View Single Post
Old 08-03-2012, 07:54 PM   #74
MOS2013
Banned User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 154
Default Re: What's So Bad About Superman Returns?

Quote:
Originally Posted by DogofKrypton View Post
Not only that, he did it with kryptonite still inside of his body.

One major "sin" of movie-making is creating your own rules, then breaking them on a whim. This is exactly what Singer did here.



Unfortunately, I don't think so...



Not as bad as the poorly-rendered CGI puppet at the end. It's mind-boggling how BAD of a decision it was to leave that in.



Yikes.



Original is a word very rarely used for this film outside of the small group of fans it has.



Disagree on Routh doing a fine job, but his post-SR career and box office takings say more than I ever could.
I can't believe the used that shot, why could that scene not have been done with wire work? crazy.

I thought Routh did a good job with the rather limited dialogue and ammunition he had though, I couldn't fault him too much.

Heres a link to a rather large image of the shot that really bugged me

http://img90.imageshack.us/img90/857...7134655ah6.jpg

Quote:
Originally Posted by DogofKrypton View Post
He counters what was said with well-reasoned posts. No name-calling or rudeness.

I suggest you respect that many people disliked this film.



Yeah, people disliking something you like?

How dare they.
Cheers mate. As you said, just putting my own point across, if this section is strictly for Pro-SR discussion then I apologise.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thundercrack85 View Post
I would say the most fundamental flaw of Superman Returns was the fact that it was essentially sold as a pseudo-sequel to the Donner films.

As a result, Routh's Superman, was never allowed to get out of Reeve's shadow.
This is true, with hindsight it was a bad idea. Trying to replicate Reeve's Superman and taking dialogue from the original (especially key lines like 'I hope this incident hasn't put you off flying) was always going to be torture.


MostPowerful, I'm not just highlighting the flaws of SR for the fun of it, I'm just trying to engage in the discussion which is what the forum (I presume) is all about. I notice that you didn't exactly waste any time in rushing in to the MOS forum to declare that it's too dark or whatever, so I'm not sure why thats okay but me explaining what didn't work for me in SR isn't.

People are talking about being objective, but one could argue that discussing the film with someone who is on first name terms with 'Brandon' isn't completely objective.

I'm really glad you and lots of other people liked the film, it's good that people get enjoyment from it, if you like it that's all that matters, you shouldn't feel threatened by people who don't like it.

I like LOVE loads of films that are widely regarded as being **** films, but I won't let it bother me in the slightest, you like what you like. I'm not exactly pro-MOS either, I'm very much on the fence with it, I like what I've seen so far, but then I'm willing to admit that the director of MOS has had previous film trailers which were impressive only for the actual films to fall short.


Last edited by MOS2013; 08-03-2012 at 08:00 PM.
MOS2013 is offline   Reply With Quote