Superman Returns Official Rate and Review Superman Returns thread!!!

[Tzigone]

Then you should really catch up, since it's been revealed that he(Clark)misread the message.

When? Jor-El's been possessed of many different personalities and motivations in Smallville (I really hope they come up with an explanation for that - like Zod, Brainiac, Eradicator), but it's not been confirmed that I've seen that the message was misread - though I did miss a few eps, I didn't think I'd missed any Jor-El ones. Which episode was that? And does that explain Jor-El killing Kara, threatening Jonathan's life, brainwashing Clark, etc?

 

[Garzo]

Tha Dark Horizons review
Spacey is pure genus as Lex Luthor and Frank Langella is a wonderful Perry Mason.
http://www.darkhorizons.com/news06/060612e.php

Perry Mason? Langella is doing Raymond Burr? What?

 

[Ita-KalEl]

Man, Garth has to be such an A$$ about this. You should post his comments about the reviews and his own personal little jab...



Screenings were held late last week in Los Angeles and New York City for "Superman Returns" with various word already leaking out.

On the one hand some journos I've talked to who attended have given reactions ranging from 'average/mixed' to 'good', praising some elements but being critical of others. None however have given a 'negative' review as such, a good sign, even if one or two had laundry lists of problems.

The best news for fans is that some online reviews have jumped the embargo and gone up already - practically all gushingly positive, including those from one or two pretty stern critics.

You can find some of these at Hollywood Elsewhere, Latino Review and Blue Tights. A more mixed review, but a well penned one that justifies its arguments is up at AICN.

Here's our own, admittedly often cheery, Los Angeles correspondent Paul Fischer with his take. Expect my own review to go up when they screen it down here in Sydney for the press sometime in the next fortnight or so:

First off, no one really broke any "Embargo", they kept the reviews storyline and spoiler free. I respect that he didn't call the AICN ADD review "negative" as some others have, but comments like "Laundry list of problems" just make my eyes roll. What an A$$.

LOL I agree. He has been forced to say only positive things about the movie.
IMO he doesn't feel too happy

 

[Nivek]

LOL I agree. He has been forced to say only positive things about the movie.
IMO he doesn't feel too happy

Thats what I've been getting from his site fot the past year, he's not a fan, and kinda wants it to stumble. He's not going to outright say it, but he's one of those "I heard from a friend who knows someone who seen it, it sucks" types.

But as I noted in other threads, he falls into that lump of news sites that seem pretty slowed down now, like CHUD and AICN.

 

[Mr. Credible]

Man, Garth has to be such an A$$ about this. You should post his comments about the reviews and his own personal little jab...



Screenings were held late last week in Los Angeles and New York City for "Superman Returns" with various word already leaking out.

On the one hand some journos I've talked to who attended have given reactions ranging from 'average/mixed' to 'good', praising some elements but being critical of others. None however have given a 'negative' review as such, a good sign, even if one or two had laundry lists of problems.

The best news for fans is that some online reviews have jumped the embargo and gone up already - practically all gushingly positive, including those from one or two pretty stern critics.

You can find some of these at Hollywood Elsewhere, Latino Review and Blue Tights. A more mixed review, but a well penned one that justifies its arguments is up at AICN.

Here's our own, admittedly often cheery, Los Angeles correspondent Paul Fischer with his take. Expect my own review to go up when they screen it down here in Sydney for the press sometime in the next fortnight or so:

First off, no one really broke any "Embargo", they kept the reviews storyline and spoiler free. I respect that he didn't call the AICN ADD review "negative" as some others have, but comments like "Laundry list of problems" just make my eyes roll. What an A$$.

wow... he called the AICN review well penned? really? i thought it looked like a 13 year old wrote it in between algebra and social studies class.

 

[Isildur´s Heir]

Sorry but this is sort of a ridiculous statement. He's an alien from another planet , with Superhuman powers who flies around in a cape and tights. The idea that an alien culture could develop a level of technology that could build crystalline structures(something that is found in nature) is somehow doesn't make sense?
...Fanboys....

Sorry, but your statement is far more ridiculous than mine

I never once said that an alien culture could not develop technology that could build crystalline structures, the thing is....Krypton never built any crystalline structures, the Fortress of Solitude never was a crystalline structure.

 

[skruloos]

Sorry, but your statement is far more ridiculous than mine

I never once said that an alien culture could not develop technology that could build crystalline structures, the thing is....Krypton never built any crystalline structures, the Fortress of Solitude never was a crystalline structure.

And yet, in this continuity, it does.

 

[Isildur´s Heir]

And yet, in this continuity, it does.

.....and then we go full circle and arrive to the begining, the problem is the undying love of Singer for Donner´s Superman, like you can read in AICN..

Remember that scene in Superman where Christopher Reeve had that chain with kryptonite around his neck and he couldn't get rid of it? Well, Bryan Singer has a chain with Superman The Movie attached around his neck and he can't liberate himself from it.

The all Fortress of Solitude as a crystalline structure thingy, is something you can picture in the pre-crisis kind of deal, which makes it totally acceptable in Donner´s movie.
But, once again, there is far more problematic issues than the Fortress being made out of crystal.



About the reviews...
From all the reviews i´ve read so far, the AICN one is the first to make me really excited.
Why?
Because of the...."and it ends up being very emotional (the last 20 minutes, pure drama, are absolutely brilliant)".

 

[mad-sci]

The all Fortress of Solitude as a crystalline structure thingy, is something you can picture in the pre-crisis kind of deal, which makes it totally acceptable in Donner´s movie.
But, once again, there is far more problematic issues than the Fortress being made out of crystal.

But a reason I see Singer using this design is for its apparent timeless appeal. If you were to use the advanced post-crisis FOS, odds are that after 5 - 10 years on film, it would appear outdated, and age the film accordingly (see the Nokia Phones in the first Matrix film, or cars used in the first Burton Batman film).

Using the crystal design helps make it stand out of time, as well as appearing to be non-human. Face it, almost anything that's designed to be alien ends up being less impressive the more times its seen. Making the design simple and obvious leads you to think that its either very basic, or completely beyond your comprehension.

 

[skruloos]

.....and then we go full circle and arrive to the begining, the problem is the undying love of Singer for Donner´s Superman, like you can read in AICN..

And why is that a problem again? Because you don't like it? Because it's not that way in the comics? Not good enough reasons to me. I see the movies and TV shows as equally valid to the character as the comics are. Sure, the character once came from the comics, but he has also grown because of other media. So I see no problem basing this interpretation on any of the incarnations of Superman, whether it is in comics are any other media.

 

[Mr. Credible]

But a reason I see Singer using this design is for its apparent timeless appeal. If you were to use the advanced post-crisis FOS, odds are that after 5 - 10 years on film, it would appear outdated, and age the film accordingly (see the Nokia Phones in the first Matrix film, or cars used in the first Burton Batman film).

Using the crystal design helps make it stand out of time, as well as appearing to be non-human. Face it, almost anything that's designed to be alien ends up being less impressive the more times its seen. Making the design simple and obvious leads you to think that its either very basic, or completely beyond your comprehension.

well said. i've never read a superman comic, and neither have 99.2% of your average movie goer, to them, the fortress of solitude is a huge, ice/crystal thingy in the antarctic they saw in the superman movies and in smallville (i can't think of what it is on the animated series). if you made it anything else, no one would recognize it.

 

[tonytr1687]

well said. i've never read a superman comic, and neither have 99.2% of your average movie goer, to them, the fortress of solitude is a huge, ice/crystal thingy in the antarctic they saw in the superman movies and in smallville (i can't think of what it is on the animated series). if you made it anything else, no one would recognize it.

wait...in the comics the fortress doesnt look like that?

 

[Mr. Credible]

???

i don't know. i thought that's what all the hoopla was about? someone was saying he wanted a 'post-crisis' fortress, not the 'pre-crisis' one from donners movie.

 

[Isildur´s Heir]

And why is that a problem again? Because you don't like it? Because it's not that way in the comics? Not good enough reasons to me. I see the movies and TV shows as equally valid to the character as the comics are. Sure, the character once came from the comics, but he has also grown because of other media. So I see no problem basing this interpretation on any of the incarnations of Superman, whether it is in comics are any other media.

C´mon dude, of course is not because i don´t like it, i´m bigger than that, it´s because that´s not the real deal.
That´s not a good enough reason for you, great, kick ass, but it doesn´t make it any less of a distortion of the facts.
Basically, it all comes down to whatever you think it should be made. If you and a bunch of others, think that it doesn´t matter what you do, because there is always the comics, and it´s fine to have diferent interpretations of the myth (TV show, cartoon, comics, movies...), well, that´s fine.
I´m not of that opinion, i´m fine with it when it comes to cartoons and TV shows, but, in movies, i think that you should try to bring the character´s life
to the big screen.

But a reason I see Singer using this design is for its apparent timeless appeal. If you were to use the advanced post-crisis FOS, odds are that after 5 - 10 years on film, it would appear outdated, and age the film accordingly (see the Nokia Phones in the first Matrix film, or cars used in the first Burton Batman film).

Sorry, but that doesn´t make sense.
Nokia Phones in the Matrix are just phones, they were never meant to be 'timeless'; and about the cars in Burton´s Batman...i don´t understand what you are trying to say.
But, while you are at it, what about the flying cars in Blade Runner (just as an example), do they appear outdated?
The reason why he uses it, is because it´s how it was done by Donner, and the reason why Donner has made it like that, is, like you say, the appearence of being completely beyond our comprehension.
And that´s a problem too...

 

[The Sage]

C´mon dude, of course is not because i don´t like it, i´m bigger than that, it´s because that´s not the real deal.
That´s not a good enough reason for you, great, kick ass, but it doesn´t make it any less of a distortion of the facts.
Basically, it all comes down to whatever you think it should be made. If you and a bunch of others, think that it doesn´t matter what you do, because there is always the comics, and it´s fine to have diferent interpretations of the myth (TV show, cartoon, comics, movies...), well, that´s fine.
I´m not of that opinion, i´m fine with it when it comes to cartoons and TV shows, but, in movies, i think that you should try to bring the character´s life
to the big screen.


Sorry, but that doesn´t make sense.
Nokia Phones in the Matrix are just phones, they were never meant to be 'timeless'; and about the cars in Burton´s Batman...i don´t understand what you are trying to say.
But, while you are at it, what about the flying cars in Blade Runner (just as an example), do they appear outdated?
The reason why he uses it, is because it´s how it was done by Donner, and the reason why Donner has made it like that, is, like you say, the appearence of being completely beyond our comprehension.
And that´s a problem too...

So what you're saying is that alien technology, technology from another world, shouldn't be beyond human comprehension?

ROFL!!!

 

[greenlantern530]

But a reason I see Singer using this design is for its apparent timeless appeal. If you were to use the advanced post-crisis FOS, odds are that after 5 - 10 years on film, it would appear outdated, and age the film accordingly (see the Nokia Phones in the first Matrix film, or cars used in the first Burton Batman film).

Using the crystal design helps make it stand out of time, as well as appearing to be non-human. Face it, almost anything that's designed to be alien ends up being less impressive the more times its seen. Making the design simple and obvious leads you to think that its either very basic, or completely beyond your comprehension.

 

[skruloos]

C´mon dude, of course is not because i don´t like it, i´m bigger than that, it´s because that´s not the real deal.
That´s not a good enough reason for you, great, kick ass, but it doesn´t make it any less of a distortion of the facts.
Basically, it all comes down to whatever you think it should be made. If you and a bunch of others, think that it doesn´t matter what you do, because there is always the comics, and it´s fine to have diferent interpretations of the myth (TV show, cartoon, comics, movies...), well, that´s fine.
I´m not of that opinion, i´m fine with it when it comes to cartoons and TV shows, but, in movies, i think that you should try to bring the character´s life
to the big screen....

And so...previous movies and tv shows of that SAME character don't count as part of that heroes life? And further, pre-crisis comics don't count as part of that character's life? You're talking about Superman as if he was a static being that has existed through time. He is not. He is who he is because of the myriad of artists in every medium that has tackled him. Seems you want to limit him to post-Crisis. The character, whether you like it or not, is much larger than that and has a history molded by a lot of other media.

 

[Excel]

...

 

[TPS1000]

First post, with a review:

http://reporter.blogs.com/risky/2006/06/superman_return.html

Superman Returns Preview

Warner Bros. has finally started screening Superman Returns. They have nothing to worry about, even if it did cost $200-million plus. The movie is terrific (its first showings are on Tuesday June 27th at 10 PM before its Wednesday opening). Filmmaker Bryan Singer sold Warners on his radical Superman concept and he delivers it. He brought his hard-won knowledge from directing the X-Men series to reinventing this franchise, and clearly understands this universe.

Returns builds on director Richard Donner's 1978 Superman (Donner and Singer talked; this film uses footage of Marlon Brando as Jor-El). The conceit is that Superman (a boyishly sweet Brandon Routh, who isn't as funny as Christopher Reeve) has been away for five years, exploring what's left of his exploded home planet Krypton. Some things have changed when he gets back. His Mom (Eva Marie Saint) is now a widow, and while eager-to-please Clark Kent easily gets his old job back from editor Perry White (Frank Langella) at the Metropolis Daily Planet, star reporter Lois Lane (a brunette Kate Bosworth) has a child with White's nephew Jack (X-Men's James Marsden), but she hasn't gotten around to marrying him. Could she still be carrying a torch for Superman? Freed from prison, Lex Luthor (a deliciously evil Kevin Spacey) tricks a dying widow (Noel Neill, TV's original Lois Lane) into leaving him all her money, so that he can get back to his mission: destroy Superman. It all falls into place nicely—although you'd think the folks at the Daily Planet would put two and two together when the remarkably similar Clark and Superman both return on the same day.

What makes the movie so expensive is the scale of the effects. This Superman can not only fly and hover in space (like a grown-up version of the baby from 2001: A Space Odyssey) as he listens to the multiple tragedies going on in the world, he can also do things (in CG form) that the comic book Superman did, like hurtling through flaming tunnels and lifting plummeting airplanes with jaw-dropping ease.

But Singer is also adept at the quieter moments. He sets things up and lets them play, including a well-directed scene on Lex Luthor's luxury yacht when a terrified Lane watches her little boy play "Heart and Soul" on a piano accompanied by a tattooed thug. The action set pieces all serve the story, though, which is not only an epic fantasy adventure but a sad romance about an alien outsider who can never really have the girl. (Read the LAT's John Horn on "How Gay is Superman?".) This Superman is as lonely (if not as virile) as John Wayne.

 

[Eteric]

Nice.

What he means by the Fortress of Solitude being timeless is... Well, here's an example.

Lets say that Bryan made the fortress to be a place with advanced looking computers, etc. Just like in the old Star Trek series, 20 years later it would look cheesy and laughable. With Donner's Fortress, it's unlike anything ever seen by man kind, and will probably never truely look cheesy.

Not to mention the mystery around it. We have no idea how it works, and that makes it even more intresting.

Hell, SR has only given it a small face lift, and it STILL has it's mystery facter.

 

[Excel]

11/11

chyea

 

[Mr. Credible]

so what does this other fortress look like that you guys are wanting to see so bad on film? i remember on the animated series he had animals from other planets there, hopefully that's not it?

 

[DorkyFresh]

Nice.

What he means by the Fortress of Solitude being timeless is... Well, here's an example.

Lets say that Bryan made the fortress to be a place with advanced looking computers, etc. Just like in the old Star Trek series, 20 years later it would look cheesy and laughable. With Donner's Fortress, it's unlike anything ever seen by man kind, and will probably never truely look cheesy.

Not to mention the mystery around it. We have no idea how it works, and that makes it even more intresting.

Hell, SR has only given it a small face lift, and it STILL has it's mystery facter.

good point...and i think that's another reason why Bryan wanted to stick with Supes's origin from S:TM for this film. Krypton looks like something we've never seen before...something truely alien, not just the flavor of the month alien but something us as regular people would never think of. same goes for Supes's spaceship. when we think of spaceships we think of monitors, controls, maybe a window, etc.....nope, Supes's ship doesn't have all that and we'll never fully understand how the ship works which gives Superman that magic touch...

 

[ShadowBoxing]

It's amazing just how good the press surrounding this film is.

 

[JamalYIgle]

wait...in the comics the fortress doesnt look like that?

It does now.