I think we fans destroyed Superman's legacy.

[spider-neil]

spider neil you are right there they need to find a comparable villain to have superman face then weaken him/make him mortal like.

I don't even think they should do THAT webhead. whenever I read superman there is always some plot device to make him weaker, kryptonite, magic, coloured kryptonite, red sun. just ONCE I want to see superman at the height of his powers and the villian STILL gives superman a tough time. JL/JLU absolutely NAILED superman

superman (to darksied) - 'no darkseid, the only way off this rock is through ME and I wont stop until you're a greasy smear on the end of my FIST'

superman (to darkseid) - 'I feel like I live in a world made of cardboard, always careful not to break something, or somebody, but you can TAKE it can't you big guy? what we have here is the oppertunity to cut loose and show you just how powerful I really am'

writers are trying to weaken superman they should EMBRACE the fact he is the most powerful being on the earth. they should be going EPIC not personal. I'd kill to see james cameron tackle superman, not because he is flavor of the month but because he understands specticle and epic.

 

[spider-neil]

Well, it's a new decade and I don't doubt by the end of it Superman will be on the big screen again. I'm gonna be positive about the whole thing. Nobody has killed Superman's Legacy. The thing about a Legacy is that it endures. Fans come and go. The story is passed down to new generations. There are leaps then there are stumbles. I think we'll all get the great Superman film we've been waiting for . It won't be easy , but nothing in life ever is . Just look at the path from Batman and Robin to The Dark Knight.

look at the path of development hell to SM2

hope springs eternal.

 

[Webhead2006]

hopefully they can get it right next time when ever it might be.

 

[LL2K2]

SR destroyed "Superman's legacy" that is all folks.

No. Right now, it's the Siegel/Shuster lawsuit plus WB's inablity to move forward that's killing the legacy.

And let's face it, no matter what the storyline (reboot, sequel), no matter what villain (Doomsday, Darkseid, Brainiac), no matter which actor is playing Superman, Lois, Lex, etc., you just CAN'T please every fan out there because we all have our own image of Superman. For some fans, that's Chris Reeve. For others, it's Brandon Routh. Some like L&C's Dean Cain or SV's Tom Welling (although he's not quite there yet).

Point is, these debates, arguments, and "casting wars" will continue until something happens.

 

[The Overlord]

I already mentioned the space plane sequence. Plus, there was the earthquake and New Krypton.

The climax was Superman lifting something, that is just lame. This is supposed an action film, so it needs more action then what we got.

Oh, and take a guess how many punches Reeve threw in STM. None. Zero. The only action he performed which could be considered 'violent' was lifting Lex up by his collar ("Where's the detonator?"). And his Supes did an awful lot of lifting as well - the helicopter sequence; lifting and pushing tons of rock and boulders to quell the damage caused by the earthquake; and pushing the eastbound rocket into space.

Superman returns is a rip off of superman I, so those thing s were less fresh the second time they did it. One of the reasons Superman returns sucks because it rehashed Superman I, instead of doing something new.

Jump ahead to SII and SIII (and even SIV to an extent), and his battles were far more physical, but only because his opponents were his equal in terms of powers and strength: Zod, Non, Ursa, the evil Supes, and yes, Nuclear Man.

Why couldn't we have seen a new villain from comics in the movie, like Parasite or Metallo to have superman fight, instead of rehashing Superman I. Why not do something new?

 

[Webhead2006]

ll2k2 agree there lawsuit and wb not knowing what to do is the two biggest factors against superman right now

 

[3atman]

superman (to darksied) - 'no darkseid, the only way off this rock is through ME and I wont stop until you're a greasy smear on the end of my FIST'

superman (to darkseid) - 'I feel like I live in a world made of cardboard, always careful not to break something, or somebody, but you can TAKE it can't you big guy? what we have here is the oppertunity to cut loose and show you just how powerful I really am'

That sounds like a PG version of the macho boasting done in 300, which, some would like, others wouldn't. I'm fairly indifferent on super, huge, tank throwing, continent shifting, macho boasting movies, they're "fun" but that's about it.

 

[NeoRanger]

^ Yeah, these only worked in context and even there they weren't as good as people usually claim.

The adapted dialogue when he's wailing on Mongul in "For the Man Who Has Everything", on the other hand...

 

[TheCalling]

Fans kill everything.
Doesn't matter what a director comes up with or does, it's never good enough in a fanboy's eyes. They've always got something to ***** about.
This results in the studios "rebooting" a filmseries.

 

[Max Newlander]

I think we fans destroyed Superman's legacy? No.

This is how I see it.

WB saw a massive cash cow. Spider-man's first outing had grossed $800M WW a few years earlier, and its highly acclaimed sequel had just made similiar numbers, and was much loved by most. The general public seemed to have a real appetite for big comic-book characters. Even better, The Man of Steel was arguable even more popular than the cheeky web slinger? So they green light a massive budget to a young director with previous in successful superhero movie making. How could this fail to make then all richer than their wildest dreams?

Where to start. They somehow let the creative team (sorry the not so creative team in this case) of the new Superman movie dredge up the past, and make the movie a some kind of sequel to the original motion pictures some 20 years previous? A full generation had passed, the world had moved on from these films. More importantly the movie going general audience had moved on.

What makes it worse was the team with $200M+ budget created one of the most grey, boring movies you could possibly make. This is a superhero movie after all, and it starred the most super of heroes, where was the action, the fun, the big movie moments? There was no "wow" factor, no particularly positive WOM, you left the cinema and forgot about it quite quickly. Hence instead of being a shoe in for ONE BILLION DOLLARS, it huffed, puffed and wheezed it way to climb to a very unimpressive $200m domestically, and less than $400m WW. The general audience plainly didnt have such appetite for this superhero, the biggest of them all, well certainly not this dated and some what boring version anyway.

Lets not compare BB numbers to Superman, Batman had nearly been killed off forever (no pun intented). Not by the Joker or the Riddler, but by the Schumacher. There was no real appetite for the Caped one thanks to recent previous movies. However after a "wow" factor and great WOM from the first, the follow up did stunning business, and it wasn't surpising.

Superman's time was now, a major iconic charater that hadn't had a movie for 20 years, it was in a totally different position to the position of Nolan and the team behind the new Batman movie.

Returns just didn't connect with the masses, and that scared the c**p out of the studio. Green lighting another $200m becomes a bit scary after that reaction from the public. With no strong WOM from the first why would anyone particularly bother going to see another one?

The argument that The Man of Steele was green lit and it was Singer/Valkyrie that stopped it is IMO nonsense. WB is a business, and its ethos is to make money, if the thought it would be a profitable exercise then the would have made it with or without Singer. Returns as a movie experience was poor and they knew it, and a quick sequel was a dangerous option because of that.

The current scenario with the rights issues plainly makes the situation even more complicated. However in my honest opinion I think the studio have no idea what to do with Superman, and are running scared from it right now.

Superman Returns ironically killed off Superman (for a while anyway) IMO.

 

[spider-neil]

That sounds like a PG version of the macho boasting done in 300, which, some would like, others wouldn't. I'm fairly indifferent on super, huge, tank throwing, continent shifting, macho boasting movies, they're "fun" but that's about it.

you need to hear the dialogue in context. a lot of classic lines lose their power if you don't see it context

 

[spider-neil]

I think we fans destroyed Superman's legacy? No.

This is how I see it.

WB saw a massive cash cow. Spider-man's first outing had grossed $800M WW a few years earlier, and its highly acclaimed sequel had just made similiar numbers, and was much loved by most. The general public seemed to have a real appetite for big comic-book characters. Even better, The Man of Steel was arguable even more popular than the cheeky web slinger? So they green light a massive budget to a young director with previous in successful superhero movie making. How could this fail to make then all richer than their wildest dreams?

Where to start. They somehow let the creative team (sorry the not so creative team in this case) of the new Superman movie dredge up the past, and make the movie a some kind of sequel to the original motion pictures some 20 years previous? A full generation had passed, the world had moved on from these films. More importantly the movie going general audience had moved on.

What makes it worse was the team with $200M+ budget created one of the most grey, boring movies you could possibly make. This is a superhero movie after all, and it starred the most super of heroes, where was the action, the fun, the big movie moments? There was no "wow" factor, no particularly positive WOM, you left the cinema and forgot about it quite quickly. Hence instead of being a shoe in for ONE BILLION DOLLARS, it huffed, puffed and wheezed it way to climb to a very unimpressive $200m domestically, and less than $400m WW. The general audience plainly didnt have such appetite for this superhero, the biggest of them all, well certainly not this dated and some what boring version anyway.

Lets not compare BB numbers to Superman, Batman had nearly been killed off forever (no pun intented). Not by the Joker or the Riddler, but by the Schumacher. There was no real appetite for the Caped one thanks to recent previous movies. However after a "wow" factor and great WOM from the first, the follow up did stunning business, and it wasn't surpising.

Superman's time was now, a major iconic charater that hadn't had a movie for 20 years, it was in a totally different position to the position of Nolan and the team behind the new Batman movie.

Returns just didn't connect with the masses, and that scared the c**p out of the studio. Green lighting another $200m becomes a bit scary after that reaction from the public. With no strong WOM from the first why would anyone particularly bother going to see another one?

The argument that The Man of Steele was green lit and it was Singer/Valkyrie that stopped it is IMO nonsense. WB is a business, and its ethos is to make money, if the thought it would be a profitable exercise then the would have made it with or without Singer. Returns as a movie experience was poor and they knew it, and a quick sequel was a dangerous option because of that.

The current scenario with the rights issues plainly makes the situation even more complicated. However in my honest opinion I think the studio have no idea what to do with Superman, and are running scared from it right now.

Superman Returns ironically killed off Superman (for a while anyway) IMO.

excellent post

 

[Webhead2006]

what ever happens the next time. I do wish them the best of luck and hope it will be the film the studio needs and something we fans can enjoy alot.

 

[MadVillainy]

thats not really saying anything

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

And oh yeah:

No we didn't destroy Superman's legacy.

Batman survived Batman and Robin. Superman will survive the lawsuits, the okay but not awesome word of mouth of the last movie and Bryan Singer bailing on the franchise.

I just hope the next movie takes a page from Star Trek and be more fast pace and fun. And for the love of all that is holy never make another Supervillainless Superman movie again. Enough with Lex Luthor being the only villain and not being updated from the old movies.

 

[Webhead2006]

that is what i would like to see a bright bold movie, that fun, full of story/action. a mix between trek/im with a hint of seriousness like the dark knight. That would be how i want the tone/feel of the film.

 

[TheBat812]

Oversimplification is what killed SR. You can't just say he lifts a continent so obviously the movie sucked. Or, the suit was awful it sucked. I think most people expected Superman to be a Superhuman, and what they were given was a humanized Superman, something i loved, personally, and I felt like his entire story and arc was quite believable if you see Superman as a human with flaws. You disregard the small parts that honestly don't have consequence to the actual story, such as the convenience of Jason being 5 and Supes having been gone 5 years, because these are trivial things. You can overanalyze every movie and say something was convenient, because it was written that way to have meaning. I loved SR for what it is, even if it wasn't exactly what I was expecting because it worked for me as a story I'd never considered. The suspension of disbelief was there, but for many of you, you went in with an idea of whether or not you'd like it or not like it for one reason or another, never once considering that it was somebody else's vision of Superman. I bet if you made your own version, there'd be a similar percentage who liked it versus who didn't like it as Singer received. Could it have been better? Sure, but I hardly think it was bad as it was. Simply overanalyzed in trivial manners.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Oversimplification is what killed SR. You can't just say he lifts a continent so obviously the movie sucked. Or, the suit was awful it sucked. I think most people expected Superman to be a Superhuman, and what they were given was a humanized Superman, something i loved, personally, and I felt like his entire story and arc was quite believable if you see Superman as a human with flaws. You disregard the small parts that honestly don't have consequence to the actual story, such as the convenience of Jason being 5 and Supes having been gone 5 years, because these are trivial things. You can overanalyze every movie and say something was convenient, because it was written that way to have meaning. I loved SR for what it is, even if it wasn't exactly what I was expecting because it worked for me as a story I'd never considered. The suspension of disbelief was there, but for many of you, you went in with an idea of whether or not you'd like it or not like it for one reason or another, never once considering that it was somebody else's vision of Superman. I bet if you made your own version, there'd be a similar percentage who liked it versus who didn't like it as Singer received. Could it have been better? Sure, but I hardly think it was bad as it was. Simply overanalyzed in trivial manners.

It's an opinion to like or dislike it. Deal with it.

I'm not a moron, if a movie is good I don't care if it's what I expected. I can easily over look story flaws if I like a movie. I loved Spider-man 1 and 2 and overlook there story flaws and anyother flaws they might have. Same with BB, TDK, HellBoy Watchmen, Iron Man and the first two Blade movies.

I simply didn't like Superman Returns. I couldn't over look it's flaws because it had too damn many of them IMHO. I'm happy as all get out that you enjoyed Superman Returns but there was nothing emotional about it to me. I damn near hated Superman after watching it.

 

[The Overlord]

Oversimplification is what killed SR. You can't just say he lifts a continent so obviously the movie sucked. Or, the suit was awful it sucked. I think most people expected Superman to be a Superhuman, and what they were given was a humanized Superman, something i loved, personally, and I felt like his entire story and arc was quite believable if you see Superman as a human with flaws. You disregard the small parts that honestly don't have consequence to the actual story, such as the convenience of Jason being 5 and Supes having been gone 5 years, because these are trivial things. You can overanalyze every movie and say something was convenient, because it was written that way to have meaning. I loved SR for what it is, even if it wasn't exactly what I was expecting because it worked for me as a story I'd never considered. The suspension of disbelief was there, but for many of you, you went in with an idea of whether or not you'd like it or not like it for one reason or another, never once considering that it was somebody else's vision of Superman. I bet if you made your own version, there'd be a similar percentage who liked it versus who didn't like it as Singer received. Could it have been better? Sure, but I hardly think it was bad as it was. Simply overanalyzed in trivial manners.

I don't see how the movie being dull is a trivial matter or why the movie being dull has anything to do with oversimplification or superman being human.

This was supposed to be an action film, so it should some action in it besides Superman saving an airplane, making a movie for 232 million dollars and having one action scene involving Superman and nothing else of note action wise, is a real waste of time. That's a big issue, not a trivial one and that has nothing to do with oversimplification and everything to do with bad story telling.

 

[MadVillainy]

It's opinion to like or dislike it. Deal with it.

I'm not a moron, if a movie is good I don't care if it's what I expected. I can easily over look story flaws if I like a movie. I loved Spider-man 1 and 2 and overlook there story flaws and anyother flaws they might have. Same with BB, TDK, HellBoy Watchmen, Iron Man and the first two Blade movies.

I simply didn't like Superman Returns. I couldn't over look it's flaws because it had too damn many of them IMHO. I'm happy as all get out that you enjoyed Superman Returns but there was nothing emotional about it to me. I damn near hated Superman after watching it.

I agree for the most part
except SR didn't even have too many flaws. Its just that the few flaws it had were so crippling to the film and the franchise. Jason and continuing in the Donnerverse. Those made SR worse for me and really has me question where they could have gone in a sequel.

I don't see how the movie being dull is a trivial matter or why the movie being dull has anything to do with oversimplification or superman being human.

This was supposed to be an action film, so it should some action in it besides Superman saving an airplane, making a movie for 232 million dollars and having one action scene involving Superman and nothing else of note action wise, is a real waste of time. That's a big issue, not a trivial one and that has nothing to do with oversimplification and everything to do with bad story telling.

co sign.

I hate when SR defenders say: "All people want is action". Well, yeah everyone wants action in an ACTION movie. Which is what Superman is.

Ideally Superman would be a superpowered mix of State of Play, All the President's Men, and some corporate corruption

 

[spider-neil]

anyone wanting action in an action movie should be ashamed of themselves. I mean, whatever next? jokes in a comedy? scares in a horror?



we want our superhero movies to be an action free zone!!

 

[charl_huntress]

B.Singer hampered Supes. Us fans have kept the legacy alive.

My two cents.

On a side note, I'm not even surprised to see people still arguing about Superman Returns. Fortunately for me I've lived through my grief with that movie. It's time to let it go folks. Granted, it was a bad movie, but maybe it's time to look toward the future. I'm totally digging DC animated. That's what will keep Supes alive for the time being.

 

[Superark]

B.Singer hampered Supes. Us fans have kept the legacy alive.

My two cents.

On a side note, I'm not even surprised to see people still arguing about Superman Returns. Fortunately for me I've lived through my grief with that movie. It's time to let it go folks. Granted, it was a bad movie, but maybe it's time to look toward the future. I'm totally digging DC animated. That's what will keep Supes alive for the time being.

Bad movie? Or good movie? I can't tell

Something wierd happened on my way to the movie...I forgot all the spoilers and went in with a totally open mind. I was really jazzed with the movie, but the ending was wistful and not explaining the conception of Jason or alluding to more than it was...well...I feel that was a mistake. I'm sure the DVD may expound on this, but...well I still thought the movie was very good.

Okay...I'm a little torn because...well there were a lot of things I didn't like in the movie, but I still liked the movie.

I loved the opening shots and the credits were old school, and I did feel like I had been transported back to my childhood. I didn't love the opening scene with Lex and I would have liked to have seen Kal hurtling in his space ship as the very first character shot, but the Lex scene played well. Plus, Noel was wonderful. As soon as I heard her voice I was transported again to my childhood and watching AOS.

The beginning felt rushed, but I'm undecided if there should have been more scenes with Martha or less. Routh has the most chemistry with Bosworth, so it was best to hook them up sooner rather than later. I wasn't really feeling the Martha/Clark talk, but maybe that will be rectified in the DVD.

I LOVED the FX. SR heat vision is the way to go. I liked how it was sort of a combo of the laser and SV heat blast effect. Also, most of the flying shots were great...better than great. There were a few that looked wire-y, but it wasn't bad.

All the actors did a good job. No one really stood out, and that's a bit of an issue because I didn't get the total vibe of Superman-coolness from Routh until the end. I guess he was still getting broken in earlier in the movie. I definitely hope the next movie give him more than ten lines. He seemed really short shrifted in the dialogue department.

Lastly, the only thing I truly didn't like was the ending. I was very wistful and...that's all I'm going to say. I know this is set up for the sequels, but it was a wistful way to end a Superman movie. Also, the lack of Jason's conception and the prior relationship between Supes and Lois wasn't handled very well. There should have been more exposition on that. Again, hopefully the DVD will clear that up.

Dont get me wrong. I really liked this movie and I'll see it again at least two more times. But...well...I'm hoping for a bit more punch in the next movie, and if I have to keep saying that the DVD will expound on this than there were elements missing that should have been left in.

edit:

I can't see how anyone is still thinking we are going to get Sky High after watching SR. C'mon...he flew off at the end...alone. And from the looks of he'll be doing a lot of that in the future...le sigh.

 

[Superark]

It's opinion to like or dislike it. Deal with it.

I'm not a moron, if a movie is good I don't care if it's what I expected. I can easily over look story flaws if I like a movie. I loved Spider-man 1 and 2 and overlook there story flaws and anyother flaws they might have. Same with BB, TDK, HellBoy Watchmen, Iron Man and the first two Blade movies.

I simply didn't like Superman Returns. I couldn't over look it's flaws because it had too damn many of them IMHO. I'm happy as all get out that you enjoyed Superman Returns but there was nothing emotional about it to me. I damn near hated Superman after watching it.

Spidey you liked Twilight How could we possibly take your tastes seriously

Just teasing, I love ya Spidey!

 

[charl_huntress]

Bad movie? Or good movie? I can't tell

t:

Wow Superark! You certainly went back in the archives for those quotes. Bravo!

To be frank, I went through a rollercoaster of emotions related to SR. Initially, I didn't want to trash the movie, but I felt there were a lot of problems with the film. My first review was relatively nice, but eventually I came to dislike the film because it did a serious disservice to my fave superhero. Dislike is actually a nice word. I HATE SR and have only watched it once. I won't even watch it on FX.

I didn't trash the film in that review because I hoped it could be salvalged via sequels, but le sigh...I'm glad WB junked it.

Kudos on digging through the archives to find that though. I forgot I did go in to the movie theater with no preconceived notions. Unfortunately, I remember leaving the theater feeling sad for Superman and that is one of the many problems with SR.