First Look at Amy Adams on the Superman: Man of Steel Set

And while her character, intrepid reporter Lois Lane has been traditionally a brunette in the comics, Adams is looking very blonde-ish on the Illinois set of Zack Snyder’s “Man of Steel”, where the “Watchmen” director is currently destroying all manner of buildings and what have you.

Mind you, not that messing around with Lois Lane’s hair color hasn’t been done before. The comics have done some crazy things to the gal in the past, and take a look at Erica Durance as Lois Lane in TV’s “Smallville” to your left. She’s not just a blonde, but she’s “undercover” as a stripper. So yeah, not a whole lot of places Adams as Lois Lane can go but up from there.

The rebooted “Man of Steel” flies in 2013, and finds Superman battling superpowered enemies while struggling with his destiny. The film will co-star Henry Cavill as the new Man of Steel, along with Russell Crowe, Diane Lane, Kevin Costner, Michael Shannon, Christopher Meloni, Julia Ormond, Antje Traue, and Harry Lennix.

Pics by Kimber Dolan / via Rama Screen



About Nix

View all Posts

Editor/Writer at BeyondHollywood.com. Likes: long walks on the beach and Kevin Costner post-apocalyptic movies. Dislikes: 3D, shaky cam, and shaky cam in 3D. Got a site issue? Wanna submit Movie/TV news? Or to email me in regards to anything on the site, you can do so at nix (at) beyondhollywood.com.

Cool Stories From Zergnet

  • Juggernaut

    Erica Durance’s hottness makes Amy Adams look like a troll! LOL! Amy Adams is hot but nowhere as hot as Durance!

    • Jonsmith

      i agree

  • Juggernaut

    Erica Durance’s hottness makes Amy Adams look like a troll! LOL! Amy Adams is hot but nowhere as hot as Durance!

  • Dan

    An iconic character such Superman is the last movie to take risk like changing the hair color of major characters, after the disaster like SR. I think this is a bad decision on Snyder part.

    • Juggernaut

      Agreed! I was hoping for her hair to be darker. To me that is what separates her visually from Lana Lang. I guess we’ll see.

    • Anonymous

      Contrary to what is said (mostly out of ignorance), Superman Returns was a success at the box office-here’s the article that points out why:

      PERCEPTION: Superman Returns was a flop.
      REALITY: Most estimates put the cost of this film at $270
      million. That number actually includes the cost of several
      previous, unrelated, failed attempts to make a new Superman
      movie and doesn’t really reflect the actual cost of Superman
      Returns
      . Even if it did, Superman Returns made $391 million
      worldwide. That’s even more than Batman Begins, totaling only
      $371 million in box office receipts worldwide. Yet Batman
      Begins
      is widely considered to be the more successful movie, so
      successful in fact that it spawned an entire series of even
      more successful sequels while Superman was abandoned to be
      completely rebooted years later.

      You’re Wrong: 20 Common Box Office
      Misconceptions

      • Dan

        I never said SR was a box office flop, did I? Read my comment before trying to correct me. I said it was a disaster because not many people like it, the fact that it made money was because it was superman movie but people who watched it didn’t like it, the reaction was not good thats why they decided on a reboot. A box office hit don’t equal a good movie, hell even Airbender was a hit.

        • Lexavi80

          Actually, Superman Returns wasn’t a successful movie in the box-office either.

          Production budget was 200 million. Add that the marketing money they invest on the movie and you get more than 300 million.

          $371 million worldwide might be big for a whatever character, but for a mega-production/franchise like Superman, is a huge flop. That’s the reason why a sequel wasn’t planned nor made.

          The Man of Steel is a reboot. They didn’t cast Brandon because they didn’t want for anything to tie with the former movie in order to avoid confusion.

          • Fantomex

            Did you read the rest of the article in the link provided, or did you decide to forget?

          • Lexavi80

            I did read it, and is irrelevant. The whole thing have no basis.

            The link is so irracionally bold, that it suggest Superman Returns was more of a box-office success than Batman Begins.

            How can that be when SR budget goes beyond 250 million, and Batman Begins was 150 million? Please!

            Even Hancock , a movie with $150 million production budget, made $624 million in worldwide box office. SUPERMAN, made $391 worldwide with a bigger budget and 70 years worth on stories!

            Get real, men!

            Superman Returns was a boring little movie that made some money because… is Superman!

    • Anonymous

      Contrary to what is said (mostly out of ignorance), Superman Returns was a success at the box office-here’s the article that points out why:

      PERCEPTION: Superman Returns was a flop.
      REALITY: Most estimates put the cost of this film at $270
      million. That number actually includes the cost of several
      previous, unrelated, failed attempts to make a new Superman
      movie and doesn’t really reflect the actual cost of Superman
      Returns
      . Even if it did, Superman Returns made $391 million
      worldwide. That’s even more than Batman Begins, totaling only
      $371 million in box office receipts worldwide. Yet Batman
      Begins
      is widely considered to be the more successful movie, so
      successful in fact that it spawned an entire series of even
      more successful sequels while Superman was abandoned to be
      completely rebooted years later.

      You’re Wrong: 20 Common Box Office
      Misconceptions

  • Lexavi80

    I’m ok with that.

    Lois Lane is a reporter. She looks like a reporter and not a Playboy Bunny, or a classy lawyer or things like that.

    With that look I can believe Lois is tough.

  • apeman

    how many lois lanes are we going to be forced to see? how many boring soulless clark kents? how many lex luthors with no brain? how many superman movies with the same story and the same characters and the same boring endless romance?
    they will never end, never.

    • Danmillion99

      I agree, it is boring me!

  • Lexavi80

    This one’s different.

    Superman: The Movie was quite unique. Superman Returns was a re-make of Superman: The Movie. The Man of Steel won’t have Lex (so far) and it was said that Lois Lane’s role won’t be as big as in the former movies.

    Watching all the destroyed buildings and set pictures so far I think Snyder is making something we never seen before in Superman… using a Chris Nolan/David Goyer script.

    Need I say more?

    • Shazam!

      Me thinks thou art a little confused.

      SUPERMAN RETURNS WAS NOT A RE-MAKE OF ANYTHING!!!!! Go home, watch Superman: The Movie, Superman II and THEN WATCH Superman Returns. It was meant to be a sequel to the two Richard Donner films. It was meant to wash the crappy taste that Superman 3 and 4 left in people’s mouths – a task it accomplished.

      You want to know the real reason why they’re rebooting?? It’s so WB doesn’t lose the rights to make Superman movies. They’ve been in a legal battle for years with the estates of Superman’s creators who feel that the rights to the character should revert back to them. A few years ago a judge ruled that if WB didn’t have a movie “in production” that included an origin story they would lose the rights to make Superman films.

      Now – if you were WB would you reboot? OF COURSE YOU WOULD!

      Also, bring on a new continuity of Superman movies! Unlike Batman, there has only been one run of Superman movies – why not take another kick at it with a younger actor who can take the franchise for few other movies? (And as an added bonus you get to wash your hands of Superman having a son who is more powerful than him!)

      • Lexavi80

        That’s correct!. WB had to make a Superman movie so they don’t lose the rights of the character. I believe if they didn’t had that monkey on they’re backs, The Man of Steel won’t be in production. Returns didn’t work at all.

        I’m not affirming SR was a remake of Superman: The Movie, but it was my perception, really. I mean, I know it was supposed to be a sequel for Superman II (a bad one, by the way), but the story was almost exactly as the first one (except that Returns was WAY more boring):

        Superman arriving earth on his ship
        Lex being the villain (idiot henchmen/woman included)
        He goes on patrol on Metropolis (a plain in troubles is included)
        A romantic fly session with Lois
        Luthor, again, using a real-state scam as his malevolence plan
        Kryptonite again is Superman’s impediment to save the day

        Some elements on the equation were changed but it was almost the same, and for today movie standards that was lame. They could give continuity to the saga and yet bring something new to the table, but they didn’t.

        They tried so hard to play homage to the Donner movies (which I love) that, in the way, they just made the 21st century version of Superman: The Movie. But that’s just me, of course.

        • Shazam!

          Agreed – in premise it is arguably one of the least creative pieces of cinema in recent history. In fact, if I were Mario Puzo, I’d get on the horn and figure out why my name is isn’t attached to the story credits for the movie!

          Plus… in my humble opinion, Routh is a terrible actor and I’m happy to see him gone! I’ve yet to see him in anything where is less than cardboard. Sorry Brandon, I wanted to like you… but you make it really hard!

  • Shazam!

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superman

    It’s explained at length under the portion “Copywright issues.”