The first image of Russell Crowe in his Jor-El costume have appeared online, and as expected, everyone is scrambling to get a look.
Even though this is a blatant rip-off of Orem Rivendorn’s garb, I like how this costume comes together. And if the hint of blue we are seeing under the robes is an indication, there may actually have been some thought put into the solid blue Superman costume Henry Cavill sports flick.
The Man of Steel arrives June 14, 2013.
Someone got a link to a pic of Orem in his garb?
You’re looking at it. In fact (I probably shouldn’t be announcing this in the comment section), Russell Crowe will be playing Orem in the soon to be announced Critical Hit: The Movie…
Here is a story about a man who loved a woman and sent thier baby to another planet to survive the destruction of thier planet ~Hated it!~
Here is a story about the relationship between a tall dark and handsome billionaire and his young teen boy ward fighting crime. ~Loved it!~
Ahem, the costume looks like it belongs in Oblivion games or Lord of the Rings.
Does this mean we are yet again getting an origin story?
Is anyone else out there tired of origins every time Hollywood reboots a story.
No offense, but you, like me, are old. You remember the ’78 Superman (you probably also remember rocking out to Christopher Cross and not Criss Cross, though I hear they make you jump, jump). The Man of Steel is not targeted to you and me. We have mortgages, children, business to run and grow, and the amount of disposable income is quite low.
18 years ago, Batman Beyond got somebody all worked up after going to the theater, resulting in the teenagers running around the streets and standing on our lawns today. H’wood knows they have the income to spend on vidja games and cars, and have the disposable income that has them flocking to The Mall every weekend. That is who The Man of Steel is marketed to. And while Superman Returns did bring in some people, a new origin story for a new age of movie goers is going to bring in more money than a honest to goodness sequel targeted to people that believed a man could fly when they saw the first film in 1978.
It’s sad, but it is true.
I don’t need a sequel. I know who Superman is (doesn’t everybody?). Just tell me a good Superman story (with new actors – if need be). It doesn’t need to relate to previous movies.
The new Spider-man is going to be an origin (again), if I remember. It wasn’t that many years ago (was it?) that the first Spider-man movie (Tobey Maguire) was made. Certainly todays audience has access to the original and most have seen it. Is it necessary to tell the origin again?
Spider-Man came out in 2002, Amazing Spider-Man arrives in 2012. A 15 year old would have been just five when the Tobey flick arrived in theaters, and I’m pretty sure most parents would not take a five year old to see that movie (rated PG-13). I don’t know about you, but I seem to remember being 15 once (a long time ago in a galaxy far far away), and not liking anything my parents liked (hence my distaste for Westerns until my mid 30s). While access to DVDs of the Spider-Man movie should be relatively easy, I think Hollywood still believes kids want something for their generation, and not their parent’s generation. It’s a marketing gimmick that has been tested time and time again, and it works. And I will bet you money right now that by the time 2037 rolls around, The Amazing Spider-Man (2012) will get a rerelease “for a whole new generation to experience for the first time.” It’s a Disney ploy that has worked for 75 years, and it will work again, when the studio remakes the movie in 2038 with a new new origin tale that includes the tag-line “with effects and storytelling not possible 30 years ago!” While Disney made it work, I think Lucas has come closest to perfecting it. Bottom line, I don’t think we are going to see superhero movies that just tell good stories without the need for an origin story every decade or so.
Hate to agree but when a man is right a man is right!
I think a reboot is in order when you want the audience to forget that Superman was a dead-beat Dad in the last sequel. Oh god my brain hurts just thinking of it.
Just because they want the origin story to be part of the movie, doesn’t mean it has to be the entire movie. A single expository scene would suffice. This was one of the things Daredevil did right, in my opinion.
Dude, if you listened to Kris Kross, you’re still pretty old.
Kriss Kross was the first CD I ever owned. They did, in fact, make me jump.
Well played sir
You remember the ’78 Superman (you probably also remember rocking out to Christopher Cross and not Criss Cross, though I hear they make you jump, jump).
That reference is nearly 20 years old.
I imagine they would also like to reinvigorate the merchandise angle for this new feature too.
Whilst “legacy” superman product will always move, I remember working in the toy department of a store when superman returns came out. I was actually in a designated “Superman returns” department, specifically made for the film. I think between three shifts I sold two pencil-cases; that’s between superman figs, cars, stationary, laptops(!)… the film property merch was a dud!
Yes, if we get past the origin of the original “super man”… then we could possibly have a movie with action and a plot! I don’t care what “Little Jimmy” doesn’t understand. “Little Jimmy” doesn’t have a bank account to pay for tickets to the movie! And, if enough parents don’t get entertained… no movie… no games… no comics. I’m gonna go see a movie with my family because I want to see it too! (I slept through Alice in Wonderland and Avatar!) Get out the pitchforks and torches!
Anyone else think that Crowe looks like he’s shrugging at the camera and saying “ah, it’s a living”?
2013??? Really???? Oh man… of steel.