Superman Returns Is Superman's Boy Scout Image The Reason Beyond Lackluster Ticket Sales?

[8atman]

I saw Superman Returns two times in the theater, once on Imax and always left happy with the movie. I understand some of people's negative feelings about the movie because of some of the risks they took (sequal/not a sequal, lois being engaged with kid, the end with the kid) but my personal feeling is the risks worked. I thought FX were spectacular and casting for the most part was pretty good with the exception maybe of Lois (actresses name escapes me for the moment) but still it wasn't bad.

I just wonder since Superman Returns seems to be a decent movie that is taking a lot of flak and not doing well box office wise if there is some other reason. Is it actually possible that Superman has out lived his age? I mean face it as powerful as Superman is he hasn't grown with the times he still has that 40's farm boy mentallity. There's no chinks or spots on his armor so to say. Batman and other heroes have managed to kind of grow with the times they don't exactly reflect what they were when they were first introduced to us. Batman did well and was well accepted but I constantly how darker it needed to be. The Punisher which I thought was another good movie that seemed to get some criticism, mainly it wasn't close to how dark and violent it should of been. Even with Spider-man 3 starting to get bigger in hype people want to see a darker movie. Heck even in comics you see it. Black Adam who I had totally forgoten up has become more popular of recent then his good guy counter part because he's been ripping off villians limbs and even faces.

Basically I think that if you try and give the Superman that we've always known your never going to get people flooding into the theaters to see it and praising itno mater who you cast, what the story is or how you film it. Sure they could bring someone in to mix Superman up a bit and give him that more darker image but you know that even the people that wanted the darker, edgier superman would be sitting there thinking "that ain't Superman". Face it Superman is a family hero movie and family movies aren't going to sell as well. I'm sure we'll get a Superman sequal but it I'm sure it will be toned down to appease more to the family crowds and with a smaller budget.

Does anyone agree with this at all?

 

[matthooper]

I saw Superman Returns two times in the theater, once on Imax and always left happy with the movie. I understand some of people's negative feelings about the movie because of some of the risks they took (sequal/not a sequal, lois being engaged with kid, the end with the kid) but my personal feeling is the risks worked. I thought FX were spectacular and casting for the most part was pretty good with the exception maybe of Lois (actresses name escapes me for the moment) but still it wasn't bad.

I just wonder since Superman Returns seems to be a decent movie that is taking a lot of flak and not doing well box office wise if there is some other reason. Is it actually possible that Superman has out lived his age? I mean face it as powerful as Superman is he hasn't grown with the times he still has that 40's farm boy mentallity. There's no chinks or spots on his armor so to say. Batman and other heroes have managed to kind of grow with the times they don't exactly reflect what they were when they were first introduced to us. Batman did well and was well accepted but I constantly how darker it needed to be. The Punisher which I thought was another good movie that seemed to get some criticism, mainly it wasn't close to how dark and violent it should of been. Even with Spider-man 3 starting to get bigger in hype people want to see a darker movie. Heck even in comics you see it. Black Adam who I had totally forgoten up has become more popular of recent then his good guy counter part because he's been ripping off villians limbs and even faces.

Basically I think that if you try and give the Superman that we've always known your never going to get people flooding into the theaters to see it and praising itno mater who you cast, what the story is or how you film it. Sure they could bring someone in to mix Superman up a bit and give him that more darker image but you know that even the people that wanted the darker, edgier superman would be sitting there thinking "that ain't Superman". Face it Superman is a family hero movie and family movies aren't going to sell as well. I'm sure we'll get a Superman sequal but it I'm sure it will be toned down to appease more to the family crowds and with a smaller budget.

Does anyone agree with this at all?

No.

The movie stunk. That's why it's failing.

 

[Galactical]

not me... smallville's a hit. Superman's been doing well in animated form for years. Today's audiences still enjoy his story. i do.

the movie just didn't click with the public. it's not the movie that captured audiences like the first film did.

 

[WTFwuzThT]

I'd say Supermans lack of a boyscout image along with the horrible boring retread of a movie is why this sucker is bombing. I don't really like seeing someone else's angst being portrayed on screen by a man in tights. Leave your feelings of poor me at home Singer.

 

[matthooper]

not me... smallville's a hit. Superman's been doing well in animated form for years. Today's audiences still enjoy his story. i do.

the movie just didn't click with the public. it's not the movie that captured audiences like the first film did.

True. Although I'm not a fan of Smallville, there is NOTHING wrong with the character of Superman. He's still an icon. The movie just wasn't much. The public picked up on that way before the film opened, and once it did open, no one seemed to care.

You make a good story about a can of baked beans and people will see it. It's not the character that is broken, it's the filmmakers.

 

[afan]

^ I agree, it is not the presence of the ideal, it is the absence that deflates the film.

 

[y2jversion1]

matthooper's nailed it:

You make a good story about a can of baked beans and people will see it. It's not the character that is broken, it's the filmmakers.

 

[TRUE]

The movie was too long and boring imo. Movie was a big dissapoint too me. I hope the sequal is more liike the animated series.

 

[retconned]

The reason it has ahd lackluster ticket sales is becuase this film lacks rewatchable quality, I can't stress this enough.

 

[matthooper]

The reason it has ahd lackluster ticket sales is becuase this film lacks rewatchable quality, I can't stress this enough.

Very true, but in addition to that, the opening wasn't that good either. Nothing in the trailers or the hype made the average filmgoer say, "I have to see that!"

 

[retconned]

Very true, but in addition to that, the opening wasn't that good either. Nothing in the trailers or the hype made the average filmgoer say, "I have to see that!"

Agreed, the general public thought the trailers were boring. Geuss that trailer didn't lie.

 

[Octoberist]

Yeah, I think the word of mouth has been mixed. It's not the characters, it's the creative decisions made in this movie.

 

[retconned]

I remember watching the trailer for Superman Returns on the big screen with somewhat girlfriend at the time, and after the trailer was over she looked at me and said, Im not seeing that with you, it looks boring.

And that girl is as general as it gets.

 

[Octoberist]

I think it's because the public is so familar NOW with Spider-Man and Batman that Superman looks..boring.

Singer made a movie that should have beend designed to lore non-Superman fans, but in my honest opinion it didn't work.

 

[Galactical]

I think it's because the public is so familar NOW with Spider-Man and Batman that Superman looks..boring.

Singer made a movie that should have beend designed to lore non-Superman fans, but in my honest opinion it didn't work.

you are confusing me here. The public's been familiar with them for years alongside Superman. That can't be the reason at all.

The reason is because superman returns is mediocre, even sub par compared to spidey and batman and whatever else has come since the 70s. I wouldn't even say it touches the original superman film in quality, despite otis dragging that one down to stupidity hell.

It's not well paced.

it uses corny action we've seen forever in better films.

it bends established rules in the superman world

Lex's plot. nuff said.

It uses vague history that nobody understands but bryan singer

It's the movie, not superman that's the problem and I'm not holding back or sugar coating it... The movie is not very good. Decent at best, considering the excellent plane fx scene and the effort put into performances, but somebody dropped the ball when the day was done and what's left is this film. and i've read the planet. i've read the twisting and spinning to make unnecessary scenes seem necessary, uh, double speak to make it all look like friggin gone with the wind, but it's not. Truth is, it's a weak story for a strong superhero and the two conflict throughout the 2 hours and 30 or so minutes this beast lasts.

in fact, after seeing the SM3 trailer myself before this, I'm certain some wished they saw that film instead. So of course it looked boring. it is. how can a man flying around in his underwear ouside his pants be boring? I don't really want to know, it just was for whatever reason.

hmmm, SM3 does look good despite raimi continually trying to deviate from the comics' long established canon.

 

[Steelsheen]

well bad ass characters seem to resound more with current audiences, just look at the popularity of Blade and Batman. current audiences are more jaded compared to the days of our grandfathers.

but it doesnt mean that boyscouts have no room in our world. everyone would still rally behind a leader, someone that can inspire us to be the best of who we can be, just look at Lord of the Rings. its just that for Superman since he's the ultimate boyscout stakes has got to be higher, and i dont mean the SR version of higher stakes, but true good vs evil. they got the right villain already-- Lex, its jus that he's got to be a meaner, more evil SOB the next time around (if we do get a next time).

 

[Mr. Socko]

Kinda so. The public no longer likes cartoony colorful superheroes. They think they are for kids.

 

[Fan of Tomorrow]

I think most everyone, in the States anyway, is a fan of Superman in some form or another, boyscout image or not. That being said, I'm frankly a little tired of reading excuses for Superman Returns' relative failure at the box office. Has it dawned on any of you fans of the film that perhaps some, dare I say even most people simply didn't enjoy the film?

Superman happens to be my favorite superhero for any number of complex reasons. I realize he might strike some as a boyscout, but he is not a boring character. In my opinion though, Singer unfortunately failed to make an entertaining, engrossing movie around the character, and that's why ticket sales are sagging.

 

[chicagodave]

it has nothing to do with the character at all. the story just had too many holes in it. even for a comic book movie it was just too uneven and somethings where just not explained well. plus it was about 25 minutes too long.

 

[Steelsheen]

25 min too long for some, 30 min too short for the others.... nobody's gonna be happy with the running time

 

[chicagodave]

25 min too long for some, 30 min too short for the others.... nobody's gonna be happy with the running time

so if its 30 mins more it would be a 3 hour movie!! wow!!!! its doing bad now imagine if it was that long. it wouldnt even crack 100 mill. some more editing was neccesary a lot more.

 

[ultimatefan]

I saw Superman Returns two times in the theater, once on Imax and always left happy with the movie. I understand some of people's negative feelings about the movie because of some of the risks they took (sequal/not a sequal, lois being engaged with kid, the end with the kid) but my personal feeling is the risks worked. I thought FX were spectacular and casting for the most part was pretty good with the exception maybe of Lois (actresses name escapes me for the moment) but still it wasn't bad.

I just wonder since Superman Returns seems to be a decent movie that is taking a lot of flak and not doing well box office wise if there is some other reason. Is it actually possible that Superman has out lived his age? I mean face it as powerful as Superman is he hasn't grown with the times he still has that 40's farm boy mentallity. There's no chinks or spots on his armor so to say. Batman and other heroes have managed to kind of grow with the times they don't exactly reflect what they were when they were first introduced to us. Batman did well and was well accepted but I constantly how darker it needed to be. The Punisher which I thought was another good movie that seemed to get some criticism, mainly it wasn't close to how dark and violent it should of been. Even with Spider-man 3 starting to get bigger in hype people want to see a darker movie. Heck even in comics you see it. Black Adam who I had totally forgoten up has become more popular of recent then his good guy counter part because he's been ripping off villians limbs and even faces.

Basically I think that if you try and give the Superman that we've always known your never going to get people flooding into the theaters to see it and praising itno mater who you cast, what the story is or how you film it. Sure they could bring someone in to mix Superman up a bit and give him that more darker image but you know that even the people that wanted the darker, edgier superman would be sitting there thinking "that ain't Superman". Face it Superman is a family hero movie and family movies aren't going to sell as well. I'm sure we'll get a Superman sequal but it I'm sure it will be toned down to appease more to the family crowds and with a smaller budget.

Does anyone agree with this at all?

First of all, thanks for writing a post that was somewhat negative but thoughtful instead of the usual "Superman sux azz" fanboy crap we been getting. Yeah, sometimes Supes gets criticized for his "boy scout" image, but still he has managed to stay as one of the most popular superheroes. I think other factors played here (marketing, opening right before the POTC2 phenomen, etc.)

 

[Hunter Rider]

Spiderman proves that being a good guy through and through with no badass leanings can sell but his advantage is he is an underdog

Superman is virtually invincible and i truly believe if this film had a true physical threat to him then there would be grater interest,it isn't the character or what he stands for that is lacking it is the movie's choice of direction

 

[djprince]

The reason it "bombed" at the boxoffice in the usa is that it didnt attract the big "christian" marked. I think they "brushed" the movie away because of all the gay "relations". The film is going to do very very well in europe and asia, wait and see!!!!

 

[D-Bone]

SR is a good movie, it's just not an action adventure summer movie.
But that was a dunderheaded move by Singer, because if you wanted to tell a dark romantic story, why use Superman? It's almost like suckering the audience; they advertise Superman vs. Lex Luthor, but the movie has more in common really with The Lake House.