ROTTEN TOMATOES: More Posey for "Superman" Sequel?

More Posey for "Superman" Sequel?

by Scott Weinberg | June 13, 2007

While out and about talking about her newest indie "Broken English," Parker Posey was asked if she'll be returning for the "Superman Returns" sequel...

The indie doll had this to say to Moviehole.net: "Oh I hope I'm in it ... Yeah, we'll see if I'm in it. I don't know if I am. I just talked to one of the writers last night and I meant to ask him."

The always-busy Ms. Posey has (the pretty solid) "Broken English" coming up, plus her (also quite good) "Fay Grim" just hit video stores. Also on the way for P.P.: That remake of "The Eye."

Source: Moviehole.net

Related Items

Celeb:	Parker Posey
Movie:	The Eye
	Superman Returns
	Fay Grim
	Broken English

(1-20 of 36 posts) | Reply

Gimy writes:
on Jun 13 2007 06:57 AM

ok, this was reported months ago wasn't it? deja vu??

ok, this was reported months ago wasn't it? deja vu??

(Reply to this)

BUCK69 writes:
on Jun 13 2007 06:59 AM

[b]LET THE COUNTDOWN BEGIN...[/b]
I for one think it would be nice to see Posey and Spacey back [although with smaller roles] just for the sake of continuity. It would be diificult to imagine a Superman movie without Lex Luthor. As for the "countdown", I'm referring to the impending, inevitable onslaught of negative comments and complaints that we've all read, ad nauseam, about "Superman Returns."

(Reply to this)

rustdog writes:
on Jun 13 2007 07:11 AM

In reply to this comment (#869157)
Then don't read them. The movie sucked and so did Posey and Spacey and Roth and that other chick and the little kid and the boyfriend and even the extras in the back. On a more positive note, it wasn't as bad as Ghost Rider.

(Reply to this)

bigbrother writes:
on Jun 13 2007 07:16 AM

I wouldn't have a problem with a Superman movie without Luthor as long as they had an adequate villain. Darkseid anyone? As Batman Begins showed us you can have a good Batman movie without the Joker. Lets hope you can have a better one with him though.

(Reply to this)

nickb1016 writes:
on Jun 13 2007 07:19 AM

i liked ghost rider and superman returns

(Reply to this)

jeremyd4 writes:
on Jun 13 2007 07:51 AM

i don't know how anyone over the age of 12 could like "Ghostrider"...

i wasn't that bigger fan of "Superman Returns" either, but I bought the 2-disc special edition cheap and after watching the fantastic behind the scenes featurettes I find myself liking it more...

(Reply to this)

BUCK69 writes:
on Jun 13 2007 07:59 AM

In reply to this comment (#869158)
[b]A BETTER IDEA...[/b]
Then don't post them. Unless you can qualify your opinion with some degree of reason and logic, keep it to your self. A movie that was almost universally praised by critics and made more than $300 million didn't "suck." That should be obvious to anyone with any degree of intelligence. You may not have liked it, but that doesn't mean that it "sucked." Maybe it was just over your head.

(Reply to this)

Merlin235 writes:
on Jun 13 2007 08:10 AM

So, not to be sarcastic or anything, but it's news now that Posey doesn't know if she will or won't be in a movie? For all I know, Stallone 'may or may not' be in the next Superman movie. (ok, so I am being sarcastic)

(Reply to this)

Now it's dark writes:
on Jun 13 2007 08:24 AM

Every couple of weeks RT reporters should try and find rumours about Parker Posey to see if she would be into working on a Superman sequel.

(Reply to this)

Matanuki writes:
on Jun 13 2007 09:02 AM

In reply to this comment (#869162)
[b]Who the hell called the police?[/b]
Hold on now. Anyone with any "degree of intelligence" is not going to slavishly bow to what the critics say or, worser still, to how much money the picture made. The critics liked Spiderman 3 too, and it's still making money. Doesn't mean it was good. Sure, some of the things said on these boards about "Superman Returns" are way over. Like, for instance, all that talk about it being the "worst comic book movie ever", and Spacey being "terrible as Lex", and Routh being "terrible as Superman," or, my personal favorite, too "skinny." Talk about gross exaggerations! Was it flawed in terms of remaining true to the spirit of the Superman mythology? Very much so. Was it a complete disaster? No, I wouldn't say that. Here's hoping the sequel learns from the mistakes of Returns.

(Reply to this)

arendr writes:
on Jun 13 2007 09:23 AM

I thought most of the actors in Superman Returns did nice work. Routh was actually pretty good and I didn't even realize that was Parker Posey until I saw the credits. The problem was that it felt pretty limp. Maybe it's the cynical time we live in though, because Superman just doesn't seem to do much for me. I like him, he's just really dull. Superman is the kind of guy you want around in real life, but he's bland on the screen. That's why we like Clint Eastwood types.

Still, it was probably better than the Marvel movies. They just keep churning them out...

My 2 cents.

(Reply to this)

dracus writes:
on Jun 13 2007 09:34 AM

Well, I really enjoyed Superman Returns and I'm looking forward to the next one.

(Reply to this)

MattBaerFTW writes:
on Jun 13 2007 09:50 AM

In reply to this comment (#869167)
Me Too

(Reply to this)

Sputnik99 writes:
on Jun 13 2007 10:16 AM

Look,
Superman Returns wanted to stick to the theme of the old Superman movies, where all he did was basically save the world through massive feats of strength and speed. That's what Superman had always done on TV and movies. He wasn't about fighting big-bad well-known supervillains back then and Returns tried to stick to that theme. The Genre of the Comic Book Movie has changed since then. The Batman movies brought about the idea of battling well-known villains, which really had never been done before.

But I grew up watching Superman 1 and 2, so I loved Returns, because except for a couple weaknesses (cough cough, Lois Lane, cough cough, Lex Luthor) it felt like a continuation of those classic movies. A lot of young moviegoers out there hated it, because, IMO, it didn't feel like a Batman movie. Who was Superman fighting? He was just picking up a bick chunk of dirt and throwing it into space! But that was perfectly fine to me. That was what I expected and even hoped for.

And for the most part, I felt the performances were great. Lois and Lex were miscast, IMO, and the little boy should never have been there, but it was well-directed and looked great. Superman was perfectly acted.

But hey, if Supe wants to swing punches with a big baddy next movie, I'm all for it! I love those movies too!

(Reply to this)

mojodaddy writes:
on Jun 13 2007 10:46 AM

In reply to this comment (#869157)
[b]"It would be difficult to imagine a Superman movie[/b]
I think it's a joy to imagine. He's the only freakin villain they ever use. They should use parasite and/or bizarro.

(Reply to this)

blank blank writes:
on Jun 13 2007 01:35 PM

Buck69, superman wasnt bad or sucky, it was just diasppointing and underwhelming in my opinion, and kate bosworth was woefully miscast. but how can the movie be "over my head"? did i miss the theological implications of a father sending his only son from the heavens to come save mankind here on earth?

other than that tiredly over done reference, was there a bit about buddhism or philosophical implications of superman that i missed? i dont think so. if you want to talk about super hero movies that people hate because they are "over the head" of people, you should be talking about the hulk, or the matrix sequels (which arent really superhero movies, but you get the pitcure.)

(Reply to this)

Mr. Kong writes:
on Jun 13 2007 03:28 PM

In reply to this comment (#869160)
ME TOO! HIGH FIVE!

(Reply to this)

dylan21484nj writes:
on Jun 13 2007 04:55 PM

Posey should have been Lois Lane, not Beluga Whale Forehead Bosworth.

(Reply to this)

Exode writes:
on Jun 13 2007 06:44 PM

I hope the next one has a better theme than returns did, I swear "what would happen if the world no longer needed superman?" seemed like something a studio executive came up with. Besides, they might as well have brought back Zod as an updated villain since they didn't really make a direct sequel to the originals (Too many inconsistencies between II and returns, Lois Lane found out who superman was in II for example).

I would have preferred it if Superman returned to Earth to find that General Zod and his minions had enslaved humanity in his abscence, perhaps include at least twelve other kryptonians that were inprisoned along with him. Humanity being responsible for freeing them from their prison would have been nice as well. Even to return to find that a war with Apocolypse (which could have easilly been stopped had it not been for his abscence) surfaced while he was away. I mean the guilt superman would feel for that one would really help to give his character more depth. Not to mention the bitterness humanity would feel for Superman in casting blame.

My point is that there is a lot of potential for a sequel and I really hope they don't blow it.

(Reply to this)

gamejediben writes:
on Jun 13 2007 07:07 PM

Well, no matter what you all thought about returns, you have to agree that it can only get better from here. Routh is probably the best Superman ever (and thats coming from a Reeve fan). In fact the entire cast was superb. Lois is actually hot! (unlike that margot kidder). But I have to admit, Bryan Singer is apperantly not very good with franchise starters. X-Men 1, anybody? But as he proved with X-Men 2, he can slam dunk a sequel like its nobodies business. Watch and wait people 2009 is gonna be epic!

(Reply to this)