Superman Returns 44 days later...

WormyT said:
Thank god for the animated show! Now THESE clips are epic! I don't want ALL fighting (in the movies) but when there IS action, i want it on THIS scale.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rY0VNjribyY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h7Pzv9u9nEs

A lot of the cartoons are great. The animated Superman comes off down to earth, oldfashioned but still kicks a$$ if need be. basically the producers od the toons have respect for the legend by looking at the source material.

It's mostly chicks that like the chick flick (that they call Superman Returns) and their boyfriends who are whipped into liking it.
But even that aside, it's a bad chick flick, bad pacing, bad acting, no tension, zero chemistry between the bad actors, ridiculous plot, silly ending and dumb beginning.
Oh, how I hate Superman Returns

Well, I loved SR actually...but the only thing that really makes my blood boil is that he won't put the Krypton sequence on DVD...

^the vids are awesome...

But in the process of owning Captain Marvel, he killed alot of innocent lives in those buildings....heh, when pushed over the edge, he becomes reckless I suppose
 
Wesyeed said:
One word: Potential.

theres just so many possibilities with a new superman.
He doesn't exist in the comics. So why (did Singerman) make up such stupid crap when it will take Superman even further from his roots. Not to mention they never really explained when SSuperman and Lois got busy. No flashbacks.
They could have had a clone plot with luthor cloning Superman instead. Perhaps a plot that involes 2 succesful attempts of cloning out of god knows how many failures. The 2 successful attempts could turn out Bizzarro and Conner kent. That way you have a Supervillain and the kid. And the kid would already be in his teens from accelerated growth (Reign of the Supermen). That type of dynamic would be interesting given Conors cockiness PLUS Luthor would reveal Conners got half HIS DNA too.

I've always viewed Superman as a Superhero/sci fi story about a guy adopted by small town folks. A story about adoption adn acceptance. The love story is only part of it.
It's NOT a bloody episode of The Brady Bunch or a cheesy chick flick.
 
BatFitz said:
Well, I loved SR actually...but the only thing that really makes my blood boil is that he won't put the Krypton sequence on DVD...

^the vids are awesome...

But in the process of owning Captain Marvel, he killed alot of innocent lives in those buildings....heh, when pushed over the edge, he becomes reckless I suppose
LOL!
It's true, he did go a little over board on the property destruction. I presume the fight happened AFTER office hours. Anyone who died deserved it for working too much and not spending quality time with their families.
 
Wesyeed said:
ah ha, well then riddle me this...

If you can insert into an outlet, can we also outsert out of an inlet?:confused:

I've been mulling over that one for weeks.

That's right up there with how many licks does it take...:oldrazz:
 
wrooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooong
 
TheBat812 said:
I don't really agree that this wasnt a Superman movie. Many Superman comics have departed more than this movie, and this stayed true to the core of the characters, imo. Sure, it was a slightly different take than you probably wanted, but it worked (for me, at least).
i think you need to go read the books again, singer departed on his elseworld journey, in an elseworld journey
 
WormyT said:
LOL!
It's true, he did go a little over board on the property destruction. I presume the fight happened AFTER office hours. Anyone who died deserved it for working too much and not spending quality time with their families.

No one was in there, the complex was been opened to the public for the first time.
 
I kind of remember that. Lex was making new homes for people or something like that. Superman didn't trust lex and wanted to do something to stop him from opening the apartments, and cap wanted superman to trust lex and so both fought each other and brought down lex's buildings anyway... I cant remember the rest. I'm flashing back to some sort of underground device that needed to be diffused or something though.
 
This is my take on SR...
-Visually great
-Lois Lane...too *****y/cruel/rude/lacks anything that would make Clark be in ove with her still(basically, she didn't come off as loveable)
-Luthor: you know, we've never seen Superman battling a human who uses superman's only weakness to his adavantage...BRILLIANT!!
-The kid...it could have been further developed
-the 3-way: my take on how to resolve the richard-supes-lois problem would be to have Richard die in the next movie (and no, not as a villain like metallo like some people on the boards suggest, but maybe as a hero?...)
originality: -10 out of 10
 
Problem with Richard dying and Lois and Supes/Clark getting together is that it would make Lois seem heartless.

I think this is a tricky one for them (script writers) to get out of. Richard is a decent bloke and Lois shouldn't just ditch him either.
 
/\ Lois....heartless? nah, thats not possible. i mean, she treats her collegaues with great respect and always follows orders and never puts people in danger just because she wants to "investigate" something. Plus, she's such a great mom who not only makes sure her kid gets all of his veggies and medicine but also that he never wanders off or never forgets to pick him up from school. u know...stuff like that. plus, she an supes were just made for each other. selfish and b****y really meshes well with self sacificing and good. She really is a good human being, especially to clark.
 
it's like revenge of the sith. Terrible film in my opinion. But people love it and gave it a high 82% rotten tomatoes and 8.0 imdb scores because either the emotional parts with the burning Passion of the Anakin scene really washed away all the terrible parts of the movie for people, or some were just extremely glad jar jar wasn't in this one, or was barely in it to be noteworthy. I just can't believe how such a sucky movie did well. Now parts are alright... I liked when Order 66 happened, but others are pointless toy commercials and it's just so stupid at other points with terrible acting from some of today's best performers ever, I can't believe how well recieved it was.
 
spot on wesyeed.
look at all the newer starwars films.they all got a majority of decent reviews but they were crap.
its only because of the love of the characters and the universe that its failing as an actual film were ignored. hey i enjoyed all of em first viewing in the cinema. then on thought and watching again on DVD i saw how much they really sucked as films.
i bet if those films were not "starwars" films. they wouldve been torched by the majority.
SR is the same.
once the initial buzz of seeing superman on the bigscreen again goes. the film will be seen from a more objective standpoint and will be less and less popular as time goes on.
SR was a poor superman film.
i dont doubt it was made with skill etc.
but it did no justice to the iconic character and will be put in the same bracket as the batman forevers. the superman 3's etc.
sad really.
 
It's mostly chicks that like the chick flick (that they call Superman Returns) and their boyfriends who are whipped into liking it.
But even that aside, it's a bad chick flick, bad pacing, bad acting, no tension, zero chemistry between the bad actors, ridiculous plot, silly ending and dumb beginning.

I agree that it's not the "chick flick" that Singer trumped it up to be. I dislike the way it has been said that "chicks" would automatically like this movie just because they throw in some soppy romance scenes or that only young males wanted more thrilling action scenes.

Why should a woman automatically like the Lois/Superman scenes in this movie and why would only teenage males like a fast-paced, thrilling and enjoyable action movie? That's not the case I've seen.
 
Immortalfire said:
Most useless, pointless character addition ever.

You mean the most interesting sequel story potential character....
 
Indeed. Now that's the spirit. who wouldn't want superman to have his very own sidekick?

It's like batman forever, when Bruce learns to be like a father to young dick. It brings him some inner peace when he becomes a parent figure he lost in his youth. I always liked that about sidekicks for batman. In a way he's acting as the parent to people like him who lost theirs. superman will be a parent. That Sandman guy says that he won't, but he can shut it. Superman will be the dad to his son and he will train him to fight for justice.

but that guy, hippie something, keeps sayng returns isn't like Forever. It's a lot like it. I don't care what that hippie guy wants to say.
 
If someone thinks directors have to follow the tight rules that someone from comic books lays down they are kidding themselves. "WTF" is exactly what i thought when i read that review :down:

If we dont like films, plz... lessen stress and just read comics.
 
Ugh. I hate when zealous fans use that. "Just read the comic"? do you know what you're telling movie studios about how respectful they should be to the sources?

Don't do that.
 
Wesyeed said:
Ugh. I hate when zealous fans use that. "Just read the comic"? do you know what you're telling movie studios about how respectful they should be to the sources?

Don't do that.

Do you have any idea what youre telling a director when you give him a laundry list of abstract rules? Youre saying, shut up and dont create, just put this on film.

That will never happen... ever ever.
 
Lucidious said:
I dislike the way it has been said that "chicks" would automatically like this movie just because they throw in some soppy romance scenes or that only young males wanted more thrilling action scenes.
Me too, and I'm a sappy chick. However, I don't like being brazenly manipulated, and telling me that something is a "chick flick" already turns me off from the get-go. I despise romantic comedies. Like, with a fiery kind of hatred.

Most of why I absolutely love BB is because I feel so much for the 8-year-old child whose parents were gunned down in front of his eyes. That's something you never truly get over. That's REAL tragedy. I get all sappy and emotional with that kind of stuff. Trying to get back with someone who's moved on? That's not tragedy - that's called, "get a spine."

Or maybe that's just me. Even when I feel that I could possibly be someone's soulmate, I don't go after other women's men. I just don't.
 
XCharlieX said:
Do you have any idea what youre telling a director when you give him a laundry list of abstract rules? Youre saying, shut up and dont create, just put this on film.

That will never happen... ever ever.

Sin City.

And all fanboys want is the director to stay true to the spirit of their characters and fundamentals of their story. You try to make it sound like they want word for word adaptation without anything different besides live action, which is of course impossible. There are plenty of ways to be creative using established characters and their extensive comic history, so I don't buy that garbage about their creativity being stifled by sticking to the source as closely as possible. That's really the whole point of adaptation, isn't it...

It's a slippery slope to say fanboys should just read the comics if they care so much about their character being portrayed correctly. You're telling hollywood you personally don't give a **** if they screw up and create a thousand batman and robins or catwomans.

Please don't do that.
 
Wesyeed said:
Sin City.

And all fanboys want is the director to stay true to the spirit of their characters and fundamentals of their story. You try to make it sound like they want word for word adaptation without anything different besides live action, which is of course impossible.

It's a slippery slope to say fanboys should just read the comics if they care so much about their character being portrayed correctly. You're telling hollywood you personally don't give a **** if they screw up and create a thousand batman and robins or catwomans.

Please don't do that.

And you use this to justify complaining when a director so as much happens to have amind of his own? You do realize this is like 3% of the time right?

Its not their fault if youre paranoid about film makers decision to create crap. Crap is crap... labelling all deviations as crap is crap also. Its wrong.

I see a lot of interest in making films out of their favorite characters, but I see less than zero respect from the art that often goes with it. Either put up or... ;)
 
XCharlieX said:
And you use this to justify complaining when a director so as much happens to have amind of his own? You do realize this is like 3% of the time right?

Its not their fault if youre paranoid about film makers decision to create crap. Crap is crap... labelling all deviations as crap is crap also. Its wrong.

I see a lot of interest in making films out of their favorite characters, but I see less than zero respect from the art that often goes with it. Either put up or... ;)

What are you talking about?:confused:

I'm saying what's the point of adapting something to film if you're not going to adapt something to film in the first place.

Yes it's usually crap if the hero on screen has very little relation with their comicbook self... You caught me! I admit it.

:confused: You saying you want comicbook movies to STOP striving to be the best adaptations of the source stories as they possibly can? Please tell me your views on Burton and MCG's superman. They certainly had their own minds.

*listens patiently*
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"