The spin begins on the new Superman sequel.

I saw this on CBR:

"The Hollywood Reporter also talked to

producer Jon Peters

about the sequel. "Right now, Bryan Singer is working on the story," Peters said, "and hopefully, that will be a script by the end of the year. And hopefully, we'll be in preproduction by, say, January or February of next year. "Superman Returns" was an amazing effort. You're talking about a story that's been made before; you're talking about the fact that we had to re-explore his youth, his origin. And now, the second movie allows us to go do things that people haven't seen before.""

 

Hmm, Maybe my recollection of the movie was different, but the only "Re-exploring of his youth" I remember from Superman Returns was that totally unnecessary, tacked on, does nothing to move the plot along sequence where a young Clark leaps across the wheat fields. A scene which could have been completely removed and the audience would miss nothing. I have no recollection of there being a recap of his origin.

This is just Peters trying to improve business for the sequel, thinking that non-existent origin recaps turned people away. Essentially, he's saying "trust me guys, this one's going to be better, now that we've got the origin out of the way", which is the now expected line of BS all superhero sequel producers give. Of course, in this case, it doesn't really work. Mainly because there was really no "origin" stuff in the movie. As a matter of fact, Superman Returns was the ipso facto sequel to the Donner Superman movies. So the whole "come see the movie, you won't have to see an origin" argument should have applied to Returns.

And the reason he is saying these things is because Superman Returns was considered a disappointment. It made a healthy $200 million in the US and a total of $391 million worldwide. This should be an unabashed hit, but when compared to the $270 million budget, run up mostly because of Peters' incompetence with getting the movie off the ground,  it is considered a disappointment.

So, instead of being honest with himself and saying "Hey, my stupidity made flick seem like a disappointment", Peters is saying "The reason why the movie didn't gross $500 million in the US was because of that half hour scene at the beginning of the movie. I'll tell them that those type of scenes aren't in this one. That should improve business."

I don't know why this upsets me so much, but it does.