View Single Post
Old 07-16-2013, 04:07 PM   #271
John Lambert
Side-Kick
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 632
Default Re: What's So Bad About Superman Returns?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. View Post
Allow me to agree and disagree with you on this point.

Where I agree: Dude in video says that critics hated Richard. In my experience (and yours, apparently) that’s simply not the case. Even strident critics of SR seemed to like Richard. The complaint was that he was a nicer, nobler guy than Superman. Dude was arguing the wrong thing.

Where I disagree: Richard being a “good man” was an essential aspect to the overall theme of Supes’ alienation. Without the global and mythic responsibilities of a superman, Richard can afford to be a “normal hero” and have the normal life unavailable to Supes. When Lois was in peril, he could devote himself to the single task of rescuing her. On the other hand, Supes had to interrupt his attempt, turn around and attend to earthquake ravaged Metropolis first. His duties are far bigger than Richard’s – even to the point of sacrificing himself to save the world. That’s something that Richard – for all his nobility – could never do.



Allow for a bit of poetry. It's a description of the passing of generations. The "father" recedes into a more passive role (the "son") when his own son assumes the "father" role. In any case, the line is lifted directly from STM. If you hated it in SR, you should reserve equal ridicule for its use in STM.



A fair criticism. But SR had exactly as many "fights" as STM. So, again, as long as you dislike both films for that reason... you're being consistent.



I’d say the SR scheme was more “realistic.” In STM, we’re supposed to believe that after a nuclear blast, and the devastation of California, Lex could satisfy authorities by merely producing the deeds to his legally bought land. In SR, there’s no pretext like that. Lex’s control over nations would be derived by power and the fact that half of them are destroyed – not through implausible legal technicalities.
Well, actually in S:TM, there is the problem that no one would want to live along a coast right by the nuclear fall out.

I don't think S:TM is any less hokey in its plot then SR. The redeeming aspect is that Superman is not a dead-beat Dad, who comes back and decides to disrupt the fairly stable family situation of his son.

On the other hand, I just always hated all the Donner/Singer movies for the "Superman is too much above us" line. I will take "Man of Steel" and any other medium, where they do not send Superman to earth with a mandate he not form normal relations with earthlings. If fire fighters, police men and other first responders can have family lives, then so should Superman.

John Lambert is offline   Reply With Quote