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

  • Thread starter Thread starter J.Howlett
  • Start date Start date

How good was Superman Returns?

  • 10

  • 9

  • 8

  • 7

  • 6

  • 5

  • 4

  • 3

  • 2

  • 1


Results are only viewable after voting.
Superman79 said:
I thought I heard somewhere where that was true...I really couldn't care one way or another.

why are people so concerned about singer's sexual orientation?

do people really think that his being gay is gonna somehow influence the character of superman?

he's not gonna make superman into "thuperman" (in the voice of big gay al from southpark). he's not jon peters, for goodness sakes. hahaha.

silly silly people.
 
dabilee01 said:
why are people so concerned about singer's sexual orientation?

do people really think that his being gay is gonna somehow influence the character of superman?

he's not gonna make superman into "thuperman" (in the voice of big gay al from southpark). he's not jon peters, for goodness sakes. hahaha.

silly silly people.

Some people just have to have something to B***h about. As for anyone else's interest, it's just one of those things that is interesting that we like to know about celebs, like their hobbies and interests and crap like that...it makes people feel like they know a celeb more personally...at least that's my theory. [shrug]
 
Lower my expectations, my ass!

Again, it might not be bad advice. This thread has taken a turn for the rabid in the last few pages. And not rabid in the cute way, I mean rabid as in foaming at the mouth and snapping at things. Lowering those expectations might help keep things less adversarial and more open, so that when you see a negative review you don't work overtime trying to discredit everything about it.

Also, lowering your expectations, in the face of all these great reviews, might reduce the movie from "Second coming of God" to just "movie" again, in which case you can enjoy it properly. :)
 
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,200698,00.html

'Superman Returns': Superhero Broods, Breeds

Bryan Singer's "Superman Returns" got its big press airing last night in multiple screenings. Even though Warner Bros. has been keen to flack positive reviews from the trades and the newsweeklies, there’s a lot more to say about this $300 million epic that opens next Wednesday.

For one thing, I don't know why in the world this edition of "Superman" was adopted by the gay community. Director Singer is gay, and his point of view comes across fairly often, but neither Superman the character nor his new portrayer, Brandon Routh, seem especially sexual in any direction. Singer seems more interested in creating a Christ-like icon out of Superman, which is certainly unique.

But Superman, aka Clark Kent in "Superman Returns" is just as much of a dork as he was in the first two films that starred Christopher Reeve and were directed by Richard Donner.

The early revelation that Lois Lane has a child the same age as the amount of time he’s been away makes absolutely no visible impact on Clark. If he ever slept with Lois in "Superman II," he seems either to have forgotten or not realized the consequences.

The one thing Routh has going for him is that he looks a lot like Chris Reeve. Other than that, his acting hasn’t changed much since his short, cardboard-like stint on "One Life to Live."

Singer is content with using him as sort of a prop, and moving everyone else around him. It’s not that Routh is bad or embarrasses himself. He does neither. But dynamic is not a word that comes to mind, either.

Kate Bosworth as Lois Lane actually fares much worse. She is very bland, lacking any of the zip Margot Kidder gave to the role in the films or Teri Hatcher in the "Lois and Clark" TV series.

She is sass-less, but then again, so is the wearisome script by Michael Dougherty, Dan Harris and Singer. Their dialogue is either suffocating or absent. After all, Lois has supposedly won a Pulitzer Prize. But she's as witty or facile with words as a lump of Kryptonite.

Now, you might think I didn't like "Superman Returns." Not so: The first hour is magnificent, and there is a lot to like in the succeeding hour and a half. But the movie is way too long. Singer apparently thought "more is more," and you can see all $300 million up on the screen.

But a long sequence in the middle, with lots of CGI and some preposterous stuff involving Lois saving Superman, is repetitive and kind of joyless. A woman sitting next to me in yesterday’s screening kept making phone calls during that part.

But the first hour or so just soars, and all works with a real brilliance. It’s enough to offset the rest of the film for better or worse.

That first hour is essentially a remake of the first two Donner films. The only difference is that Superman has been away for five years. But Singer recreates Superman's original appearance on Earth — this time instead of being a baby in a rocket, he's an adult. The wonderful Eva Marie Saint returns as Clark’s mother Martha Kent, and the scenes in Kansas are gorgeously shot.

In recreating the Donner films, Singer has also used John Williams' original score and the original title design as well. In this case "Superman Returns" is really "Superman III." About 20 minutes in, Clark/Superman must rescue the Space Shuttle and a passenger plane that was boosting it into space. The whole movie is worth this episode, every part of it works.

But that's when a new story kicks in, involving Kevin Spacey as Lex Luthor colorlessly imitating Gene Hackman, and Parker Posey doing her damnedest to make a character out of his sidekick Kitty.

But Posey — who looks great and has some good introductory moments — never takes off. For a lot of the film she’s dressed up with no place to go, and you can feel it. Her role is full of missed opportunities for juicy one-liners and observations.

Spacey, sometimes looking like Uncle Fester, works overtime to find new paths away from Hackman's work. Sometimes, but not often, he is successful.

There are some nice touches: The first character you see in the film is a wealthy, dying widow whom Lex is conning into signing over her estate. The original Lois Lane from TV, Noel Neill, does a nice job with the part.

Later Jack Larson, Jimmy Olsen from TV, gets few good scenes as a bartender. Perry White (Frank Langella) does get to say, "Great Caesar's ghost," and in a cute scene the words, "Look, up in the sky, it’s a bird, it's a plane," are uttered.

In the end, "Superman Returns" is grand, and often aims to be a take on "Gotterdammerung" with the world exploding, flooding, collapsing and repairing itself. There is a lot of melodrama, and many gorgeous shots of Superman flying around the world, into space and brooding about his life's work.

I think the audience I saw the movie with was a little confused. They wanted some laughs, but when the few times came, they chuckled nervously instead.

There was succinct applause at the end, but not the feeling that we’d seen a jubilant triumph. My guess is the movie, which comes out June 28 and will "open" all the way through July 4, will make all its foundational money right away, and come out of the first week in good shape. But $300 million is a lot to earn back, no matter how impassioned comic books fans are about this latest iteration of their hero's saga.
 
This one is in spanish, so I have no idea what it says, but I read it is a postive

http://www.miami.com/mld/elnuevo/entertainment/movies/14879379.htm

Estrenos
'Superman Returns', en verdad es súper
By RENE JORDAN
Crítico de cine/El Nuevo Herald
Superman Returns es una película exaltante, de esas que al terminar provocan espontáneos aplausos en el público. Escribo esto en un cuaderno a los 15 minutos de verla, para que no se me pase el efecto de beber a pico de botella este embriagador trago de Cine-Cine. Cuando el Hombre de Acero vuela quizás por última vez hacia el horizonte, en alas del tema musical de John Williams, el espectador receptivo se queda en las nubes.

Dicen que la crítica es el análisis de una primera impresión, pero ésta no es tan fácil de analizar. Su poder evocativo transporta a través del tiempo y es como volver a los 12 años ante los episodios de una serie. Revive la ingenuidad perdida de aquellas matinés dominicales en que la pantalla proyectaba las mil y una lumínicas ilusiones del cuento de nunca acabar.

Superman Returns inspira a dedicarle piropos poéticos, porque Bryan Singer la ha dirigido como un lírico regreso a Superman: The Movie, de 1978, en la que Richard Donner le dio impulso rapsódico al comic book realzado por efectos especiales. Como Singer es un cineasta con más imaginación que Donner --además de contar con técnicas digitales de último minuto-- la del 2006 sobrepasa a todas las anteriores.

Brandon Routh se parece tanto a Christopher Reeves que cada uno de sus close-ups fluctúa entre homenaje y resurrección. En The Usual Suspects, Singer encaminó al entonces casi desconocido Kevin Spacey hacia su primer Oscar, y ahora le obsequia la jugosa villanía de Lex Luthor. Se robaría el botín si éste fuera realmente un filme de actores, en lugar de un despliegue quinético de irrefrenable impacto visual.

Kate Bosworth es Lois Lane, la heroína romántica, con más nostálgica ternura que la algo mecánica Margot Kidder. James Marsden perfila un papel relativamente ingrato como el marido de Lois, consciente, pero sin celos, de la superioridad de su rival. Sam Huntington es el niño que tal vez ha heredado por ósmosis algunas de las dotes sobrenaturales del gran amor de su mamá. Parker Posey logra una caricatura cruelmente cómica en la amanerada Kitty, amante del megalomaníaco Luthor.

Singer se ha rodeado de un equipo de primerísima clase. El ritmo sin pausas de la acción se debe en parte a que el co-editor John Otman también compuso la partitura. No es posible apartar la vista de la pantalla a medida que la fantasía avanza a trepidante velocidad. En plano de puro y simple entretenimieno, es mucho mejor verla que intentar describirla.
 
For one thing, I don't know why in the world this edition of "Superman" was adopted by the gay community.

Not only is it weird that this is the first sentence of the review in proper, but I did not know that this had happened at all. And he's speaking about it like it's common fact.

Wha?

A woman sitting next to me in yesterday’s screening kept making phone calls during that part.

And there it is. Great. Reviewers who can't make their points about the movie without needing to support themselves with anecdotal evidence at the screening are SO disappointing. It's enough that it bored YOU, dude. I don't need to be hard-sold on it because some woman was on her cell-phone. Have some faith in your own words.

Other than that, the review reads almost exactly like a modern review of the first Superman movie. Same criticisms, down the line.
 
Ita-KalEl said:
The spanish review is very very positive :)

You can read it? Tri-lingual. You never fail to impress me Ita.
 
I used the Google translater for the spanish review




Superman Returns is a exaltante film, of which when finishing they cause spontaneous applause in the public. I write this in a notebook to the 15 minutes to see it, so that the effect does not go to me to drink to bottle tip this intoxicating drink of Cinema-Cinema. Perhaps when the Steel Man flies for the last time towards the horizon, in wings of the musical subject of John Williams, the receptive spectator remains in clouds. They say that the critic is the analysis of one first impression, but this one is not so easy to analyze. Its evocativo power transports through time and is like returning to the 12 years before the episodes of a series. Revive the lost naivete of those matinés dominical in which the screen projected thousands and the one luminance illusions of the story never to finish. Superman Returns inspires to dedicate to him piropos poetic, because Bryan Singer has directed it like a lírico return to Superman: The Movie, of 1978, in which Richard Donner gave to rapsódico impulse to comic book him heightened by special effects. As Singer is a film director with more imagination than Donner --besides to count on digital techniques of last minute-- the one of the 2006 it exceeds to all the previous ones. Brandon Routh as much looks itself like Christopher Reeves who each one of his close-ups fluctuates between tribute and resurrection. In Usual The Suspects, Singer almost directed to then the stranger Kevin Spacey towards its first Oscar, and now it flatters substantial villanía to him of Lex Luthor. The booty if this one outside really films of actors, instead of a quinético unfolding of irrefrenable visual impact would rob. Kate Bosworth is Lois Lane, the romantic heroin, with more nostalgic tenderness than the something mechanical Margot Kidder. James Marsden outlines a relatively ungrateful paper like the husband of Lois, conscious, but without jealousy, of the superiority of his rival. Sam Huntington is the boy who has perhaps inherited by osmosis some of the supernatural dowries of the great love of his mother. Parker Posey obtains a cartoon cruel comedian in the mannered Kitty, loving of the megalomaníaco Luthor. Singer has been surrounded by an equipment of first class. The rate without pauses of the action must partly to that the Co-publisher John Otman also composed the score. It is not possible to separate the Vista from the screen as the fantasy advances at trepidante speed. In pure plane of and simple entretenimieno, it is far better to see the one that to try to describe it.
 
Matt said:
You can read it? Tri-lingual. You never fail to impress me Ita.

Spanish is similar to italian and at University I studied Spanish and English :)
 
just saw the movie. it was great. really serious though. this isnt your spider-man comic booky fun fare....this is a REAL movie!
 
Motown Marvel said:
just saw the movie. it was great. really serious though. this isnt your spider-man comic booky fun fare....this is a REAL movie!

Nice - did you check it out in the Detroit area or L.A.?

Can you elaborate a little?
 
Motown Marvel said:
just saw the movie. it was great. really serious though. this isnt your spider-man comic booky fun fare....this is a REAL movie!
that's what i like to hear...to me Spider-Man, Blade, Hellboy and the X-Men films are comic book movies, that is...movies that aren't in the same league as say...A Beautiful Mind. they're not as deep. i like movies based on comics that don't feel like they were just translating the comic into live action. i like movies based on comics that feel like a REAL movie (Batman Begins) that will withstand the test of time...

...and i'm hoping that's what we're getting with Superman Returns.
 
Motown Marvel said:
just saw the movie. it was great. really serious though. this isnt your spider-man comic booky fun fare....this is a REAL movie!
Finally a reviewer I trust Thanks Marv :)
 
GarudA said:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,200698,00.html

'Superman Returns': Superhero Broods, Breeds

Bryan Singer's "Superman Returns" got its big press airing last night in multiple screenings. Even though Warner Bros. has been keen to flack positive reviews from the trades and the newsweeklies, there’s a lot more to say about this $300 million epic that opens next Wednesday.

For one thing, I don't know why in the world this edition of "Superman" was adopted by the gay community. Director Singer is gay, and his point of view comes across fairly often, but neither Superman the character nor his new portrayer, Brandon Routh, seem especially sexual in any direction. Singer seems more interested in creating a Christ-like icon out of Superman, which is certainly unique.

But Superman, aka Clark Kent in "Superman Returns" is just as much of a dork as he was in the first two films that starred Christopher Reeve and were directed by Richard Donner.

The early revelation that Lois Lane has a child the same age as the amount of time he’s been away makes absolutely no visible impact on Clark. If he ever slept with Lois in "Superman II," he seems either to have forgotten or not realized the consequences.

The one thing Routh has going for him is that he looks a lot like Chris Reeve. Other than that, his acting hasn’t changed much since his short, cardboard-like stint on "One Life to Live."

Singer is content with using him as sort of a prop, and moving everyone else around him. It’s not that Routh is bad or embarrasses himself. He does neither. But dynamic is not a word that comes to mind, either.

Kate Bosworth as Lois Lane actually fares much worse. She is very bland, lacking any of the zip Margot Kidder gave to the role in the films or Teri Hatcher in the "Lois and Clark" TV series.

She is sass-less, but then again, so is the wearisome script by Michael Dougherty, Dan Harris and Singer. Their dialogue is either suffocating or absent. After all, Lois has supposedly won a Pulitzer Prize. But she's as witty or facile with words as a lump of Kryptonite.

Now, you might think I didn't like "Superman Returns." Not so: The first hour is magnificent, and there is a lot to like in the succeeding hour and a half. But the movie is way too long. Singer apparently thought "more is more," and you can see all $300 million up on the screen.

But a long sequence in the middle, with lots of CGI and some preposterous stuff involving Lois saving Superman, is repetitive and kind of joyless. A woman sitting next to me in yesterday’s screening kept making phone calls during that part.

But the first hour or so just soars, and all works with a real brilliance. It’s enough to offset the rest of the film for better or worse.

That first hour is essentially a remake of the first two Donner films. The only difference is that Superman has been away for five years. But Singer recreates Superman's original appearance on Earth — this time instead of being a baby in a rocket, he's an adult. The wonderful Eva Marie Saint returns as Clark’s mother Martha Kent, and the scenes in Kansas are gorgeously shot.

In recreating the Donner films, Singer has also used John Williams' original score and the original title design as well. In this case "Superman Returns" is really "Superman III." About 20 minutes in, Clark/Superman must rescue the Space Shuttle and a passenger plane that was boosting it into space. The whole movie is worth this episode, every part of it works.

But that's when a new story kicks in, involving Kevin Spacey as Lex Luthor colorlessly imitating Gene Hackman, and Parker Posey doing her damnedest to make a character out of his sidekick Kitty.

But Posey — who looks great and has some good introductory moments — never takes off. For a lot of the film she’s dressed up with no place to go, and you can feel it. Her role is full of missed opportunities for juicy one-liners and observations.

Spacey, sometimes looking like Uncle Fester, works overtime to find new paths away from Hackman's work. Sometimes, but not often, he is successful.

There are some nice touches: The first character you see in the film is a wealthy, dying widow whom Lex is conning into signing over her estate. The original Lois Lane from TV, Noel Neill, does a nice job with the part.

Later Jack Larson, Jimmy Olsen from TV, gets few good scenes as a bartender. Perry White (Frank Langella) does get to say, "Great Caesar's ghost," and in a cute scene the words, "Look, up in the sky, it’s a bird, it's a plane," are uttered.

In the end, "Superman Returns" is grand, and often aims to be a take on "Gotterdammerung" with the world exploding, flooding, collapsing and repairing itself. There is a lot of melodrama, and many gorgeous shots of Superman flying around the world, into space and brooding about his life's work.

I think the audience I saw the movie with was a little confused. They wanted some laughs, but when the few times came, they chuckled nervously instead.

There was succinct applause at the end, but not the feeling that we’d seen a jubilant triumph. My guess is the movie, which comes out June 28 and will "open" all the way through July 4, will make all its foundational money right away, and come out of the first week in good shape. But $300 million is a lot to earn back, no matter how impassioned comic books fans are about this latest iteration of their hero's saga.
That´s one of the things I hate about critics: they won´t even admit the rest of people don´t feel like them... What the positive reviews and articles describe as genuine applause, he goes for "succint" just to imply that the crowd agrees with him.
 
What? You didn't expect someone working for FOX news to give a glowing review from a movie distrubed by Warner Bros.

Cominf from one of their reviewerss, this is like saying it's the greates movie ever made. :)
 
wow... that Fox review is a complete joke. And what's with the 'gay' stab? Unbelievable. haha.... good journalism, Fox.


let me just add a little more.... what legit film critic mentions a film's gay following, claims an absurd budget (numerous times), predicts its box-office success (or lack of), and, to top it all off, mentions the audience's reaction as support to his own opinions?

You're an idiot, Roger Friedman. Not because you don't like the movie but because this is as unprofessional a review i have ever read.... and now i'm pissed off that i've given this worthless news outlet's website one more 'hit.' Darn it...
 
DorkyFresh said:
that's what i like to hear...to me Spider-Man, Blade, Hellboy and the X-Men films are comic book movies, that is...movies that aren't in the same league as say...A Beautiful Mind. they're not as deep. i like movies based on comics that don't feel like they were just translating the comic into live action. i like movies based on comics that feel like a REAL movie (Batman Begins) that will withstand the test of time...

...and i'm hoping that's what we're getting with Superman Returns.

really? i wouldn't say the first 2 x-men films were comic booky. there was alot of substance. it was more about persecution/inequality/racism than superheroism.
 
Sub-Zero said:
really? i wouldn't say the first 2 x-men films were comic booky. there was alot of substance. it was more about persecution/inequality/racism than superheroism.
i know there were more underlying themes in the first 2 x-men compared to other comic book movies but the visual style will be dated in 10 years...while you'll still be able to watch Batman Begins and Superman Returns (hopefully) without thinking about how out of style the set designs/costumes/wardrobe are...
 
PSU442 said:
wow... that Fox review is a complete joke. And what's with the 'gay' stab? Unbelievable. haha.... good journalism, Fox.


let me just add a little more.... what legit film critic mentions a film's gay following, claims an absurd budget (numerous times), predicts its box-office success (or lack of), and, to top it all off, mentions the audience's reaction as support to his own opinions?

You're an idiot, Roger Friedman. Not because you don't like the movie but because this is as unprofessional a review i have ever read.... and now i'm pissed off that i've given this worthless news outlet's website one more 'hit.' Darn it...

totally agreed...i'm not just agreeing because i'm pro-SR. i'm agreeing because the reviewer used dishonorable tactics to add negativity to his review...
 
man, i just can't drop this....

look at what else Roger Friedman has put out for FoxNews. he's a propaganda machine. So far this summer, the only movie he has had favorable comments for is X3.... go figure. I count at least four articles that take a stab at Superman -- in the title of the article! (one on the lack of promotion, one on Superman being a father, one on the budget, and the review.) I also count three or four articles on X3.... where each opening paragrah says that X3 will be the hit of the summer. He even mentions in one that 'the good word of mouth' will allow the film to smash box-office records. Hmm... what good word of mouth? Did you make that up, Roger?

*****ing FoxNews.
 
PSU442 said:
wow... that Fox review is a complete joke. And what's with the 'gay' stab? Unbelievable. haha.... good journalism, Fox.


let me just add a little more.... what legit film critic mentions a film's gay following, claims an absurd budget (numerous times), predicts its box-office success (or lack of), and, to top it all off, mentions the audience's reaction as support to his own opinions?

You're an idiot, Roger Friedman. Not because you don't like the movie but because this is as unprofessional a review i have ever read.... and now i'm pissed off that i've given this worthless news outlet's website one more 'hit.' Darn it...

Not everyone will like the movie. I actually respect the honesty of ign.com's review (it wasn't a bad review persay, but kinda lukewarm)

BUT

I hated the fact that Roger mentioned the crowd's reaction. It was a pre-screening. The most of the people aren't 'real people' from what i've know. Moron.

This whole gay context...It's funny actually. Superman is not gay. It's like the whole "C3PO is gay". C3PO is a robot in a space opera, for God's sakes.

It's not homophobia or anything, but it's like this: but if someone thought that you're 'gay' deep down you're like "What the hell?" No matter how confortable you are with your sexuality.
 
and just as a disclaimer, i think the most 'reliable' review out yet is IGN's.... which is not favorable.
 
Its amazing how much you guys care about other peoples opinions.
 

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,432
Messages
22,104,442
Members
45,898
Latest member
NeonWaves64
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"