Superman Returns Superman Returns:Final Thoughts

[jgatienza]

i thought it was great. i think there was a good balance of action and drama.

 

[buggs0268]

Dont know why your telling him this, i am an SR lover and i didnt say anything bad to him. I respect his views a lot.

It was a joke. Although, as Matt can attest to, during production, if you said something negative about SR, a handfull of individuals (more than a handful actually) would come out with a snotty comment any time you posted anything negative about SR. Their posts would not even address your post, but be some smart alec remark about your mom, or a nasty swipe at you. A lot of times when you have never had any interaction to this person in yor life, and it was their first post to you. Also, they would make comments about your sanity. Literally had nothing to do with the post, or what you had posted, just some stupid a$$ remark right off the bat. That is why we called them "THE SUIT NAZI'S" or the "SR GESHTAPO". And if you look, I said the word "some" and not all in that post.

 

[buggs0268]

I think WB had bigger problems with movies like Lady In The Water, Ant Bully, and Poseidon. Superman ended up making money for WB in many branches of the tree. Not sure what can be said about the other three.

It did, but it was the tentpole film, so it was expected to make a lot of money and cover the losses of other films. Tentpole film means just that. It is on of the 4 or 3 poles holding up the tent. If it goes, the tent falls. So it had to make a lot of money. That is why what it made is considered a disapointment.

 

[Showtime]

It was a joke. Although, as Matt can attest to, during production, if you said something negative about SR, a handfull of individuals (more than a handful actually) would come out with a snotty comment any time you posted anything negative about SR. Their posts would not even address your post, but be some smart alec remark about your mom, or a nasty swipe at you. A lot of times when you have never had any interaction to this person in yor life, and it was their first post to you. Also, they would make comments about your sanity. Literally had nothing to do with the post, or what you had posted, just some stupid a$$ remark right off the bat. That is why we called them "THE SUIT NAZI'S" or the "SR GESHTAPO". And if you look, I said the word "some" and not all in that post.

I remember it all to well, but I also remember so called "haters" being just as obnoxious. It is a two way street. There is no victim here, it is open debate, and some go way to far.

 

[mego joe]

lots of people complain about superman having a kid now, and how they feel that his character is now flawed, impure, a screw up, etc.

here is a question i would like to talk about, unfortunantly probably not worthy of its own thread...

Did you feel Superman was impure, flawed, etc. in the Donner films when he slept with Lois?

honestly, i kinda did, because of my personal morals/beliefs i don't believe in premaritial sex, and i was personally shocked when superman chose to make love to lois in the original movies. obviously, everyone doesn't feel that way, but unfortunantly, most people do see a child out of wedlock as immoral though. so there is my question.....is superman any more irresponsible now than he was in Superman II?

I never liked that either. I think the only redeeming thing about it was that he had decided to make his life with her and chose her over being SUperman. (A stupid concept, though, he should be able to do both.) He had to go back to being Superman b/c in the context of the DOnner films he couldn't do both. (Again, just for emphasis- a stupid idea.)

Yes, I think he is worse in SR than SII.

 

[buggs0268]

I remember it all to well, but I also remember so called "haters" being just as obnoxious. It is a two way street. There is no victim here, it is open debate, and some go way to far.

Well I can tell you it all really started when us suit haters decided to show the pics to random people (not superhero fans) to see the reaction of the suit and reported the respnonses we got and people who don't live in our city, state or zip code started calling us liars and mental patients who should be on Thorazine for doing that. It was something that myself, Thunder Emporer, and a few others decided to do when the suit-likers, who where a very small minority at the time, said that only the fanboys were complaining and the GA would just see Superman and his suit. I know that is when it really started for me and the suit wars began.

 

[Showtime]

Well I can tell you it all really started when us suit haters decided to show the pics to random people (not superhero fans) to see the reaction of the suit and reported the respnonses we got and people who don't live in our city, state or zip code started calling us liars and mental patients who should be on Thorazine for doing that. It was something that myself, Thunder Emporer, and a few others decided to do when the suit-likers, who where a very small minority at the time, said that only the fanboys were complaining and the GA would just see Superman and his suit. I know that is when it really started for me and the suit wars began.

Well I wasn't personally involved in the "suit wars" because I thought it was pointless. The suit was made and that was the end. I was aware of what was going on, and by the time I got there, everybody was taking each other's heads off. Who started it, I can't say, only know through what you're telling me or others are telling me. I just thing both sides are pretty guilty of attacking each other, I don't feel bad for either side personally.

 

[Matt]

I remember it all to well, but I also remember so called "haters" being just as obnoxious. It is a two way street. There is no victim here, it is open debate, and some go way to far.

I think the difference is the "haters" were in such a minority that their actions were for the most part out of desparity. Not to justify the way many people on these boards acted (even including myself, in fact Showtime, you are one of the few who can say that they very seldom if ever were anything but civil). Posters were entirely out of line at times...however, if I recall correctly, it really did start out with detractors being treated like animals by an incredibly overwhelming majority..

 

[Showtime]

I think the difference is the "haters" were in such a minority that their actions were for the most part out of desparity. Not to justify the way many people on these boards acted (even including myself, in fact Showtime, you are one of the few who can say that they very seldom if ever were anything but civil). Posters were entirely out of line at times...however, if I recall correctly, it really did start out with detractors being treated like animals by an incredibly overwhelming majority..

At that point in time I believe you were right, the boards were very titlted towards those who were positive about the movie itself. I appreciate you noticing, I do my best to remain civil. I do not remember how it started, but from most I am hearing that it is due to the fact that majority of positive posters begain the attack on those who had negative opinions on the movie. After that it turned into a disaster with both groups attacking on a daily basis.

If and when there is a sequel I hope it can be more enjoyable for both parties.

 

[charl_huntress]

Lexlives is trying to say that Routh most likely wasn't a good actor in the first place, given the OLTL fiasco.

I don't how that could possibly be judged in it's entirety since he barely had lines.

 

[Showtime]

I think he had plenty of opportunity to show off his comedict side with Clark Kent, but not much of opportunity with Superman & Smallville Clark.

 

[mego joe]

i thought it was great. i think there was a good balance of action and drama.

I think it had a good balance of action and drama too, I just felt that the drama wasn't very dramatic, just a soap opera cliche and it was done poorly and only touched on the surface of the issues and never went any deeper. Oh, IMO, the dramatic situation was about the worst you could ever come up with for a SUperman movie, only behind, "Child Molester-SUprman" and "Superman Comes Out Of The Closet."

 

[mego joe]

I don't how that could possibly be judged in it's entirety since he barely had lines.

I have to agree. He didn't have hardly any opportunity to do anything but look longingly and stare sadly.

 

[SamuraiSon6]

I never liked that either. I think the only redeeming thing about it was that he had decided to make his life with her and chose her over being SUperman. (A stupid concept, though, he should be able to do both.) He had to go back to being Superman b/c in the context of the DOnner films he couldn't do both. (Again, just for emphasis- a stupid idea.)

Yes, I think he is worse in SR than SII.

i agree with you mega joe

 

[SamuraiSon6]

FINAL THOUGHTS

(+): A well directed and well made movie, has respect for the character of Superman, you can feel the passion in every scene of the film, best CGI in a comic book film yet.
(-): Based the film too much on the previous reeve films, Not enough stuff to satisfy the hardcore comic supes fans, poor villain plot, lack of pumped-up action.

simple, concise, good review

 

[Axl Van Sixx]

Well, I think that having seen the movie probably a dozen times by now, I can now post my final thoughts on Superman Returns. Superman is my favourite superhero, and so I was looking forward to the film immensely. I followed all the news during production and everything looked like it was going to be terrific. Even the suit I never really had any problems with - sure it was different, but I liked the Fleischer-esque elements and thought it was appropriate for a modern Superman flick. Having said all this, what was my reaction when I finally sat down in a darkened theater and watched the movie?

Both as a moviegoer and a Superman fan, I was...disappointed.

Certainly there were a lot of things to love about the movie. I thought that Brandon Routh did a great job as Superman/Clark Kent (especially considering that he was filling in for CHRISTOPHER ****ING REEVE). The plane scene was one of the best action sequences I've ever seen in a superhero film. The film was obviously crafted with a lot of passion and respect for Superman. It has a timeless look to it. Isolated scenes were incredible - Lex beating Superman and stabbing him with kryptonite, Superman's slow descent into the Fortress of Solitude (in that lighting he's a dead ringer for the Alex Ross Superman), the plane scene obviously, and the Daily Planet scenes were all done very well. I even thought that the Superman/Lois flight was much better done than the one in S:TM. The religious imagery was all very intriguing.

Given all this, why do I say this film was disappointing? Simply because in the end, the good was outweighed by the weak elements:
- Kate Bosworth was a poor choice for Lois Lane. She looks too young (especially when she's supposed to be playing a Pullitzer-Prize winning journalist and mother). She has a skeleton's physique. She looks relatively hot in some scenes, but in others is very unattractive. Come on, this is LOIS LANE! Finally, she totally fails to radiate the tough-as-nails gutsy reporter aspect of Lois' personality.
- Lex Luthor was all wrong. Spacey's performance was good, but they should not have gone with a rehash of the campy Gene Hackman Lex, which is far less interesting dramatically than businessman Lex would have been. Lex's character was not fleshed out anywhere near enough.
- The film is in too many ways a rehash of S:TM. Singer stole so many elements from that movie - with SR's entire plot structure following the broad outlines of Donner's film - that it went beyond homage and became more like rip-off. If you want to make a Superman movie for a new generation, you need to have NEW IDEAS.
- The kid was a bad idea...period.
- Superman's return to earth and his relationship to people was not explored to its full potential. If this movie had been more about what Superman means to the world, and less about his relationship with Lois, it would have been a lot better. In addition, if Lex had started LexCorp and become a powerful businessman while Superman was gone for 5 years, it would have lent a lot more dramatic punch to his return.
- Singer didn't lie - this movie really IS about "what happens when old boyfriends come back into your life." I thought that just meant he would pay attention to the relationship between Lois and Superman, not make it the central focus of his movie. But he does, and to completely boring effect. For long stretches, this movie stops dead in order to become a dull soap opera.
- Kal Penn had basically NO LINES! W...t...f. If you have Kumar in your film, you give him plenty of funny lines. Which brings us to the next problem...
- The movie took itself too seriously. I appreciate the respect they have for Superman, but the Donner films did that and were also able to have a bit of fun with him at the same time.
- Brandon Routh was not given anywhere enough lines. The movie is called SUPERMAN RETURNS, but in the end Superman doesn't say much.
- Lex's land scheme was dumb, and once again was a rehash of Lex's land scheme in S:TM.

I don't know, as I've said there are a lot of things I like about this movie and I watch it pretty often. But the movie as a whole doesn't provide the "wow" factor I get from watching the Spider-Man movies or Batman Begins. If I had to summarize my problems with the movie in one sentence - beyond my disappointments about no Lexcorp or whatever - I would put it thusly:

Superman Returns is a chick flick.

I never thought I would have a problem with a Superman film being too long, but that's exactly what I felt about this one, and it's because so much of it is filled with dull romantic soap opera. I don't exactly watch Smallville for the barn scenes (although I'll stop watching it altogether if the show remains on its downward spiral). Similarly, I don't go to a Superman movie to watch drawn-out scenes about Supes' relationship with a decidedly un-hot Lois Lane. I can enjoy this movie on my own, but if you want to get blitzed with your buddies and watch an awesome superhero action flick, this is NOT the movie you're looking for.

I'm hoping Singer will do a better job on The Man of Steel, but his first shot at resurrecting Superman has yielded decidedly mixed results.

 

[AgentPat]

...If this movie had been more about what Superman means to the world, and less about his relationship with Lois, it would have been a lot better.

Mmmm.... kinda have to disagree with ya on this point. I think they did a good good job of showing how important Superman is to the world within the context of the plot. I agree that it could have been even *better* had the threat been something more evil than a guy with a real estate fetish (alien invasion, super villains, monsters from the ID - anything), but the film did address Superman's relevancy to the world and did so adequately, IMHO.

The relationship with Lois, on the other hand, is what crashed and burned. It wasn't a matter of them spending too much time telling the Clark/Lois/Superman tale, they didn't spend enough, and what they DID show was depressing. Not only was Lois a real beeeeyotch to Clark, she didn't even want to write the story of Superman's return - where he'd been, the new suit (LOL), and all of those other things that Perry pointed out SELLS newspapers. What Lois was that? Certainly nothing that I recognized. If Superman went missing all of a sudden, wouldn't Lois be devastated? Why would she automatically assume his departure was intentional? What in the name of Rao would ever possess her to write an article about why the world doesn't need Superman, and THEN be all pissed at him when he DID return? Wouldn't she WANT to know what the bleep happened? Was he hurt? Was he off saving another planet? WTF? LOL

Then there's Superman, all emo and broken up over Lois moving-on (as if she would - her life has always been about her career AND Superman), and his peekaboo stalker routine...

OMG! WHAT was Singer thinking? Gah!

this movie really IS about "what happens when old boyfriends come back into your life." I thought that just meant he would pay attention to the relationship between Lois and Superman, not make it the central focus of his movie. But he does, and to completely boring effect. For long stretches, this movie stops dead in order to become a dull soap opera.

Again, the problem wasn't about Lois and Superman's relationship as it was their estrangement. Who wants to see that? Where was the playful dance both characters usually do around each other? Clark loves Lois and Lois loves Superman. Who the heck was this Richard guy? *sigh*

Superman Returns is a chick flick...

...that didn't have much of an appeal to this chick. If Singer wanted to make SR a chick flick, he should have added the kind of rom-com elements that generally appeal to women. And really, how hard is it when you already have a pre-established couple that are madly in love but hide it from each other in romantically humorous ways while other more serious plot elements play out around them? SR was called a "chick flick" by a guy who sapped every last ounce of joy out of Superman. Now THAT's hard, or so I would have thought.

 

[Cyrusbales]

The first half of SR is really impressive, however the second half lags a little to much which brings the overall quality down. Still in the upper echelon of comic book films.

 

[CGHulk]

I know I'm gonna get alot of flak for this, but this movie is alot better with all the Lex scenes cut out of the first half of the film, but leave in Supes saving Kitty, when Supes sees her at the end of the film it works. The first time we should see Lex in the film is when Lois meets him on his yatch. From there on Lex explains his whole plan, why should we see it all earlier when he just explains it all later. The film should start out with Martha on the farm, it's alot better (than Lex with Mrs. Vanderworth) because Supes just traveled from Krypton to Earth perviously and now he's crashed on the farm, the continuity is better. The blackout and the plane crash is more interesting and suspensful without the Lex scenes which breaking up the suspense and excitement of the scene, and the mystery as to why it's happening is ruined. See by cutting out all of Lex Scenes until Lois investigates and discovers it is Lex is like an old Superman comic, where Lois and the characters do thier investigations and Lois gets herslf into trouble. We should as an adience go with the characters to figure it all out and be surpised as they do when they find out too. Leaving out that we know Lex's plan makes him less menacing, but by revealing him later on we're not sure what he's going to do is scarier. The less you know about the villian the better, he's impredictable. The first half without Lex is great because the focus is on Clark and what's going on with him and lois without distraction, and there's no complaint from me that there's not enough Clark in the film if the first half is carried by him without Lex. The movie is then in two parts, wich in my opinion is a better film. Try it out, skip the Lex scenes.

 

[dark_b]

I know I'm gonna get alot of flak for this, but this movie is alot better with all the Lex scenes cut out of the first half of the film, but leave in Supes saving Kitty, when Supes sees her at the end of the film it works. The first time we should see Lex in the film is when Lois meets him on his yatch. From there on Lex explains his whole plan, why should we see it all earlier when he just explains it all later. The film should start out with Martha on the farm, it's alot better (than Lex with Mrs. Vanderworth) because Supes just traveled from Krypton to Earth perviously and now he's crashed on the farm, the continuity is better. The blackout and the plane crash is more interesting and suspensful without the Lex scenes which breaking up the suspense and excitement of the scene, and the mystery as to why it's happening is ruined. See by cutting out all of Lex Scenes until Lois investigates and discovers it is Lex is like an old Superman comic, where Lois and the characters do thier investigations and Lois gets herslf into trouble. We should as an adience go with the characters to figure it all out and be surpised as they do when they find out too. Leaving out that we know Lex's plan makes him less menacing, but by revealing him later on we're not sure what he's going to do is scarier. The less you know about the villian the better, he's impredictable. The first half without Lex is great because the focus is on Clark and what's going on with him and lois without distraction, and there's no complaint from me that there's not enough Clark in the film if the first half is carried by him without Lex. The movie is then in two parts, wich in my opinion is a better film. Try it out, skip the Lex scenes.

after reading this i punched my face and than i asked myself: why was there so many lex scenes at the beginning? is this superman returns or lex returns to FOS?

 

[Showtime]

That was a problem I had with the editing. Sure, I understand they were trying to build the storyline with Lex, but it was rather curious.

I didn't punch myself in the face though.

 

[LexCorp]

Lex overkill...Superman underkill

 

[Spiderine]

I felt like I was waiting for the climax and it just never happened.

 

[SingItWithMeNow]

I had high expectations regarding Bryan Singer, and coming out of Batman Begins, expected a similar deal with Superman.

I just didnt get the connections with Reeve's Superman I & II, it was pretty risky making a remake and a sequel at the same time, and it didnt really pay off.

Kal-El-Clark-Superman and Lois were clunky and not very entertaining.
Loved Jimmy Olsen and Lex Luthor, those guys are having fun!

Very watchable, but wont go down in history.