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

[Angel Of Dark]

what did chuck norris think of SR, that's what I'm waiting for.........

 

[skruloos]

To be fair, the comics had parllels to Christ long before Donner came along. And there were parellels to Christ long before Superman was ever created (and they would claim Superman is the story of Moses... not Christ. That's where their religion fits in.) So, my point is this: enough about the Christ - Superman comparisons.

Yes...I realize the parallels particularly with Moses. That was a given. The parallels with Christ can usually be attributed to the Messiah archetype of storytelling. AS far as Donner's work goes, it's one of the instances where the parellels are quite blatant.

 

[Cinemaman]

Why almost every critic gives it only 3 stars

They says something like "it is excellent movie" and gives only 3 stars.

Excellent means 4.5 or even 5 as I think

 

[skruloos]

Why almost every critic gives it only 3 stars

They says something like "it is excellent movie" and gives only 3 stars.

Excellent means 4.5 or even 5 as I think

Because sometimes movies are rated from a 4 star scale. 3 stars out of 4 is pretty damned good. Not many movies actually deserve a full 4 stars on a 4 star scale as it is. There is a difference between an excellent film and a perfect film. The main one being that a perfect film does not exist, IMO.

 

[Mr. Credible]

and just as a disclaimer, i think the most 'reliable' review out yet is IGN's.... which is not favorable.

3.5 out of 5 stars isn't favorable?

maybe it's not gushing over the movie, but it's not exactly like they hated it, now, is it?

 

[Milkman95]

Fox > WB

Now this comment is HILARIOUS. How the heck did you come to that conclusion Sparky?

 

[Kane]

Fox > WB only as far as television goes....since WB televison is pure garbage.


Movies are another story.

 

[J.Howlett]

Le Ebert has struck. It hasn't been printed yet but from searching online, it seems Le Ebert gave it 2 out of 4 stars, saying that it's joyless, lackluster, and not like Superman The Movie and Superman II.

I'll see if I can find some exact quotes....

 

[J.Howlett]

"Ebert gives it **, then lambasts it for not being like the first two movies (as Artimus predicted). He also calls it too dark and not joyful enough.

And says this, which is, I guess, mildly spoilery, so I'll white it out. . .

It would have been fun to give Superman a bright, sassy child, like one of the Spy Kids."

Essentially what Ebert said...it won't post until Wednesday morning....

Ebert gave the first Garfield film 3 stars. Take that as you will.

 

[Cinemaman]

Because sometimes movies are rated from a 4 star scale. 3 stars out of 4 is pretty damned good. Not many movies actually deserve a full 4 stars on a 4 star scale as it is. There is a difference between an excellent film and a perfect film. The main one being that a perfect film does not exist, IMO.

I thought there is 5-stars scale

 

[Fatboy Roberts]

Whooooooo This should be good.

Watching this place pretzel in on itself trying to discredit Roger Ebert, that is. The review is probably pretty well written itself.

[edit]That Spy Kids quote is gold. Jesus.

 

[J.Howlett]

"A glum, lackluster movie in which even the big effects sequences seem dutiful instead of exhilarating. Brandon Routh is monosyllabic as Clark Kent, and microsyllabic as Superman."

That is from Ebert. Fatboy, I tend to go back and forth on Ebert. But, in 2002, he lost me. He gave Episode II two stars while he gave Episode I 3 and a half stars. But, if you had read that review of Episode II, he didn't talk about the film whatsoever. He only talked about why film is better than digital. And that is why I had to let Ebert go when it comes to reviews.

I'm sure it will be well written but sometimes Ebert does pull a "What the F was he thinking" review....

 

[Ita-KalEl]

Ebert isn't God.
IMO Superman is a controversial character. Too good, too great, too bright. A lot of people feel the shame of their litte and sad lifes in front of that simble of goodness and heroism.

For example in Italy a lot of critics (of the communist area) bashed The Passion of the Christ of Mel Gibson without seeing it. They said "I don't want to see this horrible, splatter movie, made by a fascist, and you have to do the same thing"

 

[Milkman95]

Yeah, Ebert comes and goes in terms of comic book films depending on the character. In the end, we all know critics don't matter, but we do like to hear good things anyway......I like reading the fans reviews more than the professional critics, they're more on our level in terms of expectations anyway.

 

[Kane]

Okay Eberts entitled to his opinion but my personal preference is dark realistic films and not the campyness of the first 2 Superman films.

Enough fans say SR has elements of that camp in it and not enough darkness and seriousness.......but Ebert complains theres too much darkness..

He probably was expecting it to have the same tone and voice of the first 2 films in their campy 70s glory.

Thats not what I wanted at all..

 

[J.Howlett]

Ebert just surprises me sometimes. I use to be able to gauge him. Now, not so much.

 

[Nivek]

Eh, it's Ebert. Theres enough positive reviews out there right now anyway, his will hardly make a dent.

Whats with him anyway, I heard he's refusing Chemo after having a tumer removed?

 

[Milkman95]

Well, like I said, it depends on the character. He loved Batman Begins, and that was a darker character in a darker film. I think he just expected a more "happy" film with a character like Supes.

 

[Cmill216]

Oh, noes!! The Tomatometer is at 86%!! NOOO!!!!!!!

 

[ultimatefan]

So, Ebert, positive on X3, negative on SR? Why you keep doing this to me, man? I thought after X2, Spidey 2 and Batman Begins we were getting along good on comic book movies... I didn´t forget what you said of XM 1 and SM 1...

 

[Ita-KalEl]

Another positive review
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2006/06/23/entertainment/e130933D27.DTL

 

[DvilDog]

I really thought ebert would have liked it? Ah well, you win some you lose some

 

[explode7]

He probably like some parts and hated others. Typical.

 

[IKnowSomeJudo]

I enjoy reading Ebert's reviews. Even when I completely disagree with him, I find his reviews to be informative and well written. Frankly, I'm surprised he didn't like the film and I'm sure he'll list a couple of good reasons why not, but at the end of the day it won't make it or break it for me, because, well, you know, that's just like, his opinion, man. Bad rating by Ebert doesn't necessarily equal a bad film or vice versa... I mean this is the man who rated Godfather III above Godfather II. WTF? Some of my favorite movies like The Thing or Blade Runner recieved a low rating by Ebert, so I'm not worried one bit. Looking forward to reading the review though...

 

[Nerial]

I apologize if this has been posted. It's most certainly negative:

http://worldfilm.about.com/od/independentfilm/a/supermanvsgitmo.htm

Honestly, I can't even tell what the guy is even talking about, but Rottentomatoes is taking it as a canon review. Unfortunately