Originally Posted by The Guard
By any reasonable standard, SUPERMAN RETURNS isn't a bad film. Nor is it a really dark film or a morose film. Its got lots of humor in it. Overall its a fairly serious film, with a few key dark elements. The film is very well made...[etc.]
An interesting and thoughtful post.
My pet peeve with a lot of the SR
criticisms is that they’re actually generic complaints
about the basic mythos
. But for rhetorical effect, they’re often represented as being specific and unique to the film. A tad unfair (not to say hypocritical) I think.
Just for instance… I know some who objected to how “easy” it was for Luthor to find the FOS. Couldn’t Supes pick a better hiding place? Doesn’t he have “stealth technology”? A front door with a lock? Well, fair call. Even in fantasy stories, a certain degree of logic/plausibility still applies. But in the comics, various villains (including Luthor) have figured out the FOS’s whereabouts and have periodically and successfully infiltrated it.
So, what’s the difference? Why the ire directed at SR
while many of the very same genre tropes are forgiven with a “wink-and-smile” in decades worth of comics (or in STM
My (mischievous?) question: are the SR
about the sins of the film - or is it some kind of subconscious ridicule of the traditional Superman conventions? In other words, be careful what you mock.