i find it surprising so many people mix the 2 up since Amy Adams is nowhere near as attractive. Isla Fisher isn't as talented and does have an annoying voice

[BroncoMan4ever]

Originally Posted by UltimateSoldier

Isn't the reason any director puts in an actress their movie. haha

i have been under the impression that was how Megan Fox had been getting movies