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

[spidabatstink]

First, I'd like to say that I'm a fan of Superman, he's the main superhero of ALL superheroes. My thoughts on this movie is all out of respect for the character, and with that being said......

I'm just gonna try and sum up my thoughts on the different aspects of genre incorporated in this film.

Romance

-Lois and Superman, the focus of the film unfortunately. THis movie suffered from a huge "chick flick" syndrome, and we are consistently forced to watch as Superman continually wollows at the loss of his love, Lois. We go through the movie as Superman and his alter ego Clark try to squeeze back into her life despite the fact that she's engaged, and watch as the romantic tension between the two gradually builds back up through the course of the film. In the end, not only did the climax of SUperman's endeavors come up short, there's no closure to the countless times we are forced to watch as Superman tries to get her back. In essense, the romantic aspect becomes POINTLESS.....

Action

- Fight fans, be warned. Throughout the WHOLE 2 and 1/2 hour movie, we get to see ONE FIGHT SCENE, and it involves the ass-kicking of the hero, who doesn't even throw a single punch or kick in the movie!!!!! Wow, SUPERMAN, you're able to carry large krytonite-filled continents on your back but succumb to ordinary fisticuffs of a fragile human being, some SUPERMAN Singer made you!!!! Aside from this, the fantastic CGI perfectly captures Superman and his spectacular supersaves (Airplane sequence, Metropolis "Earthquake saves"). I suggest the next time, you focus on why SUPERMAN is SUPER, focusing on using his powers at really DANGEROUS catastrophies, and most importantly give Superman back his IRON WILL!!!!! His brave and bold personality!!!! He's SUPERMAN, not super-wimp......

Drama

-The most conflicting drama is of course his lovelife, others include dealing with the realization that the world has moved on without him, all while trying to find a place for him in their hearts as their protector. Of course, it failed with real life audiences all across the world. Sad but true.....Another sad thing is we get to see a very human side of Superman, expressing human-like emotions, especially sadness and depression because Lois denies her love for him. Now, not only did you turn this Superman flick into a chick flick, you've turned SUperman into a big softy. Thanks, Singer, for talking away the "MAN" in "SUPERMAN".

HORROR

-THE SUPERSUIT. In my opinion, the suit's problems were; The small "S" shield, the tightness, the dark color, the high collar, the missing "s" shield in the back, the belt buckle and finally the lining of the top of his boots. In other words, basically all the modifications they applied. Why couldn't they just made the exact duplicate of Donner's Supersuit with the new material, what was the point of all the funny looking modifications? Singer's vision of Superman's suit is clearly gay. Since, Mr. Singer, you are still in charge of the next movie, I suggest you fire whoever made the suit and give us back Donner's suit (with the new material, of course, something about the suit needs to be improved) since you basically made this film in honor to his.

Science Fiction

-Aside from the fact this is a SUPERMAN film, Singer insisted on making the world quite realistic. The only sci-fi element present in this movie was Superman, his fortress, chrystals, and his spaceship. The whole islands growing in the ground were just about as sci-fi as this movie got. Superman now lives in a real world, away from the fantastic elements we knew and loved from the superhero's universe.

Mystery

-The biggest mystery in this movie is why the hell did WB allow for one of the world's most beloved SUPERHERO to be envisioned as a character whose so weak and pitiful. Geez, people, he's SUPERMAN. I want a director that can show SUperman as a strong-willed being, not a pathetic dweeb. Singer has a long way to go before he can convince audiences all across the world that we need him, because he failed to do so with this movie.

 

[XCharlieX]

On second thought this is the wrong topic...

lol jk.

 

[dark_b]

i didnt know where to post this. i hope this is not old.

was it already confirmed why they didnt used this shot in the movie?

because i saw in the theater this

if this is suposed to be a joke or what then it isnt funny. fact is that they spend a lot more money to make the updated cape in that shot. so why not use it? where was the problem? no matter what you say......the updated version is just better.

now i expect some peopel to say: well dude this was just a promo shot. maybe they made this in photoshop.
wroooooooooooooong. this is an official shot from the movie. here is a screencap from the documentary look up in the sky.

 

[MJB]

Jusat saw SR, and yes I know I'm late. I just wasn't thrilled with the things that i heard was in the film. At anyrate i thought is was beautifully shot film. I enjoyed it but a lot was wasted. SR man had no real challange and basically nothing to do. Singer made the movie a lil to feminine for me. The plane sequence was great, but as I suspected the action would be light. Bosworth didn't sit right with me a Lois. Routh was good, and Spacey was good. I actually liked his LEX. I see where WB probably didn't want to go far away from the original Donner films with totally retooling Lex, but Singer and Co did good. He was more menacing and at least they mamanbged to give him his wealth. Sadly Lex's plan was asinine. Just so much was wasted. I also actually liked the Superkid. I was upset about them giving Supes a kid, but it turned out good and worked. Overall someone who can do action sequnces need to take over Superman. Singer just didn't do it for me much like with Xmen. WB needs to keep Singers tone and get a doiurector that can make Superman look cool and give him a crediable threat.

7.5/10

 

[CapBeerCino]

Just wanted to say that after second viewing I like SR even more.

 

[GarudA]

i didnt know where to post this. i hope this is not old.

was it already confirmed why they didnt used this shot in the movie?

because i saw in the theater this

if this is suposed to be a joke or what then it isnt funny. fact is that they spend a lot more money to make the updated cape in that shot. so why not use it? where was the problem? no matter what you say......the updated version is just better.

now i expect some peopel to say: well dude this was just a promo shot. maybe they made this in photoshop.
wroooooooooooooong. this is an official shot from the movie. here is a screencap from the documentary look up in the sky.

I still don't see Superman when looking at Routh. Sorry but he looks like Superboy.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Just wanted to say that after second viewing I like SR even more.

I've seen it 3 times and want to go again!

 

[ShinyBlackSuit]

Amazon.com
If Richard Donner's 1978 feature film Superman: The Movie made us believe a man could fly, Bryan Singer's 2006 follow-up, Superman Returns, lets us remember that a superhero movie can make our spirits soar. Superman (played by newcomer Brandon Routh) comes back to Earth after a futile five-year search for his destroyed home planet of Krypton. As alter ego Clark Kent, he's eager to return to his job at the Daily Planet and to see Lois Lane (Kate Bosworth). Lois, however, has moved on: she now has a fiancé (James Marsden), a son (Tristan Leabu), and a Pulitzer Prize for her article entitled "Why the World Doesn't Need Superman." On top of this emotional curveball, his old archrival Lex Luthor (Kevin Spacey) is plotting the biggest land grab in history. Singer, who made a strong impression among comic-book fans for his work on the X-Men franchise and directed Spacey in The Usual Suspects, brings both a fresh eye and a sense of respect to the world's oldest superhero. He borrows John Williams's great theme music and Marlon Brando's voice as Jor-El, and the story (penned by Singer's X-Men collaborators Michael Dougherty and Dan Harris) is a sort-of-sequel to the first two films in the franchise (choosing to ignore that the third and fourth movies ever happened). The humorous and romantic elements give the movie a heart, Singer's art-deco Metropolis is often breathtaking, and the special effects are elegant and spectacular, particularly an early airplane-disaster set-piece. Of the cast, Routh is excellent as the dual Superman/Clark, Spacey is both droll and vicious as Luthor, and Parker Posey gets the best lines as Luthor's moll Kitty. But at 23, Bosworth seems too young for the five-years-past-grizzled Lois. It's nice to see Noel Neill, Jack Larson (both from the classic Adventures of Superman TV series), and Eva Marie-Saint on the screen as well. Superman Returns is one of those projects that was in development for seemingly forever, but it was worth the wait -- it's the most enjoyable superhero movie since Spider-Man 2 and The Incredibles. --David Horiuchi

Can't wait to pick up my copy.

 

[The Game]

Amazon.com
If Richard Donner's 1978 feature film Superman: The Movie made us believe a man could fly, Bryan Singer's 2006 follow-up, Superman Returns, lets us remember that a superhero movie can make our spirits soar. Superman (played by newcomer Brandon Routh) comes back to Earth after a futile five-year search for his destroyed home planet of Krypton. As alter ego Clark Kent, he's eager to return to his job at the Daily Planet and to see Lois Lane (Kate Bosworth). Lois, however, has moved on: she now has a fiancé (James Marsden), a son (Tristan Leabu), and a Pulitzer Prize for her article entitled "Why the World Doesn't Need Superman." On top of this emotional curveball, his old archrival Lex Luthor (Kevin Spacey) is plotting the biggest land grab in history. Singer, who made a strong impression among comic-book fans for his work on the X-Men franchise and directed Spacey in The Usual Suspects, brings both a fresh eye and a sense of respect to the world's oldest superhero. He borrows John Williams's great theme music and Marlon Brando's voice as Jor-El, and the story (penned by Singer's X-Men collaborators Michael Dougherty and Dan Harris) is a sort-of-sequel to the first two films in the franchise (choosing to ignore that the third and fourth movies ever happened). The humorous and romantic elements give the movie a heart, Singer's art-deco Metropolis is often breathtaking, and the special effects are elegant and spectacular, particularly an early airplane-disaster set-piece. Of the cast, Routh is excellent as the dual Superman/Clark, Spacey is both droll and vicious as Luthor, and Parker Posey gets the best lines as Luthor's moll Kitty. But at 23, Bosworth seems too young for the five-years-past-grizzled Lois. It's nice to see Noel Neill, Jack Larson (both from the classic Adventures of Superman TV series), and Eva Marie-Saint on the screen as well. Superman Returns is one of those projects that was in development for seemingly forever, but it was worth the wait -- it's the most enjoyable superhero movie since Spider-Man 2 and The Incredibles. --David Horiuchi

Can't wait to pick up my copy.

LMAO, WB will go to any length to hype this film

 

[ShinyBlackSuit]

LMAO, WB will go to any length to hype this film

Are you saying Warner Brothers paid of ALL the critics in Hollywood to rate this film highly?

http://www.metacritic.com/film/titles/supermanreturns?q=superman returns

Four Stars (4 Critics): Time. New York Daily News. LA Weekly. Empire.

Three and a Half Stars (7 Critics): Seattle Post-Intelligencer. Salon.com. Variety. Newsweek. Reelviews. Philadelphia Inquirer. New York Post.

Three Stars (15 Critics): Hollywood Reporter. Wall Street Journal. Village Voice. Entertainment Weekly. Rolling Stone. Boston Globe. Charlotte Observer. Premiere. USA Today. Christian Science Monitor. The Onion. Miami Herald. The Globe. Washington Post. Dallas Observer.

That's a whole lot of critics and a whole lot of newspaper and a whole lot of bribing going on for Warner Brothers!! (They have deep pockets).

 

[The Kid]

that's a funny review.

 

[Showtime]

I dont get why that review has anything to do with WB?

 

[romeogbs19]

A great review for a good movie No, WB had NOTHING to do with that review; I don't know why people are saying this. You might hate this movie, but there were almost $200 million worth of people who did, and no matter what you say, that isn't a small number. SR isn't a bad film, guys, can we please get off that boat now? We don't like some of the elements, but it wasn't that bad. We talk about it as if it's Gigli or something.

 

[CGHulk]

How about Superman watching the TV at the beginning of the film at his mother house and on the TV he's upset about war in the Middle East, and instead he saves people falling off roof tops, putting out fires and stopping robbers, anyone else find that weird to be passed off, since that it was shown in the film (on his mother TV)?

 

[The Kid]

but C. Lee said we're allowed to have different opinions.

really though, that's true. It's no gigli. Gigli doesn't have piano chucking, I think. I never saw gigli.

 

[WTFwuzThT]

I'm pretty sure gigli had two deaths by piano making it twice as good as Superman the remake. On another note, that review is both funny and pathetic. Let the flopping on dvd begin.

 

[The Kid]

I'm pretty sure gigli had two deaths by piano making it twice as good as Superman the remake. On another note, that review is both funny and pathetic. Let the flopping on dvd begin.

lol I call SR the donner-buttkiss, myself. Maybe Gigli's not so bad. I know the internet always has a way of exaggerating things.

Yeah that review's funny. I mean, the art deco metropolis would have been breathtaking if it was visible most of the time. And Kitty has the best lines? That raised an eyebrow from me.

I don't know, it might have decent dvd sales. It's superman. Though if my sister's any indication some of the GP may view this as another bad sequel to the original and ignore it.

 

[Kid_Kaos]

I just don't understand why most filmcritics - even the rather good ones - totally hype that piece of crap, when every Highschool educated can easily point out numerous plotholes!? Not to start with the terrible characterisation of Superman. If anything this movie can be named "Lex Luther Returns" with cameos of other 'Superman' characters.

Sorry, but I can't take anyone serious that thinks this thing is "super" or even "good". It ranges in the stupid F4 - Daredevil (PG13) - Elektra - Catwoman universe. It may have some nice action sequences but that doesn't make the plot holes disappear.

 

[dpm07]

Superman Returns is a horrible film by a man who seriously needs psychiatric help for his overinflated ego and arrogance. Not to mention his inability to connect with reality and realize that Superman is more than just the Donner film, it is the source material from tv shows, comics, other media, etc.

Bryan Singer did a horrible injustice to what should have been a given goldmine, and he turned it into a film of epic boredom.

 

[Kid_Kaos]

..., but there were almost $200 million worth of people who did, and no matter what you say, that isn't a small number. ...

Sorry but that argument is dull. The BO only indicates what kind of interest the public has in the movie - not the quality. We don't know how many people went several times or which didn't wanna go and only were dragged by their friends or how many people disliked the movie afterwards. The bad legs indicate the number of people that didn't like it must've been big!

And before you start it again: Batman Begins is often quoted as failure but it had bad WOM before it even started so it started with small numbers cause none believed in it BUT in the end the good WOM helped it to make big dollars.
When, on the other hand, SR was hyped as the biggest movie of the year and therefore logically drew it's biggest chunk in the first 2 weeks but then fastly fell to the ground. If Singer wants to blame anyone than it must be himself for the weak storyline. IMO without the awesome marketing that movie would've been nowhere to $100 mill today!

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Totally agree with that Amazon review, SR was a great movie.

 

[Bad Superman]

It's deja vu all over again. . .

 

[Spoarz™]

Totally agree with that Amazon review, SR was a great movie.

I second that, I loved the movie.

 

[green]

Superman Returns is a horrible film by a man who seriously needs psychiatric help for his overinflated ego and arrogance. Not to mention his inability to connect with reality and realize that Superman is more than just the Donner film, it is the source material from tv shows, comics, other media, etc.

Bryan Singer did a horrible injustice to what should have been a given goldmine, and he turned it into a film of epic boredom.

Do you just cut and paste the same comment over and over?

 

[dpm07]

Do you just cut and paste the same comment over and over?

No.

Btw, I like your avatar.

What's it from?