View Single Post
Old 12-21-2013, 02:03 PM   #352
Senator Pleasury
Banned User
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 2,844
Default Re: What's So Bad About Superman Returns?

Originally Posted by charl_huntress View Post
This is not a case of me needing to re-watch because I missed something. There are just certain aspects of the movie I do not like. Re-watching it isn't going to change those parts, or make me see them in a new light. I'm suggesting you rewatch MOS because you missed something that was clearly meant to be seen.
That's great, because it means that there's no point in me watching Man of Steel again. If in your opinion one viewing is enough - and I saw it twice and this very year, not 7 years ago - then I can state the gratuitousness of the last minute kiss without anybody asking me to see the movie again.

Originally Posted by charl_huntress View Post
CBMs regularly find easy ways out of problems. That hasn't changed. Look at Avengers. What was the trick to closing the hole in the sky? It was an easy fix solved by using the scepter. There's nothing complicated about it. Donner knew this, whereas Singer did not. So again, why use the Donner template? That was the wrong foundation for that type of story to begin with.
Well, regularly CBM are movies that don't go beyond the eye candy factor. Nothing wrong in trying to improve that. And MOS certainly didn't go for the easy way out either.

Originally Posted by charl_huntress View Post
If he was going to put in that sort of emotional arc then he should have solved it. He had no intention of doing that. At the end everything is depressing. Superman doesn't get the girl...nor his kid. Yeah, it was a real life situation, but who in the HELL gives Superman a real life situation like that? It was just asinine really.
It was solved. Superman in SR did find solace in the fact that he has a child and his connection to Lois is now through Jason. The very end of SR is far from depressing. Singer even symbolized that with Superman flying away from the dark clouds to a bright colorful dawn and moving from a sentimental tune to the uplifting Williams's Superman march.

For a person who doesn't believe in re-watching a movie before elaborating an opinion about it, you are certainly unable to remember the movie correctly.

Originally Posted by charl_huntress View Post
A reboot is the definition of washing something away. I don't even know what you think it is if you can't see that. Also, I was here after SR was released. It was a mad house, and the fan base was truly divided. There were fights and long, long debates about the movie. People were divided into 'lovers' and 'haters'. MOS didn't cause anything like that. Not everyone loves it, or loves everything single thing about, and yes there are some who hate it for their own reasons, but there is not the same sort of division like there was after SR was released. That is for sure!
Would you say that Raimi's Spider-man 2 has been washed away because of The Amazing Spider-man? I'd certainly say that both versions are still being analyzed.

And yes, in these forums or among the critics (56% against 44%), MOS's audiences are divided between lovers and haters. It's just a thing of checking MOS's forums.

Originally Posted by charl_huntress View Post
I won't get into the "MOS did some of the same things SR did" debate. That's not the debate here. There is a thread for which movie is better and why. However, those things you mentioned are not even comparable...not by a long shot because things like that happen frequently in the comics.
I'm sorry but for a debate you won't get into (SR vs MOS), you have been discussing it long enough here.

Originally Posted by charl_huntress View Post
Again, I don't care you like the movie. I just didn't. Nothing is going to change that.
I hardly think anyone comes here with the only purpose of changing other people's mind aboiut something.

But if you can't remember SR and you criticize it on the base of inaccurate memories, that's when I try to intervene.


Originally Posted by Dr. View Post
Problematic - since the SII tryst occurred in ~1978 and Jason is 5 or 6 in 2006. If a viewer had not seen SII (and it’s not a prerequisite) then they’d simply assume that Supes and Lois got together (at least once) just prior to his departure. And that’s all one needs to know.

This is a fairly puritanical perspective. If sex out of wedlock grates your cheese then there’s probably a great deal about modern society and pop culture that you dislike.

That Supes left without saying good-bye to Lois is a significant plot element that’s revisited and (finally) redressed during the course of the film. But there is no “abandons” Jason “by extension.” Supes entire arc is about finding/reconnecting to family. And he ultimately finds this by learning of his son’s existence. He would not - and does not - abandon the very thing he was looking for. The discovery of an unknown child (for obvious reasons, this usually happens to men ) is a reasonably common narrative device. TV Tropes calls it Who’s Your Daddy? This can play out in a number of ways. But if the “new father” is a good/sympathetic character, he’ll typically want to develop a relationship with (or otherwise support) his newfound child. And this was conveyed at the conclusion of SR.
It is, really, that simple.


Originally Posted by The Guard View Post
One thing I love about SUPERMAN RETURNS is that Superman doesn't actually try to steal Lois. When he realizes he's more or less missed out on his chance at happiness, instead of sulking about it, he more or less immediately throws himself into his "mission" again.
The scene is there (rooftop scene after Lois and Superman fly together). Lois decides to stay with Richard and then Superman steps back and respects Lois's decision.

Senator Pleasury is offline   Reply With Quote