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

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Could be a deleted scene that will be on the DVD.

 

[Kid_Kaos]

Please watch "Superman the Movie" starring Christopher Reeve.....this is the article that Lois (Margot Kidder) writes after Superman comes to her apartment, is enterviewed, takes her on a flight around Metropolis, and she recites "Can you read my mind".

Remember the vague history statement! For the normal audience it's more likely to think of what 'The Infernal' mentioned.
​

does anyone remember that at princeton last year they mentioned that they will explain how can superman survive in space and underwatter?

Yes! And I remember to read something about the production of the Supersuit also. Could be included in the extendet DVD cut.

 

[Nivek]

I understand...but we are dealing with people who don't understand shades of gray....when I read threads on here from the Hypsters...too many only talk in black and white. Thinking outside of the box doesn't exist to them. Lois is pure...or a ****e. Superman is a boyscout....or a deadbeat homewrecking dad.

It's not just here. I was talking to one of my buddies girlfriends who hated the flick because "Superman knocked her up and left". It took me close to 20 minutes to explain after they "did it" he left to search for Krypton. Her responce, "Well, why didn't they explain that in the movie, I know I would've liked it better if they did." Ugh. What i think is funny about the "dad" issue is how many people come from broken homes throwing the term "deadbeat dad" around. whatever happened to the term "Absentee father"?

 

[RedIsNotBlue]

It's not just here. I was talking to one of my buddies girlfriends who hated the flick because "Superman knocked her up and left". It took me close to 20 minutes to explain after they "did it" he left to search for Krypton. Her responce, "Well, why didn't they explain that in the movie, I know I would've liked it better if they did." Ugh. What i think is funny about the "dad" issue is how many people come from broken homes throwing the term "deadbeat dad" around. whatever happened to the term "Absentee father"?

And I agree with that girl. It was poorly explained in the movie. It is a bad case of storytelling when there are so many people that "don't get it". I don't consider Superman a deadbeat dad considering he didn't even know about Lois being pregnant but I think he was kind of a homewrecker. He came back pretty much trying win Lois back from what seemed to be a perfectly fine relationship. I have a bad feeling that Richard is gonna end up dying or something lame like that and Supes is gonna convienently come back into her life like he did everything else with his long absence.

 

[The Sage]

It's not just here. I was talking to one of my buddies girlfriends who hated the flick because "Superman knocked her up and left". It took me close to 20 minutes to explain after they "did it" he left to search for Krypton. Her responce, "Well, why didn't they explain that in the movie, I know I would've liked it better if they did." Ugh. What i think is funny about the "dad" issue is how many people come from broken homes throwing the term "deadbeat dad" around. whatever happened to the term "Absentee father"?

I'm partially from a broken home, I've had deadbeat father, so I know that's not what Superman is.

 

[RedIsNotBlue]

Oh and another minor nitpick. Why the **** was young Clark wearing glasses?

 

[terry78]

A deadbeat dad is someone that doesn't pay child support. That's basically it. If I have no money to give but still attempt to spend time with the kids I fathered, I am still considered a deadbeat dad, only due to money.

 

[The Sage]

A deadbeat dad is someone that doesn't pay child support. That's basically it. If I have no money to give but still attempt to spend time with the kids I fathered, I am still considered a deadbeat dad, only due to money.

I thought it was also if the father doesn't try to spend time with his children?

 

[The Game]

Could be a deleted scene that will be on the DVD.

all this deleted scene talk does my head in, if they had left in most of what they had deleted this movie may have been better.

 

[Nivek]

And I agree with that girl. It was poorly explained in the movie. It is a bad case of storytelling when there are so many people that "don't get it".

Actually, the point I was trying to make was this girl is an idiot, THATS why it took me 20 minutes to explain something explained easily in the plot to her. Her boyfriend/my friend even stated she cant pay attention to any plot in any film. Hell, she doesn't even remember the Undead Monkey being in POTC 2.

If more of the audience was like her, sheesh, no wonder it did "thinkin' movie" numbers.

 

[C. Lee]

I thought it was also if the father doesn't try to spend time with his children?

Think about this....if a woman gets pregnant and has a child....AND DOESN'T TELL THE FATHER......how is he supposed to try and spend time with it? Is it just that the people here like to call others bad names or what?

The whole talk about "deadbeat" dad is just getting very old.

 

[C. Lee]

I love how at the beginning of the movie there are words written on the screen that say "SUPERMAN HAS LEFT TO INVESTIGATE IF THERE IS LIFE ON KRYPTON BECAUSE ASTRONOMERS SAID THEY FOUND IT AND HE HAS BEEN GONE FOR 5 YEARS"......and so many people have to ask - where has he been?

 

[Nivek]

Think about this....if a woman gets pregnant and has a child....AND DOESN'T TELL THE FATHER......how is he supposed to try and spend time with it? Is it just that the people here like to call others bad names or what?

The whole talk about "deadbeat" dad is just getting very old.

It has been old, it's just a blanket critism for too long. It's also insulting in a way to some of us who actually know the difference through life exsperience.

 

[Hunter Rider]

It has been old, it's just a blanket critism for too long. It's also insulting in a way to some of us who actually know the difference through life exsperience.

More a security blanket IMO

 

[afan]

I love how at the beginning of the movie there are words written on the screen that say "SUPERMAN HAS LEFT TO INVESTIGATE IF THERE IS LIFE ON KRYPTON BECAUSE ASTRONOMERS SAID THEY FOUND IT AND HE HAS BEEN GONE FOR 5 YEARS"......and so many people have to ask - where has he been?

And that's the shame; that the plot point on which the entire film is created around is reduced to one measly sentence.

Do away with young Clark leaping about in the cornfield, the ludicrous Lex Luthor museum heist including the run away Mustang, and fill in the blanks regarding the absoloute necessity for the journey to Krypton.

 

[Paradoxium]

The Guard

To clarify the Batman thing, yes I agree that was one of the moments of self doubt. Taking a step back, despite all the doubts Bruce had, he was driven as a whole. For every doubt he had, he got back up and strengthened his resolve. We can debate whether the filmmakers are successful at that message, I don’t care now. For me, the bigger message of his drive is what makes him interesting. Even in the Aronofsky script – the one we debated for a few centuries – it also retains that drive to make a difference. That’s what I love about that character.

The Dr. Manhattan reference is a good parallel, I give you that. The central thesis of this film was Superman feels alone after his voyage, and he tries to find a place and stake in this world. Singer closes it with him feeling “less” alone with the discovery of his son and resolving the animosity between Lois. Am I close?

For ME, if that was the stake, the clinch for him to stay behind, that is weak. At its core, the film was about Superman trying to win back Lois (and the kid) – I think the reason or stake should have been… bigger. Throughout the film, everyone seems to love Superman’s Return. Remember the stadium cheers? It’s only Lois that had that animosity. Thus, why I said he does what he does because of his upbringing, not for some woman. That’s why it felt chick flick’ish.

A man should not do what he does to woe (however subtle it is) a woman; the attraction the woman has towards a man is a byproduct of his ideals or purpose in life. Focus on that and you have a winner. Sam Raimi understood this and pulled it off in Spider-Man 2. The major turning point was when Parker saves the little girl in the burning building WITHOUT his powers. That’s where his true heroism shined in the entire film. After the rescue he realized it can’t just be MJ, there is a bigger picture. This was when Spidey developed as a character. There is more to life than some woman he likes. He goes on with his life and MJ finally sees Parker’s strong character, and you know the rest of the story.

Maybe that is not what you got or interpreted. But that’s how I saw it.

 

[Iron Fist.]

A MUST SEE REVIEW!!!

http://youtube.com/watch?v=R8Z0qmS0N...owboy critic

 

[Galactical]

Oh and another minor nitpick. Why the **** was young Clark wearing glasses?

That's not a minor nitpick. We just don't know why he's wearing glasses back then. only bryan Singer knows the answer to that one. it's either a mistake or Singer didn't expect people to question it, or something.

 

[bosef982]

The Guard

To clarify the Batman thing, yes I agree that was one of the moments of self doubt. Taking a step back, despite all the doubts Bruce had, he was driven as a whole. For every doubt he had, he got back up and strengthened his resolve. We can debate whether the filmmakers are successful at that message, I don’t care now. For me, the bigger message of his drive is what makes him interesting. Even in the Aronofsky script – the one we debated for a few centuries – it also retains that drive to make a difference. That’s what I love about that character.

The Dr. Manhattan reference is a good parallel, I give you that. The central thesis of this film was Superman feels alone after his voyage, and he tries to find a place and stake in this world. Singer closes it with him feeling “less” alone with the discovery of his son and resolving the animosity between Lois. Am I close?

For ME, if that was the stake, the clinch for him to stay behind, that is weak. At its core, the film was about Superman trying to win back Lois (and the kid) – I think the reason or stake should have been… bigger. Throughout the film, everyone seems to love Superman’s Return. Remember the stadium cheers? It’s only Lois that had that animosity. Thus, why I said he does what he does because of his upbringing, not for some woman. That’s why it felt chick flick’ish.

A man should not do what he does to woe (however subtle it is) a woman; the attraction the woman has towards a man is a byproduct of his ideals or purpose in life. Focus on that and you have a winner. Sam Raimi understood this and pulled it off in Spider-Man 2. The major turning point was when Parker saves the little girl in the burning building WITHOUT his powers. That’s where his true heroism shined in the entire film. After the rescue he realized it can’t just be MJ, there is a bigger picture. This was when Spidey developed as a character. There is more to life than some woman he likes. He goes on with his life and MJ finally sees Parker’s strong character, and you know the rest of the story.

Maybe that is not what you got or interpreted. But that’s how I saw it.

See, you're just seeing heroism in terms of life/death scenarios. What I found truly heroic was that Superman was willing to die to save Earth, not for Lois, who he left and finally said "Goodbye" to, but for the world. He didn't say, "I have to go back for you." He said "I have to go back" as if the reason was obvious (it's his duty).

But that's if you just want to see it in life/death scenarios, the most extreme. How about the most heroic and strong character and virtous and admirable point in the entire movie:

Superman entrusting his only son to a pair of Earth people??? He knows he can't be that child's father. He can't. That child's life will be at risk continously. He understands he can't break that child's life like that right now, just as Clark's parents, presumably, knew they couldn't break his ignorance too soon either. But, when he wants Lois so badly, wants her so much, and here now is the ultimate claim to a relationship with her, he backs away, says he will always be there for them both, yet will entrust his own child to not only Lois, but Richard, who he is able to see as the man he is despite his feelings.

If that's not heroic or admirable, I don't know what it is. Many superheroes could throw a mountain, very few could do what Superman just did and make such a hard choice in a very difficult circumstance whlie being fair and honest.

 

[Hunter Rider]

See, you're just seeing heroism in terms of life/death scenarios. What I found truly heroic was that Superman was willing to die to save Earth, not for Lois, who he left and finally said "Goodbye" to, but for the world. He didn't say, "I have to go back for you." He said "I have to go back" as if the reason was obvious (it's his duty).

But that's if you just want to see it in life/death scenarios, the most extreme. How about the most heroic and strong character and virtous and admirable point in the entire movie:

Superman entrusting his only son to a pair of Earth people??? He knows he can't be that child's father. He can't. That child's life will be at risk continously. He understands he can't break that child's life like that right now, just as Clark's parents, presumably, knew they couldn't break his ignorance too soon either. But, when he wants Lois so badly, wants her so much, and here now is the ultimate claim to a relationship with her, he backs away, says he will always be there for them both, yet will entrust his own child to not only Lois, but Richard, who he is able to see as the man he is despite his feelings.

If that's not heroic or admirable, I don't know what it is. Many superheroes could throw a mountain, very few could do what Superman just did and make such a hard choice in a very difficult circumstance whlie being fair and honest.

I agree and also the scene where he his flying to Lois to save her and turns and goes back to Metropolis as he knew there were hundreds of lives at stake,he made a choice to do what was right not what was his peronal want which clearly would be to save the woman he loved
Yes he knows Richard was heading there but there was no guarentee he would succeed,it shows faith in Richard but ultimately it's superman realising that his duty to use his power wisely and for good is larger than doing what is most important to him

 

[ultimatefan]

See, you're just seeing heroism in terms of life/death scenarios. What I found truly heroic was that Superman was willing to die to save Earth, not for Lois, who he left and finally said "Goodbye" to, but for the world. He didn't say, "I have to go back for you." He said "I have to go back" as if the reason was obvious (it's his duty).

But that's if you just want to see it in life/death scenarios, the most extreme. How about the most heroic and strong character and virtous and admirable point in the entire movie:

Superman entrusting his only son to a pair of Earth people??? He knows he can't be that child's father. He can't. That child's life will be at risk continously. He understands he can't break that child's life like that right now, just as Clark's parents, presumably, knew they couldn't break his ignorance too soon either. But, when he wants Lois so badly, wants her so much, and here now is the ultimate claim to a relationship with her, he backs away, says he will always be there for them both, yet will entrust his own child to not only Lois, but Richard, who he is able to see as the man he is despite his feelings.

If that's not heroic or admirable, I don't know what it is. Many superheroes could throw a mountain, very few could do what Superman just did and make such a hard choice in a very difficult circumstance whlie being fair and honest.

You, good sir, rule!

 

[Hunter Rider]

You, good sir, rule!

Bah

 

[ultimatefan]

Bah

So do you

 

[Superman79]

I agree and also the scene where he his flying to Lois to save her and turns and goes back to Metropolis as he knew there were hundreds of lives at stake,he made a choice to do what was right not what was his peronal want which clearly would be to save the woman he loved
Yes he knows Richard was heading there but there was no guarentee he would succeed,it shows faith in Richard but ultimately it's superman realising that his duty to use his power wisely and for good is larger than doing what is most important to him

Good call hunter

I still wish they could have kept the 'do they need me' storyline, it might have helped get your point across in the flick.

 

[The Guard]

And that's the shame; that the plot point on which the entire film is created around is reduced to one measly sentence.

Do away with young Clark leaping about in the cornfield, the ludicrous Lex Luthor museum heist including the run away Mustang, and fill in the blanks regarding the absoloute necessity for the journey to Krypton.

Agreed.

To clarify the Batman thing, yes I agree that was one of the moments of self doubt. Taking a step back, despite all the doubts Bruce had, he was driven as a whole. For every doubt he had, he got back up and strengthened his resolve. We can debate whether the filmmakers are successful at that message, I don’t care now. For me, the bigger message of his drive is what makes him interesting. Even in the Aronofsky script – the one we debated for a few centuries – it also retains that drive to make a difference. That’s what I love about that character.

Absolutely. And in no way am I trying to say SUPERMAN RETURNS displayed more or "much" of his character's innate drive onscreen than BATMAN BEGINS did (though I feel it did display such aspects, subtlely). I was just taking a shot at your statement about Bruce not feeling sorry for himself, as I feel that particular sequence in BATMAN BEGINS is one of the most out of character, rambling, and frankly most pathetic moments I've seen from Batman in a long time. And a huge missed opportunity.

The Dr. Manhattan reference is a good parallel, I give you that. The central thesis of this film was Superman feels alone after his voyage, and he tries to find a place and stake in this world. Singer closes it with him feeling “less” alone with the discovery of his son and resolving the animosity between Lois. Am I close?

Exactly. It wasn't explored deeply. But it was explored. Had there been a better actor in the supersuit, I imagine more of the struggle here would have come through.

For ME, if that was the stake, the clinch for him to stay behind, that is weak.

Out of character, maybe (although fairly in character with the previous franchise's portrayal of Superman and the concerns of his humanity). But I can't see that as weak, because every single day, people go through what he did in SUPERMAN RETURNS. That's not what keeps him on Earth, neccessarily, or doing good. It's what keeps him feeling HUMAN. Another thesis of the film, like X-Men, is how one can feel alternatively alien or human depending on one's interactions and one's perceived place in a society. Which is a great move on Singer's part, because what else is Superman's conflict is attempting to reconcile his very human desire for love, companionship, and a sense of belonging and his larger responsibilities due to his Kryptonian and Smallville heritage and his perceived duty to mankind.

At its core, the film was about Superman trying to win back Lois

I think the film was about him finding himself and finding his place and responsibilities again (or his new place and new responsibilities) in a world of human beings who are different than he is. The man's a god, but he struggles to be at once more, and less than one.

If winning back Lois was what the film was about, he would have won back Lois at the end (He won her back about two minutes into the rooftop scene, and thereafter, there's no question as to their friendship/relationship's strength). He didn't win her back, though. Instead, he discovered he could find a place among human beings, with value, that didn't neccessarily directly involve Lois Lane's love.

(and the kid) – I think the reason or stake should have been… bigger.

It was. In the end, he had to sacrifice himself for his adopted world. That's much bigger than Lois and the kid.

Throughout the film, everyone seems to love Superman’s Return. Remember the stadium cheers? It’s only Lois that had that animosity. Thus, why I said he does what he does because of his upbringing, not for some woman. That’s why it felt chick flick’ish.

And that's a weakness of the script, not exploring the actual impact of him leaving nor his actual return with much depth. But explain to me how Lois having animosity toward him means he's only doing what he does for her. He saved that plane because it needed saving. He stopped disasters because they needed stopping. Etc. Lois is not what he does...Lois is what he WANTS. She's his break from everything else, from the pace and burden of his life.

A man should not do what he does to woe (however subtle it is) a woman; the attraction the woman has towards a man is a byproduct of his ideals or purpose in life. Focus on that and you have a winner.

Where in this movie does he save anyone...just to woo Lois? When he tries to woo her, he tries to woo her with himself, not with his actions as a savior.

Sam Raimi understood this and pulled it off in Spider-Man 2. The major turning point was when Parker saves the little girl in the burning building WITHOUT his powers. That’s where his true heroism shined in the entire film.

That has to be the cheesiest sequence ever filmed. Ever. And possibly the most unrealistic.

After the rescue he realized it can’t just be MJ, there is a bigger picture. This was when Spidey developed as a character. There is more to life than some woman he likes. He goes on with his life and MJ finally sees Parker’s strong character, and you know the rest of the story.

Maybe that is not what you got or interpreted. But that’s how I saw it.

Are you asking how I interpreted SUPERMAN RETURNS, or SPIDER-MAN 2?

Because much the same thing happens in SUPERMAN RETURNS. The turning point in this film is "You wrote that the world doesn't need a savior. But every day I hear people crying for one. I'll take you back now." The look on his face makes it crystal clear that he knows he can't just "be with her", and that being Superman will always get in the way of their relationship. And he's obviously very sorry for that.

See, you're just seeing heroism in terms of life/death scenarios. What I found truly heroic was that Superman was willing to die to save Earth, not for Lois, who he left and finally said "Goodbye" to, but for the world. He didn't say, "I have to go back for you." He said "I have to go back" as if the reason was obvious (it's his duty).

Exactly. He's going back to a contineint laced with poison that he knows full well will kill him...to save the world, because if he doesn't act, or if he fails, then billions of people will die. They missed a huge opportunity here to have him be saving people who were against him the entire film, but it's a powerful act of heroism and sacrifice nonetheless.

Superman entrusting his only son to a pair of Earth people??? He knows he can't be that child's father. He can't. That child's life will be at risk continously. He understands he can't break that child's life like that right now, just as Clark's parents, presumably, knew they couldn't break his ignorance too soon either. But, when he wants Lois so badly, wants her so much, and here now is the ultimate claim to a relationship with her, he backs away, says he will always be there for them both, yet will entrust his own child to not only Lois, but Richard, who he is able to see as the man he is despite his feelings.

If that's not heroic or admirable, I don't know what it is. Many superheroes could throw a mountain, very few could do what Superman just did and make such a hard choice in a very difficult circumstance whlie being fair and honest.

Absolutely. And...much like Jor-El entrusted Kal-El to humans, here's Superman experiencing the same dynamic (and becoming his father, as Jor-El predicted), entrusting the fate of his own son to Earth people for a greater good.