Originally Posted by Dr.
Even as a fan of SR
, I can appreciate (some of) this criticism. It seems clear to me that Singer was interested in the thematic tension between the hero’s traditional duties and his innate desire for normalcy. And according to Singer, these two aspects are incompatible - thus the story is necessarily melancholy (not to say tragic - though F. Scott Fitzgerald once said: “Show me a hero and I’ll write you a tragedy.”
Now, I see this as a fascinating - and entirely legitimate - interpretation of the mythos. But in retrospect, I think Singer should have crafted his movie as a fully unique iteration. In tone, it’s certainly quite a bit different than Donner’s version. Yet by using the Williams music and various/numerous other homages, he implies
a continuity - one that, imo, doesn't/shouldn’t exist.
Granted, a (say) new and original music score would not address the typical complaints that many critics have expressed (e.g., Superman having a son). But such changes would have, at least, given SR
its own identity - rather than being the weird hybrid that it is.
agree completely with this, I mean the scenes in the daily planet - such as when he sees Lois through the elevator, were magical and 1930s looking like nothing in a Superman movie before. And the big scenes like the plane rescue and the beating in the fortress were as some god-like myth. The idea of a sad, reflective Superman film where he returns from long absence to find the world moved on was great. But the camp Luthor, the cold and distant feel it all had, the constant references to the 70s films made it feel confused.