(CLICK ON PHOTO FOR LINK TO TRAILER)
After watching this powerful and, frankly emotional, trailer for “Superman Returns“, (h/t – Malcontent) it made me think of Dan’s posting a few months ago.
A Screenwriter’s Solution to Hollywood’s Slump – GayPatriotWest
Dan highlighted a column by his screenwriter friend Craig Titley about Hollywood’s slump and the need to get back to more traditional, pro-American movies. From Craig’s piece about 1985’s successful movies:
[T]hese films were optimistic in a time of fear, and they didn’t endlessly bag on their own country or send a negative message to the world implying that America is full of corrupt, greedy, selfish, dishonest, Capitalist pigs and that the Russians have every right to hate us and nuke us. On the contrary, these films wore the flag proudly, celebrated American valor and the American spirit, and used the real world villains as the reel world villains.
There has never been a film screen character that epitomizes American values more than Christopher Reeve’s “Superman.” Based on what I’ve seen in this trailer, Brandon Routh (a Midwestern boy like Clark Kent himself) has channeled Reeve in a way that is nearly mindboggling. I hope “Superman Returns” lives up to this trailer and helps Hollywood rediscover the America it is a part of.
-Bruce (GayPatriot)
What I remember most about Brandon Routh is when he played on daytime soap One Life to Live. He was Seth Anderson about 4 years ago, and he was pretty bad. He was fired, and he left a message on his website which complained that he had to come into work for 4 hours and then they called him up and fired him (how awful), and that he would leave it up to God to judge the people who fired him.
http://www.eyeonsoaps.com/rumormar2002.html#brandon
I would hope that God has more important things to worry about.
The original actor who was rumored to be cast in this part, Matthew Bomer, is just gorgeous and a good actor. I don’t know why they passed him over. I read somewhere that they had to make it look like Routh had muscles, they had to bulk up his suits and his costume. I don’t really enjoy the idea of a twink Superman, but I’m not a casting agent, so what do I know.
There are some photos of Matt here:
http://matthewbomeronline.tk/
You are right in the optimism that the original film brought, but don’t forget a little cheekiness thrown in. When Superman tells Lois he’s there to fight for Truth, Justice and the American Way, her response is “You’ll end up fighting every elected politician in the country”. Of course she snaps right of her cynicism when she realizes he’s quite serious…
Christopher was a tall, skinny bit of a weakling when he was originally cast as Superman, but he bulked up quite nicely
Most of the films that have made big money in recent years have some traditional positive message. From Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings (traditional “good vs. evil”) to the Incredibles – which was a very family-oriented film as many have pointed out – have been big money makers.
Matthew is beautiful but I think the trailer presents Brandon exactly as I could expect a young superman to look like.
Dan highlighted a column by his screenwriter friend Craig Titley about Hollywood’s slump and the need to get back to more traditional, pro-American movies
The thing that will get Hollywood out of it’s slump is returning to strong, creative and original stories. The last year and a half has been filled with CGI debacles, where technology is put before everything else. For example, Chicken Little is an innane story. No amount of CGI and 3-D and special effects can ever hope lift a movie with no substance or strong characters in the first place. It has absolutely nothing to do with being “pro-American.”
Just look at AFI’s top 10 movies out of their top 100 list:
1. CITIZEN KANE (1941) – A self-made millionaire dies alone in his mansion, the lure of wealth and power that corrupts absolutely?
2. CASABLANCA (1942) – Will the cynical expatriate Rick Blaine help his old flame Ilsa? A great love story during WWII.
3. THE GODFATHER (1972) – The aging patriarch of an organized crime dynasty transfers control of his clandestine empire to his reluctant son.
4. GONE WITH THE WIND (1939) – The epic romance during the Civil War. A selfish and headstrong woman loses her entire way of life due to the war and reconstruction raging around her. She learns that she can only depend on herself.
5. LAWRENCE OF ARABIA (1962) – Epic rumination on a flamboyant and controversial British military figure and his conflicted loyalties during wartime service.
6. THE WIZARD OF OZ (1939) – A young girl travels to a magical land to learn that everything you need in life is already within you. She exposes the powerful yet fraudulent Wizard of Oz to learn this truth.
7. THE GRADUATE (1967) – Recent college graduate Benjamin Braddock is trapped into an affair with Mrs. Robinson, who happens to be the wife of his father’s business partner and then finds himself falling in love with her teenage daughter, Elaine.
8. ON THE WATERFRONT (1954) – An ex-prize fighter turned longshoreman struggles to stand up to his corrupt union bosses.
9. SCHINDLER’S LIST (1993) – The true story of Czech born Oskar Schindler, a businessman who tried to make his fortune during the Second World War by exploiting cheap Jewish labour, but ended up penniless having saved over 1000 Polish Jews from almost certain death during the holocaust.
10. SINGIN’ IN THE RAIN (1952) – A silent film production company and cast make a difficult transition to sound. Debbie Reynolds voices for an incompetant star before the truth is revealed and she is made a star herself.
Is there something particularly pro-conservative/pro-American about these films that I’m just not getting? They’re good stories with strong character regardless of their politics.
And GCB, that’s exaclty the point. They’re not political in the least, but you should note that On the Waterfront, if it has any politics, are more conservative than liberal as it takes issue with unions corruption. And it is has long been the Democratic Party that has been in their pocket.
And GCB, that’s exaclty the point. They’re not political in the least,
Then what exactly makes something a “pro-American” movie? None of the AFI’s top 10 movies, to me, seem particularly pro or anti-American. And if that’s the case, why do think getting back to “pro-American” movies will increase the quality of the movie-going experience? Are movies with positive messages strictly an American phenomenon? What are some examples of these “anti-American” movies that have so dominated the movie landscape recently that have deteriorated the movie going experience?
To GPW and GCB
The original post had nothing to do with the movies of 1985 being “good” movies. I don’t see Rambo: First Blood Part II, European Vacation or Death Wish 3 anywhere on AFI’s top 100. It was about box office numbers. These movies made money at a time when the studios were struggling.
why do think getting back to “pro-American” movies will increase the quality of the movie-going experience?
It obviously didn’t help the quality of movies in 1985 and I doubt it will do so now. It will help make the studios more money (gasp).
This film is a parable for Elia Kazan’s battle with Communist partisans who vilified him when he dared to tell about what he saw in regards to Communist activity in the film industry.
BTW, I think these AFI lists are mainly a bloody crock.
Chicken Little is not only an inane story, but recycles every “I’m OK, you’re OK” cliché about parenting that should have gone out when Walt Disney was still living. And the characters are so damned neurotic one wonders whether Woody Allen wrote an early draft of the script. They basically took a classic story and bludgeoned it to death with bad jokes and intolerable pop-psych dialogue. People talk about reviving hand-drawn animation at Disney, but if they’re going to continue making turkeys like “Chicken Little,” why bother?
“Gone With The Wind” actually does have a political message: that the South was right and that Reconstruction hurt more than it helped. It’s a discredited message but it is nonetheless a message.
Publishing