Sequels "Going Wrath Of Khan":The Official MOS Action Thread

[X-Maniac]

Sr didn't NEED a one-on-one superbattle. In regards to action it didn't need much of anything. It needed to be more emotionally invested.

You could argue that a one-on-one superbattle would deliver emotion, but something tells me you don't mean that.

I meant that i wanted more 'interpersonal conflict' - scenes including action that really brought out the emotion between characters. No one really seemed to 'react' to things in a big way..feelings were very suppressed, understated... that's the impression it left me with...

Tell me what you mean when you wanted it 'more emotionally invested.'

 

[bosef982]

I meant that i wanted more 'interpersonal conflict' - scenes including action that really brought out the emotion between characters. No one really seemed to 'react' to things in a big way..feelings were very suppressed, understated... that's the impression it left me with...

Tell me what you mean when you wanted it 'more emotionally invested.'

And that is what i loved about SR?

Everyone in that movie is so restrained and because of it, I felt so much tension during everything. They responded as real people do to things and I think knowing their characters as Singer portrayed them help you get that.

On the rooftop, there is such marked suppression of emotion that is painful and tragic. Lois wants to say something, she' can't. Superman wants to, but he can't. Both are bound to be good people -- especially Superman -- so they avoid the topic, avoid the emotion, and it crescendos later on when she must save him and STILL cannot express her feelings because she's before her "family."

There's a great thread at Bluetights that's a bit overwraught, but nonetheless it explores the subtextual meaning of Superman Returns. It's nothing special, but Doughtery and Harris reallly did structure that film in such a way as to have the characters saying something totally different then what they were saying. It's something that we're use to seeing in films like American Beauty, etc. -- dramas of the sort with real texture and emotion.

For instance, when Superman takes Lois up and asks her what she hears, he responds with, "I hear everything." It's a simple line, but in the context of that scene it has a larger subtextual meaning. I hear everything relates to him hearing Lois say she doesn't love him; relates to why, saddled with the weight of the world on his ears, he felt the need to leave Earth and find his own people, and it refutes Lois' entire article concerning the world doesn't need a savior. If this isn't Superman reacting, I don't know what is. He's basically saying, "Sometimes, I get tired and its too much." This is a theme explored in the comcis now and then, too.

Later, Luthor tortures Superman and says, "Kind of like how a father inherits the trait of his son." What I like about this is the realism of Luthor presuming Superman knows he has a son. Luthor is essentially threatening in a roundabout way to kill Jason, but Superman at that point has no clue what he's talking a bout and probably references his own father. But it's a clever way to keep a plot thread going on the part of the writers, and also to have Luthor react naturally should he know Superman had a child.

Later, when Lois asks Superman to not go back, she says, "You're hurt." Which is really a pathetic excuse for "I wnat you to stay." But she can't say that, can she? No, because her fiancee is right there and it would be wrong. So again, we have this outpouring of emotion that has to be restrained. Superman's response, "Goodbye, Lois" mirrors why she was mad at him -- he never said goodbye. Again, an emotional response and twist on the part of Superman.

Lois' reaction to Superman's Near-death was quite potent in my opinion, and written all over her face. The way that entire scene was shot -- the framing of Jason touching the S Sheild as she told Superman -- was genius and moving. When she's leaving, her face is tight and she's holding back alot and she's in a reversal of sorts since now she's the story. A

The ending is perhaps the most emotional part of the movie. Superman responds openly and frankly to the fact that he has a son and that he's going to give him up to Lois and Richard to raise. He basically cries -- like most men do -- at seeing his child. Truly emotional and in my theatre, not a dry eye when this happened the 7 times I saw it. But then, even better, is the UNDERSTATED emotional scene:

Every time in this movie, where typically Lois and Superman would break into some melodramatic argument or conversation, Lois either cuts it with "Will ___ see you around?" and Superman replies. To further bury the matter, Superman will say "Goodbye or Goodnight, Lois" while staring at her in a way that insinuates so much more. The ending scene does this greatly. Lois responds to Superman's return and his role by stopping smoking, nad appears to be in quite a clusterf#ck. She opens her mouth about Jason, to apologize it would seem, but Superman just smiles and his face just tells her something. She asks him "will we see you around?" Already, she just knows he knows that Jason is his son. "I"m always around," Superman responds. "Goodnight, Lois" and then the way he stares at her, his eyes lingering on her when he flies away.

They have an entire conversation in those lines. The beats in that conversation are so emotional and its amazing that none of it is said, but all there nonetheless.

Lois about to apologize is finally acknowleding that she was harsh. However, Superman smile that stops her is basically saying, "I forgive you for not telling me and I understand why you were so angry now. I left both of you." When she asks, "Will we see you...around?" She's saying, "This can't go on, we can't talk about this, but I'd like to see you, and I'd like your son to see you." Superman responds with, "I'm always around" which basically states "I'm always in love with you, I'll always be there for you..." and then "Goodnight, Lois" cuts the conversation before they betray her relationship with Richard. The way his eyes linger on her is just content and pride, he's almost proud of Lois, proud of their secret...

It's an amazing scene. The emotion is there if you want and look for it. It's just that it's very, very real as it would appear in real life. As a writer, perhaps I"m more atuned to picking this up since when writing myself I have to be sensitive to emotional manfiestations as they are in real life, and not in cinema, where they do tend for simplification to be a tad overstated. That's what I loved about SR; it wasn't melodramatic at all.

 

[Maze]

Great post Bosef .

...............

As for the question of the topic, i will say why not ,if it works in the context of the movie.

I 've never once felt that the Returns was lacking in that departement.
it 's just that imo it has the action that it needed to tell THAT story.

 

[X-Maniac]

... all of which explains in many ways why those who love SR were not keen on X3 and why those disappointed with SR (including me) enjoy X3.

I prefer the emotion more obvious, the drama more passionate... and in Singer's X1 and X2, I felt the story was more dynamic and more obviously powerful...

But that's only a stylistic choice. Neither approach is 'incorrect' and i hope we can learn to respect the differences in storytelling styles.

SR still has its action, X3 DOES have its subleties; and both of them took very daring, difficult choices with the storylines. In SR we have Lois in a new relationship, a child that is Superman's, Lex knowing where the FOS is, the FOS crystals (which are Superman's link to the voice/vision of Jor-El) being somewhere in outer space, Lex being alive and free on a desert island, and a vague history to previous movies in which Zod is depowered and either in jail or down a glacial crevasse... which to me appear to put some constraints on a sequel. In much the same way, the finality of some character outcomes at the centre of the storyline in X3 puts constraints on a sequel, even where there were nods that the outcomes may not be that final.

Both movies appeared to create entirely new challenges for their central characters that some do not like. They tried to take the drama to new and surprising levels.

 

[dark_b]

And that is what i loved about SR?

Everyone in that movie is so restrained and because of it, I felt so much tension during everything. They responded as real people do to things and I think knowing their characters as Singer portrayed them help you get that.

On the rooftop, there is such marked suppression of emotion that is painful and tragic. Lois wants to say something, she' can't. Superman wants to, but he can't. Both are bound to be good people -- especially Superman -- so they avoid the topic, avoid the emotion, and it crescendos later on when she must save him and STILL cannot express her feelings because she's before her "family."

There's a great thread at Bluetights that's a bit overwraught, but nonetheless it explores the subtextual meaning of Superman Returns. It's nothing special, but Doughtery and Harris reallly did structure that film in such a way as to have the characters saying something totally different then what they were saying. It's something that we're use to seeing in films like American Beauty, etc. -- dramas of the sort with real texture and emotion.

For instance, when Superman takes Lois up and asks her what she hears, he responds with, "I hear everything." It's a simple line, but in the context of that scene it has a larger subtextual meaning. I hear everything relates to him hearing Lois say she doesn't love him; relates to why, saddled with the weight of the world on his ears, he felt the need to leave Earth and find his own people, and it refutes Lois' entire article concerning the world doesn't need a savior. If this isn't Superman reacting, I don't know what is. He's basically saying, "Sometimes, I get tired and its too much." This is a theme explored in the comcis now and then, too.

Later, Luthor tortures Superman and says, "Kind of like how a father inherits the trait of his son." What I like about this is the realism of Luthor presuming Superman knows he has a son. Luthor is essentially threatening in a roundabout way to kill Jason, but Superman at that point has no clue what he's talking a bout and probably references his own father. But it's a clever way to keep a plot thread going on the part of the writers, and also to have Luthor react naturally should he know Superman had a child.

Later, when Lois asks Superman to not go back, she says, "You're hurt." Which is really a pathetic excuse for "I wnat you to stay." But she can't say that, can she? No, because her fiancee is right there and it would be wrong. So again, we have this outpouring of emotion that has to be restrained. Superman's response, "Goodbye, Lois" mirrors why she was mad at him -- he never said goodbye. Again, an emotional response and twist on the part of Superman.

Lois' reaction to Superman's Near-death was quite potent in my opinion, and written all over her face. The way that entire scene was shot -- the framing of Jason touching the S Sheild as she told Superman -- was genius and moving. When she's leaving, her face is tight and she's holding back alot and she's in a reversal of sorts since now she's the story. A

The ending is perhaps the most emotional part of the movie. Superman responds openly and frankly to the fact that he has a son and that he's going to give him up to Lois and Richard to raise. He basically cries -- like most men do -- at seeing his child. Truly emotional and in my theatre, not a dry eye when this happened the 7 times I saw it. But then, even better, is the UNDERSTATED emotional scene:

Every time in this movie, where typically Lois and Superman would break into some melodramatic argument or conversation, Lois either cuts it with "Will ___ see you around?" and Superman replies. To further bury the matter, Superman will say "Goodbye or Goodnight, Lois" while staring at her in a way that insinuates so much more. The ending scene does this greatly. Lois responds to Superman's return and his role by stopping smoking, nad appears to be in quite a clusterf#ck. She opens her mouth about Jason, to apologize it would seem, but Superman just smiles and his face just tells her something. She asks him "will we see you around?" Already, she just knows he knows that Jason is his son. "I"m always around," Superman responds. "Goodnight, Lois" and then the way he stares at her, his eyes lingering on her when he flies away.

They have an entire conversation in those lines. The beats in that conversation are so emotional and its amazing that none of it is said, but all there nonetheless.

Lois about to apologize is finally acknowleding that she was harsh. However, Superman smile that stops her is basically saying, "I forgive you for not telling me and I understand why you were so angry now. I left both of you." When she asks, "Will we see you...around?" She's saying, "This can't go on, we can't talk about this, but I'd like to see you, and I'd like your son to see you." Superman responds with, "I'm always around" which basically states "I'm always in love with you, I'll always be there for you..." and then "Goodnight, Lois" cuts the conversation before they betray her relationship with Richard. The way his eyes linger on her is just content and pride, he's almost proud of Lois, proud of their secret...

It's an amazing scene. The emotion is there if you want and look for it. It's just that it's very, very real as it would appear in real life. As a writer, perhaps I"m more atuned to picking this up since when writing myself I have to be sensitive to emotional manfiestations as they are in real life, and not in cinema, where they do tend for simplification to be a tad overstated. That's what I loved about SR; it wasn't melodramatic at all.

nice post. but that doesnt cahnge the fact that SR didnt have the right balance between story and action. batman begins and spidey 2 did.

 

[Jasomius]

Tell me what you mean when you wanted it 'more emotionally invested.'

A lot of the scenes in SR just seemed to move the plot along, it needed more character moments.

 

[Maze]

nice post. but that doesnt change the fact that SR didnt have the right balance between story and action. batman begins and spidey 2 did.

Yes ,

It is a fact that your opinion is that Sr didn't have the right balance

 

[Jasomius]

nice post. but that doesnt cahnge the fact that SR didnt have the right balance between story and action. batman begins and spidey 2 did.

Spider-Man 2 was worse than SR, far worse.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi there!

Money is a big decider! It also impacts on other movies, including X3, where budget limited the final Alcatraz scenes in the same way that budget limited the impact of New Krypton....

I agree. But the problem with X-3's budget restrictions were totally different to Superman Returns.

For X-Men 3 the cast were probably paid something like $100 million whereas with Superman Returns, Spacey got $10 million, Bosworth got a million (I think) and Routh got $300,000. So they probably had the whole cast covered with $15 million.

Whereas Jackman, Berry, Janssen, McKellen and Stewart all had to be paid BIG money to come back. I think Jackman got $20 million.

So if we eliminate the casting budgets of both movies and look at the effects budgets, Ratner got far more mileage for his money.

 

[Lightning Strykez!]

This is another pathetic attempt by X-Maniac to single out a group and provoke a fight -- of course this'll go undetected b the MODS since X-Maniac is a favorite of theirs.

Stop.

I think it's interesting to note that you're the only one that came to that conclusion. There is no "fighting" here. Everyone else here is discussing the validity of the questions posed in the first post...and that, without bashing the thread-starter.

 

[dark_b]

Yes ,

It is a fact that your opinion is that Sr didn't have the right balance

for a comicbook movie it didnt have the right balance.

 

[Reek]

I for one loved superman returns... but i did not expect too much action in it simply because it wasnt about that, it was reintroducing superman to the world and focusing on building characters. now the second one better have a good bit of action or then ill think twice about Superman Returns, meaning i love it now because im understanding the reintro and expecting more action, but if there is not more action, its simply a love story with a guy doing nothing but preventing some disasters, rather then preventing world domination, human deaths of huge numbers etc( like a supervillain would be capable of.)

just my 2 cents

 

[Maze]

for a comicbook movie it didnt have the right balance.

And i could still answer with the same post

 

[P.B.&Chocolate]

I loved SR and and enjoyed the action it did have . I want to see more action in the next part because this is Superman and action is expected . i just want it to be sensible and not just there for the heck of it .

 

[Tojo]

Try it without being insulting--Dew

 

[matthooper]

The lack of action was one of a few dozen problems. You're right, simply adding lots of action won't fix the rest of the problems. It's like putting a band-aid on a severed leg. It simply will stop a bit of the blood. I think they are just trying to address the biggest concern the general public had with the film.

This time, they have to start with a good story and build the extra action around that. The fact is, apart from these boards, SR is a largly forgotten film. The way to get the public excited is to simply amp up the action. It appeals to the base of the movie goers. Teens and young adults. WB is not going to publicly address the core problems of SR, like poor storytelling, bad acting and a general melodramatic haze of a movie.

 

[The Incredible Hulk]

You're going too far to the other extreme. The lack of action wasnt the root of all of SR's problems but it was one of them. No one was saying they wanted a McG style action fest. They wanted a good balance between action and storytelling, which you would expect in a film about a superhero, especially Superman.

 

[Eros]

the classic superman: The Movie had the same type [if not less] action then superman Returns yet people never have forgotten it. Some people that didn't like returns simply didn't like the vague history[like myself], which is a dumb idea from singer, beleiving that people remeber every single detail of the old superman movies.

 

[Jochimus]

My wish for a follow-up to SR isn't so much for more action. It's more for A) giving Routh more elbow room with the role and not being restricted to spouting thirty-year-old dialogue, and B) putting the REST of Superman's Rogues Gallery to use, with or without a lot of super-brawling.

I just find it very hard to accept that the only two Superman villains who will work in the framework that Donner created are Luthor and Zod. Heck, the Action story arc Donner himself is involved with right now involves Bizarro, for pete's sake. If the man who created the version of Superman Singer loves so much is willing to make allowances for the actual comic lore, then Singer himself has no excuses; I let SR slide simply because it's been 20 years since there's been a Superman movie.

 

[Kid_Kaos]

the classic superman: The Movie had the same type [if not less] action then superman Returns yet people never have forgotten it. ...

It is rembered because it set THE standard for people flying in movies. The story is poor and the acting mediocre. But the style of it and beeig the first Superhero movie made it history.
-
I also don't think lots and lots of action, like F4 or X3 had, will help. You usually introduce the characters with some nice action in the first one and go into deeper storytelling in the sequel(s). If they now decide to do it the other way around it pretty much ends up like SR, just with some nice action.

Anyway, i don't see how anyone can resolve all the plotholes from SR, finally introduce the characters to the audience (in what the first movie failed), develop them further AND bring in a villain with some meaningful story.

That's a huge hole Singer has to come out of. Good luck.

 

[dark_b]

i gave SR a rate of 8 only because there was no action. with more action this movie would get a 10. i just dont get it. it is a comic book movie about superman and it had 200 milions in 2006. there is no chance that they couldnt do it. they didnt want to. and the kids and adults noticed this. and it didnt make a lot of money for a sueprman movie.

now we are gettign a smaller budget and more action. and i bet that the balance betweent story and action will be bad.

i just hope that it at the end i will get my ultimate superman movie.

 

[X Knight]

loading a movie with action and special effects doesn't make a movie good if the plot / story sucks. Then the movie becomes superficial......beautiful on the outside, hollow on the inside.

For me, SR's action was plenty good for me. Frankly, I got goosebumps everytime he flew or used his powers. The plane rescue was superb, even lifting NK and the subsequent descent at the end was grand ( albeit implausible with the copious amounts of Krypton ).

It's just the underlying story I didn't care for. More specifically, the KID!! That one plot point ruined the entire movie for me.

So, even if Singer includes a stadium load of action in the sequel, the fact that we will still have the plot elements from SR doesn't make me that interested.....

 

[Tojo]

Hey Dew couldn't you just ask me to edit out the 'idiot/mongrel' part instead of deleting the whole post?

I wasn't insulting anyone specifically anyway but i'd be happy to have edited it but noooooo that would be way too complicated wouldn't it.

Basically(people who read this thread) i said WB execs saying there will be more action than any DC film ever was a bad way of trying to fix the last films problems..

 

[matthooper]

For me, SR's action was plenty good for me. Frankly, I got goosebumps everytime he flew or used his powers. The plane rescue was superb, even lifting NK and the subsequent descent at the end was grand ( albeit implausible with the copious amounts of Krypton ).

It's just the underlying story I didn't care for......

Lack of action never really entered into my mind until I heard the general public reaction. Just as Routh, to me, was solid. For me as well, I just never connected with the story. I walked out completely dissapointed and cheated. Not one moment felt original or had any imagination. It felt like I had seen it all before. The only difference between what I had seen before and with SR was that the SPFX were pretty good.

It all starts with a good story and good writing. If we get that for the sequel, I think Singer can actually do something good.

 

[Tojo]

now we are gettign a smaller budget and more action. and i bet that the balance betweent story and action will be bad.

Smaller budget?! Yeesh, this may not work. I mean SR hardly needed a 200 million budget imo, but a smaller budget plus more action is a strange combination. I just hope we don't get any crappy CGI. I know it's difficult to be CGI free because of the nature of this superhero but....