They had about one line between them!!! There was no tension no drama between Superman and Lex. Followed by a piss poor beatdown scene.Kal-El 8 said:I thought Lex Luthor was a badass Super Villian . Spacey just owned the role, his preformance was superb! .He showed his Darkside When he beat the crap out of SUPERMAN on New Krypton .
hk_spyke said:well 97% of the superman fans i know are only fans cause of the movies and don't know anything about him in the comics. Smallville is what made me a fan l like the retelling and updated superhero storys like smallville
Timstuff said:SR needed a supervillain desperately. Seriously, when you're spending $250 million on a modern-day Superhero epic, you need something more than just catching airplanes and throwing giant objects into space. I don't care if this was the "first chapter" in a trilogy-- with Spider-Man, Batman Begins, and even Bryan Singer's own X-Men they knew well enough that they needed a good fight scene or three in there. And now, Singer's descision could very well mean that another Superman flick won't happen for a long time, and it certainly won't be under his direction.
ShadowBoxing said:X-Men was certainly not known for epic brawls as Spider-Man was.
No they are separate movies, so no. People expect to see what they are familiar with. In the case of Superman they expect to see Lex Luthor hatch an evil scheme that somehow involves krytonite, not a wacky Superman clone or evil netherworld despot fight him.
Rols574 said:ok fine, you want darkseid. in 90 minutes please explain to me how to explain his origings the reason, why he and superman are enemies (without any backstory i may add...he was never mentioned in any of the movies) what his powers are, why he is the leader of his world, explain why he is attacking earth and why superman has been gone a long time. once again..... how do you fit 70 years of history into that amount of time?
J.Howlett said:Overlord,
And do you honestly think that people would understand what the heck is going on if Superman fought some supervillian out of nowhere.
You have to warm up to because he's been gone from the cinema for 19 years. You can't do it all in one film. This is a reintroduction to the character for general audiences. They had to do what's familiar. And seeing has Lex is The VILLIAN for Superman, it was the right way to go.
Now, we can get into all the supervillians you fans are clamouring for.
Matt said:Superman 101 would teach you that Lex MUST be the villian for a first entry. There is no denying that. A 5 minute origin works for a lackey Supervillian (I.E. Metallo. Have him robbing a bank, police fire bullets, Superman deflects the bullets from the accomplice, but Corben gets shot. He is loaded into an ambulence by someone the audience recognizes as one of Lex's henchmen. We cut to Lex's lab, learn Corben has died, but they have kept his mind and reanimated him as part cyborg.) Badda bing, badda boom. You have Metallo. He resents Superman for saving his partner while allowing his life to be destroyed. He is Lex's lackey. He does things Lex cannot (a super villian fight). In other words, you have your cake and eat it too.
Rols574 said:
you proved my point. you know because you are a fan. you dont have to be a die hard fan, but just a fan. Enough to know about his origins. since you only watched the movies are you aware of all those villians they are mentioning? i would hardly think so.
dpm07 said:Movies like LOTR and POTC prove that you can have great action complementing a great story and have great emotion and drama. These films have had great heroes and villains. Singerman and his whack pack of fools Harris & Daugherty are paying the price for their emotionally heavy and action lacking film. They proved how out of touch they truly are by not putting in a supervillain to complement Luthor, and making Superman's climax the lifting of a rock. They also blew it by having a kid in the film. Bad move, and one that has turned off a lot of fans. Singer needs to look to guys like Peter Jackson, Gore Verbinski, Jerry Bruckheimer, and Sam Raimi to see how things should be done with heroes and villains.
Singer just didn't get it, and because of this, the world didn't get Superman's Return. They got Jason's Arrival.
Ass Assassin said:I would have killed for the animated interpetation of Lex Luthor in this movie. That may have made the lack of a supervillain a lot less glaring.
dpm07 said:I really believe if they'd incorporated many of the STAS elements that we would have had a film that we could be proud of, and it would have had emotion, drama, action, romance, heart, etc. Timm/Dini understood Superman, and understood how to make him work with today's audiences, and this reverberated over to the JL/JLU. Singer's insistence at distancing himself from STAS was probably a blow to Timm/Dini and all the hard work they've done with the DCAU, but in the end, they are probably getting the last laugh because they know their heart and soul into the character has more substance than Singer and the whack pack (Harris & Daugherty) did with SR.
Singer did everything to make Superman boring. I'm sure it wasn't intentional, but the fact that his ego allowed him to exclude so many facets that have made Superman popular at the insistence of using only the Donner film has become his undoing.
Perfect example is STAS/JL/JLU. They took the elements that made Superman work, and made it work for the fans. Singer did the opposite, and the result is showing.
This film suffers from many aspects. Most notably taking a great concept and giving us a poor story. In regards to a supervillain, we could have had a great opportunity to introduce LexCorp Lex and a henchmen like Metallo or Parasite, or someone else in a first film. We could have had the film wrap up with a tease toward Brainiac the way Batman Begins did. However, in all likelihood, Singer didn't go this route because it wouldn't be the Donner way.
My guess is that he may be preparing to introduce a new villain to the mix that is not a part of Superman's Rogues Gallery. Why? He wants to keep in similar vein to what Donner did, and his ego has likely been hurt by the deserved bad word of mouth his film has gotten. His ego will likely want to create a villain with a Kryptonian theme (not Brainiac), and give that to us. What do I have to support my view? Nothing. This is just speculation and opinion.
One thing I do believe is that we will have Singer for a sequel unfortunately. WB has pumped a lot of money into this, and into Singer's vision. It's going to be hard for them to do an about face. Singer will also be at Comic Con, and I'm interested in how safe the questions will be. Also, will Singer admit that he miscalculated things based on his approach, and if so, what can he do to rectify things if anything. I'd be willing to guess his ego won't own up to the fact that he miscalculated the audience's interpretations of what a great modern day superhero film should be, and most definitely what a Superman film could have been.