Superman Returns Official Rate and Review Superman Returns thread!!!
Michael Corleone
Don Corleone
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2003
- Messages
- 4,186
- Reaction score
- 4
- Points
- 58
Excel said:
I have no idea considering I thought one thread was for fan review and the other was for official critic reviews.
Mentok
Avenger
- Joined
- May 1, 2003
- Messages
- 20,647
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 31
Oh well...
David and Margaret from 'At the Movies' gave it 3 stars each.
http://www.abc.net.au/atthemovies/txt/s1663651.htm
Jseus... They have some pretty disturbing comments in teh review...
Richard Donner, who directed the first large-scale Christopher Reeve edition in 1978, was followed for Supermans 2 and 3 by the infinitely more talented Richard Lester, but No 4 was a total loss.
Now Christopher Reeve is no longer with us, but Warner Bros have spent zillions reviving the series with Reeve lookalike Brandon Routh, an actor who seems to have undergone a charisma bypass.
I never understood why the staff of the Daily Planet couldn’t see that Clark Kent and Superman were positively the same guy, but once you accept this unlikely premise you can probably enjoy this basically formulaic movie.
David and Margaret from 'At the Movies' gave it 3 stars each.
http://www.abc.net.au/atthemovies/txt/s1663651.htm
Jseus... They have some pretty disturbing comments in teh review...
Richard Donner, who directed the first large-scale Christopher Reeve edition in 1978, was followed for Supermans 2 and 3 by the infinitely more talented Richard Lester, but No 4 was a total loss.
Now Christopher Reeve is no longer with us, but Warner Bros have spent zillions reviving the series with Reeve lookalike Brandon Routh, an actor who seems to have undergone a charisma bypass.
I never understood why the staff of the Daily Planet couldn’t see that Clark Kent and Superman were positively the same guy, but once you accept this unlikely premise you can probably enjoy this basically formulaic movie.
You guys that havent seen it prepare for a quick 2 hours. Im serious. Any of you that know know that I wouldnt lie to you. Its against my creed. Superman has returned and it couldnt have come at a better time for we with all the stuff happening in my life.
K
Kane
Guest
Mentok said:
*pukes*
Tasteless....Its funny that all the bad reviews are laced with such stupid comments.
user123456789
Avenger
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2005
- Messages
- 11,260
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 31
thanks again for answering our questions ddDvilDog said:
Lobster Charlie
Sidekick
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2004
- Messages
- 1,905
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 31
I saw it today. Free sneak preview at a college in L.A.
I didn't like it. I thought it ran too long, I found most of the action to be obnoxious and over-indulgent, and the story wasn't very compelling. There was also an over-use of CGI (sometimes good, sometimes bad), limp characterization, and the overall plot to be far too focused on the relationship between Lois and Superman than anything else.
Lois was played kinda one-note the majority of the film, that note being "*****y." She gets a little tender at the end, but its not very convincing and you kinda don't care. Spacey was entertaining, and made a better Luthor than Gene Hackman, but that's really not saying much. He still hammed it up a bit too much. And he sort of spilled his motives a bit too early in the film. How about we get to see him, how disturbed he is, and THEN elucidate as to why he feels the way he does. Luthor is no more than a common foil in this film, barely developed, but still entertaining to say the least.
Routh is decent as Superman and Clark. He was better at Superman than I thought he'd be, bad haircut and all. But there isn't enough characterization or anything terribly compelling about either character. For instance, I'd loved to have seen some moments where we get an idea as to WHY Superman is the way he is. Some Pa Kent flashbacks would've been cool, much like we had in Alex Ross' Peace On Earth. Alex Ross understands Superman better than most any other artist in the world today, and its a shame he didn't play a part in the development of this character on film. I wanted to hear Superman say more than just a few lines. I wanted him to be a little less obsessed with Lois, and more interested in measuring his ideals to the changing, more cynical times around him. the ball was seriously dropped here, and the focus was put on a rather unappealing Lois Lane who I personally didn't really care much about.
I wasn't crazy about their version of Metropolis---we really don't delve too deep into it, either, and it comes off more as an overgrown NYC than a truly unique place. We spend far too much time at the Daily Planet was well. Couldn't we please have a quiet moment with Clark at his hotel room, or wherever the hell he was staying? Or just explore the city's other haunts a bit? I felt Batman Begins gave us a better feeling of being in a real city than Superman Returns did. We got docks, we got night clubs, insane asylums, police stations, nasty alleys, subway stations, court houses, etc. We were REALLY in that city in Begins. In Returns...its just serving as a backdrop, and I found that a bit of a letdown.
Some things that really irked me:
I personally get bored with watching action scenes where things just crash, break, make a lot of noise and cause huge explosions. There was a lot of that in Superman Returns like
. It's just obnoxious after a while, and a lot of the time in this film, really didn't serve much of a purpose other than showing off CGI. Certain films like Spiderman 2 pull these types of situations off a lot better because we are so invested in the characters, and the action is very focused. I felt that Superman Returns would basically show you a bunch of terrible things happening, make a TON of noise, and then have Superman come and save the day. It got kinda old, kinda fast.
To it's credit, the Plane rescue sequence was so good, I nearly got teary-eyed. It was very well done. There are a dozen or more other shots of Superman flying, doing his thing, hauling extremely large objects, which was really well done as well. But that's about it.
All in all, I found this film to be a very polished, very loud, very ambitious project that falls flat due to poor characterization, some poor plotting, running a bit too long and some rather average acting by most of our stars. I'm very disappointed in where this franchise is headed. I hope the scrap the love story and focus on SUPER VILLAINS and otherworldly stuff in the future Superman films.
I give it a 5/10.
I didn't like it. I thought it ran too long, I found most of the action to be obnoxious and over-indulgent, and the story wasn't very compelling. There was also an over-use of CGI (sometimes good, sometimes bad), limp characterization, and the overall plot to be far too focused on the relationship between Lois and Superman than anything else.
Lois was played kinda one-note the majority of the film, that note being "*****y." She gets a little tender at the end, but its not very convincing and you kinda don't care. Spacey was entertaining, and made a better Luthor than Gene Hackman, but that's really not saying much. He still hammed it up a bit too much. And he sort of spilled his motives a bit too early in the film. How about we get to see him, how disturbed he is, and THEN elucidate as to why he feels the way he does. Luthor is no more than a common foil in this film, barely developed, but still entertaining to say the least.
Routh is decent as Superman and Clark. He was better at Superman than I thought he'd be, bad haircut and all. But there isn't enough characterization or anything terribly compelling about either character. For instance, I'd loved to have seen some moments where we get an idea as to WHY Superman is the way he is. Some Pa Kent flashbacks would've been cool, much like we had in Alex Ross' Peace On Earth. Alex Ross understands Superman better than most any other artist in the world today, and its a shame he didn't play a part in the development of this character on film. I wanted to hear Superman say more than just a few lines. I wanted him to be a little less obsessed with Lois, and more interested in measuring his ideals to the changing, more cynical times around him. the ball was seriously dropped here, and the focus was put on a rather unappealing Lois Lane who I personally didn't really care much about.
I wasn't crazy about their version of Metropolis---we really don't delve too deep into it, either, and it comes off more as an overgrown NYC than a truly unique place. We spend far too much time at the Daily Planet was well. Couldn't we please have a quiet moment with Clark at his hotel room, or wherever the hell he was staying? Or just explore the city's other haunts a bit? I felt Batman Begins gave us a better feeling of being in a real city than Superman Returns did. We got docks, we got night clubs, insane asylums, police stations, nasty alleys, subway stations, court houses, etc. We were REALLY in that city in Begins. In Returns...its just serving as a backdrop, and I found that a bit of a letdown.
Some things that really irked me:
the kid being Superman's son. If I recall correctly, Superman had sex with Lois when he was human, without his powers. If that's the case, how the hell could the kid have powers and push a piano into a man?
Lois rescues a 6'4, 225 pound man who is sinking to the bottom of the sea, during a storm? please.
Superman in the HOSPITAL? come on. that part really dragged the movie on.
I personally get bored with watching action scenes where things just crash, break, make a lot of noise and cause huge explosions. There was a lot of that in Superman Returns like
the plane crashing, the train set and the crystals, the creation of New Krypton, the Daily Planet globe falling, etc
To it's credit, the Plane rescue sequence was so good, I nearly got teary-eyed. It was very well done. There are a dozen or more other shots of Superman flying, doing his thing, hauling extremely large objects, which was really well done as well. But that's about it.
All in all, I found this film to be a very polished, very loud, very ambitious project that falls flat due to poor characterization, some poor plotting, running a bit too long and some rather average acting by most of our stars. I'm very disappointed in where this franchise is headed. I hope the scrap the love story and focus on SUPER VILLAINS and otherworldly stuff in the future Superman films.
I give it a 5/10.
Michael Corleone
Don Corleone
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2003
- Messages
- 4,186
- Reaction score
- 4
- Points
- 58
TPS1000 said:
Wow Nunziata didnt hate it. He didnt love it either but I was expecting a hate fest with him. But they all seem to think its a good film just not great. I don't agree with some of their points but I was expecting a lot worse.
EDIT: I like the fact that he addresses the fact that some of the "legit" reviews both positive and negative are coming from a "weird place".
Michael Corleone
Don Corleone
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2003
- Messages
- 4,186
- Reaction score
- 4
- Points
- 58
Question is what rating did they give it for RT? It looks like fresh but I dont know.
Fatboy Roberts
Sidekick
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2005
- Messages
- 1,803
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 31
I don't know if they'll even submit it to Rotten Tomatoes since it's written by 5 people. Not that it matters. The growing obsession with the Rotten Tomatoes score is starting to get a little weird.
And Nunziata's pre-recorded prejudice and intellectual elitism is just dripping all over that review. Faraci comes off about 3 times as even keeled as he does. Nunziata's not spitting hate overtly, no, but again, like I said earlier in response to his Steady Leak harangue about distrusting online, web-only reviews, when he talks about reviews coming from a weird place, he seems to be talking about himself.
In the end, he recommends it, however. But his reasonings seemed, as they tend to do at Chud, to be mostly based in "I'm smarter than you."
I recognize that because I use it myself quite frequently
edit: And as far as this thread getting merged--good call. reviews is reviews. Everyone's gonna come to this thread after the movie opens anyway to discuss their OWN reviews, and no one's gonna have much to say about the professional or webcritic reviews anyway. Might as well consolidate em. Think of it as a before/after type thing. before release, this is the review thread for pros. After release, it's the review thread for us.
That said--it is a fun review to read.
And Nunziata's pre-recorded prejudice and intellectual elitism is just dripping all over that review. Faraci comes off about 3 times as even keeled as he does. Nunziata's not spitting hate overtly, no, but again, like I said earlier in response to his Steady Leak harangue about distrusting online, web-only reviews, when he talks about reviews coming from a weird place, he seems to be talking about himself.
In the end, he recommends it, however. But his reasonings seemed, as they tend to do at Chud, to be mostly based in "I'm smarter than you."
I recognize that because I use it myself quite frequently
edit: And as far as this thread getting merged--good call. reviews is reviews. Everyone's gonna come to this thread after the movie opens anyway to discuss their OWN reviews, and no one's gonna have much to say about the professional or webcritic reviews anyway. Might as well consolidate em. Think of it as a before/after type thing. before release, this is the review thread for pros. After release, it's the review thread for us.
That said--it is a fun review to read.
Michael Corleone
Don Corleone
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2003
- Messages
- 4,186
- Reaction score
- 4
- Points
- 58
Fatboy Roberts said:I don't know if they'll even submit it to Rotten Tomatoes since it's written by 5 people. Not that it matters. The growing obsession with the Rotten Tomatoes score is starting to get a little weird.
And Nunziata's pre-recorded prejudice and intellectual elitism is just dripping all over that review. Faraci comes off about 3 times as even keeled as he does. Nunziata's not spitting hate overtly, no, but again, like I said earlier in response to his Steady Leak harangue about distrusting online, web-only reviews, when he talks about reviews coming from a weird place, he seems to be talking about himself.
In the end, he recommends it, however. But his reasonings seemed, as they tend to do at Chud, to be mostly based in "I'm smarter than you."
I recognize that because I use it myself quite frequently
That said--it is a fun review to read.
Got a point there. I think he forgets he writes for CHUD.com
Also yeah I forgot about his comment on web reviews.
user123456789
Avenger
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2005
- Messages
- 11,260
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 31
Thank you for your review Lobster. It's a shame you didn't enjoy. I hope you like the sequels much moreLobster Charlie said:
Similar threads
Superman Returns
WB Releases Superman Returns Production Notes!!
Superman Returns
Superman Returns tv spots in HD
Staff online
-
Lily Adler🎄 Peppermint Mocha 🍫 -
Hunter RiderRonin
