Superman Returns Superman Returns makes it into Empire's 'Top 500 Films Ever' List

[X-Maniac]

Box office is not a clear indicator of quality though, otherwise Epic Movie would be classic but it wasnt. Some on here pretend its an abomination but its poll rating, along with other readers awards it has won has shown it effected enough people for them to make the effort to vote for it, and as somone else said, 2 years after its release no doubt. If the movie was so poorly received, people wouldnt be voting for it in polls 2 years down the line. So you saying it clearly wasnt fabulous means nothing, especially when just as many people, if not more, people here, DID say it was fabulous, the majority of them have just moved on.

The fanbase on SR has been polarised since day one. That should tell you something. Of course, those who love the movie (or love Routh, in Mostpowerful's case ) will want to vote for it. Fair enough. I think 496th position out of 500 says something as well, especially compared with the Batman movies someone else mentioned. People do like Singer's work, and maybe they appreciate the effort he put into SR - well, I think his hard work and craft was in the wrong directions. Effort and craft is one thing, but
it has to represent the material correctly not go off on its own crazy tangent.

Iron Man also made more than every Batman movie other than TDK, so again, your point is moot.

I'm not sure this is true if adjusted for inflation. For instance, back in 1989 when the first Batman came out, ticket prices were almost half what they are now. Adjusting its box office for inflation gives a worldwide gross of $735million, which is more than Iron Man.

But Iron Man also did pretty well. It was a pop-culture movie but respectful to the source.

Neither Hellboy movie lacked anything any more than Iron Man did, which brought nothing new to the table at all, and the action scene's in both HB movies were leagues better than the one's in IM. In fact, I consider both HB movies to be better than IM by some way.

In terms of directorial visual craft, the second Hellboy film possibly is better than Iron Man. But, overall, both Hellboy films still lacked in the areas I specified - for instance had Hellboy 2 developed the environmental theme (creatures driven out from forests, mankind covering nature with car parks etc) it would have been stronger. Way-out fantasy films like that need to connect with an audience.

Saying it should equal success means nothing, there are countless movies in the past that have deserved to do far better or far worse financially than they did, IMO SR is one of them that deserved to do better

Indeed, some do far better or far worse... because it can be complex. I understand you believe SR deserved to do better, I believe it got what it deserved, that it's box office was a fair reflection of the film's appeal.

For me the likes of TDK and LOTR are more exceptions than the rule, its great that quality movies CAN do well, and the likes of TDK and LOTR deserve every bit of financial success they get IMO. But there are simply too many example of poor movies being very successful for me to take your claim seriously, FF, X3, AvP, Epic/Superhero/Whatever Movie, Big Momma's House, I could go on and on.

There are other factors affecting some of those - anticipation created by a pre-existing franchise (X3 and especially AvP), good marketing, the American market for slapstick/satire films, the children's market (I believe FF had an animated series running on TV... the DVD is even filed under kids films in my local supermarket!). And of course your definition of 'poor' isn't everyone's.

I didn't think Alien v Predator was that much of a huge success but what success it did have was more than likely based on the cool concept of the two creature races coming together to duke it out. I don't think we could expect much artistic depth.

 

[SymbioteKal-El]

By way of comparison

15. The Dark Knight

81. Batman Begins

But also, to be fair, TDK shouldnt be were it is, it is a very, very good movie, but not the 15th best ever made. Some of the movies it finds itself above is just ridiculous in my eyes.

 

[I Am The Knight]

But also, to be fair, TDK shouldnt be were it is, it is a very, very good movie, but not the 15th best ever made. Some of the movies it finds itself above is just ridiculous in my eyes.

I agree. I think they put ahead of 2001? Nonsense.

 

[X-Maniac]

But also, to be fair, TDK shouldnt be were it is, it is a very, very good movie, but not the 15th best ever made. Some of the movies it finds itself above is just ridiculous in my eyes.

Most of these 'greatest films' list are deliberately controversial in order to get reaction and feedback. These sites/magazines/newspapers want to get people commenting so they cynically create lists that upset people. It's a well-known strategy.

 

[SymbioteKal-El]

Most of these 'greatest films' list are deliberately controversial in order to get reaction and feedback. These sites/magazines/newspapers want to get people commenting so they cynically create lists that upset people. It's a well-known strategy.

But, having followed this quite closely, why would they bother to ask people to vote if they arent going to take notice of them, even Empire mentions its surprise at the showing of some movies.

Hell, I'm a big Transformers fan, and loved the movie, but is it the 309th best movie ever? Just one place behind The Terminator? Sorry but no.

 

[lordofthenerds]

Hell, I'm a big Transformers fan, and loved the movie, but is it the 309th best movie ever? Just one place behind The Terminator? Sorry but no.

Glad I'm not the only one who noticed that terrible placement. Transformers probably doesn't belong anywhere on that list.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

The fanbase on SR has been polarised since day one. That should tell you something. Of course, those who love the movie (or love Routh, in Mostpowerful's case ) will want to vote for it. Fair enough. I think 496th position out of 500 says something as well, especially compared with the Batman movies someone else mentioned. People do like Singer's work, and maybe they appreciate the effort he put into SR - well, I think his hard work and craft was in the wrong directions. Effort and craft is one thing, but
it has to represent the material correctly not go off on its own crazy tangent.

Plenty of people did love what Singer did with the movie though, go to bluetights.net, empireonline.com, the movie is mostly praised on these web-site's in a big way, and i dont think the fanbase was as polarised from the start as you make out, as the majority of people in the review thread rated it highly. A lot of those people have simply left, or, in one sad case, passed away.

The fact that the movie made it into the top 500 at all shows to me it wasnt as disliked as some on here like to make out.



I

'm not sure this is true if adjusted for inflation. For instance, back in 1989 when the first Batman came out, ticket prices were almost half what they are now. Adjusting its box office for inflation gives a worldwide gross of $735million, which is more than Iron Man.

But Iron Man also did pretty well. It was a pop-culture movie but respectful to the source.

Adjusted for inflation, yes B89 made more, but the fact still remains, IM beat 4 out of 6 Batman movies, yet you make out that it beating SR is something significant.


I

n terms of directorial visual craft, the second Hellboy film possibly is better than Iron Man. But, overall, both Hellboy films still lacked in the areas I specified - for instance had Hellboy 2 developed the environmental theme (creatures driven out from forests, mankind covering nature with car parks etc) it would have been stronger. Way-out fantasy films like that need to connect with an audience.

Both of those movies did connect with their audience, you'll find very few people who disliked both, its just that they didnt reach the audience that other CB movies have. Putting the 2nd movie out a week before TDK doesnt help. Anyway, I find both HB movies to be better than IM, with them being just as if not more faithful.

Indeed, some do far better or far worse... because it can be complex. I understand you believe SR deserved to do better, I believe it got what it deserved, that it's box office was a fair reflection of the film's appeal.

But you need to consider all factors, SR opened a week before what was bound to be the biggest movie of that year.

There are other factors affecting some of those - anticipation created by a pre-existing franchise (X3 and especially AvP), good marketing, the American market for slapstick/satire films, the children's market (I believe FF had an animated series running on TV... the DVD is even filed under kids films in my local supermarket!). And of course your definition of 'poor' isn't everyone's.

I didn't think Alien v Predator was that much of a huge success but what success it did have was more than likely based on the cool concept of the two creature races coming together to duke it out. I don't think we could expect much artistic depth.

Though with these movies, many people agree with my definition of poor.

And no, I wasnt expecting much from AvP artistically, but i dont expect that from every movie, just interesting characters and fight scene's would have been sufficient.

But also, to be fair, TDK shouldnt be were it is, it is a very, very good movie, but not the 15th best ever made. Some of the movies it finds itself above is just ridiculous in my eyes.

Agreed, TDK being above all 3 LOTR movies, Aliens, and the 1st 2 Terminator movies is SCANDALOUS IMO.

Glad I'm not the only one who noticed that terrible placement. Transformers probably doesn't belong anywhere on that list.

I know, I loved that movie, between 400-500 would have been more fitting, if indeed it deserved to make it in there at all.

 

[X-Maniac]

But, having followed this quite closely, why would they bother to ask people to vote if they arent going to take notice of them, even Empire mentions its surprise at the showing of some movies.

Hell, I'm a big Transformers fan, and loved the movie, but is it the 309th best movie ever? Just one place behind The Terminator? Sorry but no.

In the case of magazines/sites compiling their own lists, there is bound to be some cynical manoeuvring just to be controversial. In fact, it is a common ploy.

With lists compiled from public voting, this could also happen unless results are independently verified. But, if we assume the results are genuinely presented, it could simply reflect the usual trend for people voting for films that are fresh in their minds. This would explain the high position of Transformers. People vote for what they can remember and it's not uncommon for fairly recent movies (or, in other cases, music releases) to make 'best ever' lists.

Transformers was an excellent adaptation of what is already a strong toy and cartoon brand, but I didn't find it to be fantastic. I found the final battle scenes to be fatiguing to watch, all that endless collateral destruction made me numb after a while. It all worked very well for an action film but I didn't find much depth, and have only seen it once.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

In the case of magazines/sites compiling their own lists, there is bound to be some cynical manoeuvring just to be controversial. In fact, it is a common ploy.

With lists compiled from public voting, this could also happen unless results are independently verified. But, if we assume the results are genuinely presented, it could simply reflect the usual trend for people voting for films that are fresh in their minds. This would explain the high position of Transformers. People vote for what they can remember and it's not uncommon for fairly recent movies (or, in other cases, music releases) to make 'best ever' lists.

Transformers was an excellent adaptation of what is already a strong toy and cartoon brand, but I didn't find it to be fantastic. I found the final battle scenes to be fatiguing to watch, all that endless collateral destruction made me numb after a while. It all worked very well for an action film but I didn't find much depth, and have only seen it once.

I know this wasnt a reply to but i found it interesting you finally watched TF after not fancying it for so long. Did you really not like the action scene's? Most people say they made the movie.

And IMO there is some depth there, though it doesnt become evident on first viewing.

 

[X-Maniac]

I know this wasnt a reply to but i found it interesting you finally watched TF after not fancying it for so long. Did you really not like the action scene's? Most people say they made the movie.

And IMO there is some depth there, though it doesnt become evident on first viewing.

Yes, i did indeed eventually watch it (a friend got the DVD really cheap). I thought the final action scenes were a bit 'tiring' on the eyes, all that endless destruction of buildings, after a while it began to be exhausting to watch so I switched off (it reminded me of the start of Hancock with all that smashing, crashing, crunching and wrecking). I thought the earlier action scenes were great but, overall, it's not a movie I'd rush to watch again. Shia was as charismatic as usual and good to watch.

You won't be surprised to hear that I prefer X-Men 3, which got the same RT rating. I guess there is an element of fan wish fulfilment in these films - TF fans probably loved the film and can overlook its flaws, and as an X-Maniac perhaps I am a little more forgiving with X3.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Yes, i did indeed eventually watch it (a friend got the DVD really cheap). I thought the final action scenes were a bit 'tiring' on the eyes, all that endless destruction of buildings, after a while it began to be exhausting to watch so I switched off (it reminded me of the start of Hancock with all that smashing, crashing, crunching and wrecking). I thought the earlier action scenes were great but, overall, it's not a movie I'd rush to watch again. Shia was as charismatic as usual and good to watch.

You won't be surprised to hear that I prefer X-Men 3, which got the same RT rating. I guess there is an element of fan wish fulfilment in these films - TF fans probably loved the film and can overlook its flaws, and as an X-Maniac perhaps I am a little more forgiving with X3.

Both have flaws IMO, X3 just has tons more, and ACTUALLY, if you want to get technical, TF actually got 57% while X3 got 56% on Rottentomatoes t:.

Cant believe you didnt like the final action scene's, the majority of people consider the 3rd act of TF to be one of the best action sequences ever. Whether they are TF fans or not.

 

[X-Maniac]

Both have flaws IMO, X3 just has tons more, and ACTUALLY, if you want to get technical, TF actually got 57% while X3 got 56% on Rottentomatoes t:.

Cant believe you didnt like the final action scene's, the majority of people consider the 3rd act of TF to be one of the best action sequences ever. Whether they are TF fans or not.

One per cent hardly matters in the grand scheme of things.

I'm not a fan of lengthy, noisy action sequences with buildings being smashed. Just not me.

But who is this majority of people you are mentioning? Where was such a majority established? Was there a poll somewhere?

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

One per cent hardly matters in the grand scheme of things.

Well considering the amount of reviews both movies have, I think it means more than you make out .

I'm not a fan of lengthy, noisy action sequences with buildings being smashed. Just not me.

Yet you liked the lengthy, noisy action scene's in X3? Were houses, bridges and buildings were either smashed or destroyed?

But who is this majority of people you are mentioning? Where was such a majority established? Was there a poll somewhere?

Sorry, I meant the majority of people on web-site's such as this. There was a poll on here last year for 'Best 2007 Action Sequence,' the final battle in TF won it by a landslide.

 

[X-Maniac]

Well considering the amount of reviews both movies have, I think it means more than you make out .

Well, you either accept the percentages or you don't. It's absurd to start saying that some percentages mean more with some films than others. A percentage is a percentage. The whole point of percentages is that the number of reviews doesn't matter, it reduces everything to one simple ratio regardless of the number of results.

However, the nuimber of results for TF and X3 are similar.TF had 206 reviews, with 117 fresh and 89 rotten and an average rating of 5.8/10. X3 had 220 reviews, with 124 fresh and 96 rotten, and an average of 5.9/10.

Yet you liked the lengthy, noisy action scene's in X3? Were houses, bridges and buildings were either smashed or destroyed?

Well, one house was destroyed earlier in the film in what was a powerful action sequence, which actually borrowed something from the comicbook battle between Phoenix and Emma Frost in which a house collapsed.

The ripping up of the GG bridge was innovative for film, and based somewhat on the New X-Men comic in which Magneto tears up bridges in New York.

We also had some destruction on Alcatraz when Phoenix went berserk but, overall, I felt the placement and spacing and scope of these scenes was fine and did not amount to one long, noisy, building-smashing action film. I'm not saying X3 or its action were perfect, far from it, but I never really felt weary of the amount of destruction going on. The DR sequence and the Alcatraz showdown needed more thought in places though.

Sorry, I meant the majority of people on web-site's such as this. There was a poll on here last year for 'Best 2007 Action Sequence,' the final battle in TF won it by a landslide.

Fair enough, but a look at the RT reviews (even just the brief snippets) on the main TF page show that the film was regarded by many as overly loud and destructive.

You and I are never going to completely agree, of course, so our different views here are no real surprise.

 

[Double Down]

I would rank it much higher than 496, but I am glad to see it make the list.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Well, you either accept the percentages or you don't. It's absurd to start saying that some percentages mean more with some films than others. A percentage is a percentage. The whole point of percentages is that the number of reviews doesn't matter, it reduces everything to one simple ratio regardless of the number of results.

However, the nuimber of results for TF and X3 are similar.TF had 206 reviews, with 117 fresh and 89 rotten and an average rating of 5.8/10. X3 had 220 reviews, with 124 fresh and 96 rotten, and an average of 5.9/10.

I was kidding! Bit defensive there werent you .

Well, one house was destroyed earlier in the film in what was a powerful action sequence, which actually borrowed something from the comicbook battle between Phoenix and Emma Frost in which a house collapsed.

The ripping up of the GG bridge was innovative for film, and based somewhat on the New X-Men comic in which Magneto tears up bridges in New York.

We also had some destruction on Alcatraz when Phoenix went berserk but, overall, I felt the placement and spacing and scope of these scenes was fine and did not amount to one long, noisy, building-smashing action film. I'm not saying X3 or its action were perfect, far from it, but I never really felt weary of the amount of destruction going on. The DR sequence and the Alcatraz showdown needed more thought in places though.

To me X3 was more geard towards action than TF was, the final battle was the only really prolonged action sequence in the movie, and plenty of people have actually complained that we didnt get enough action in TF, so it surprises me that you got bored by the action in TF but not in X3, especially when there just as much, if not more destruction in X3.

And as far as faithfulness, you'd be surprised by how faithful TF was to the comics, and the 2nd movie is looking to include even more of the mythology according to the writers.

Fair enough, but a look at the RT reviews (even just the brief snippets) on the main TF page show that the film was regarded by many as overly loud and destructive.

Just look through the user review thread on the TF forums, honestly plenty of people wanted more action from the movie.

You and I are never going to completely agree, of course, so our different views here are no real surprise.

Well, we agree that we wont ever agree t:.

I would rank it much higher than 496, but I am glad to see it make the list.

Agreed on both accounts, but the fact it made it in there is nice to see anyway.

 

[GlasgowBat]

public voting always leads to stupid things like this.

the fact that anyone could submit a list of their ten favourite films that included transformers, superman returns, POTC, the phantom menace or indy 4 is beyond all comprehension.

well, that's not true. people are idiots i suppose........

 

[Double Down]

Of course, everyone is stupid but you. Thank God you are on here to tell us what the actual good movies are.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

public voting always leads to stupid things like this.

the fact that anyone could submit a list of their ten favourite films that included transformers, superman returns, POTC, the phantom menace or indy 4 is beyond all comprehension.

well, that's not true. people are idiots i suppose........

You do realise that what some people consider quality others consider garbage dont you, many different people share many different views on the movies you mentioned, and thank god we dont all like the same things.

The fact is people felt strongly enough about those movies to vote for them, just because you disagree with it doesnt mean they are idiots.

Of course, everyone is stupid but you. Thank God you are on here to tell us what the actual good movies are.

 

[SymbioteKal-El]

In the case of magazines/sites compiling their own lists, there is bound to be some cynical manoeuvring just to be controversial. In fact, it is a common ploy.

With lists compiled from public voting, this could also happen unless results are independently verified. But, if we assume the results are genuinely presented, it could simply reflect the usual trend for people voting for films that are fresh in their minds. This would explain the high position of Transformers. People vote for what they can remember and it's not uncommon for fairly recent movies (or, in other cases, music releases) to make 'best ever' lists.

But plenty of older movies did make it in there, what you are saying maybe right, as I dont work for a magazine or anything, but i just dont understand why they would do it. I can see people voting for the likes of SR, BB and TF, and voting them so high, as plenty of the GA loved those movies. I just dont get why they would do what you suggested.

Transformers was an excellent adaptation of what is already a strong toy and cartoon brand, but I didn't find it to be fantastic. I found the final battle scenes to be fatiguing to watch, all that endless collateral destruction made me numb after a while. It all worked very well for an action film but I didn't find much depth, and have only seen it once.

Forgive me if I am wrong, and Jamon may already have covered this. But didnt you like the final battle's of X3 and TIH? Because those movies's finale's had just as much if not more destruction than the end of TF, which, I might had only a grand total of 1 building destroyed, so you saying the finale of TF fatiguing because of all the destruction confuses me when other movie you like have the same.

 

[TheBat812]

In the case of magazines/sites compiling their own lists, there is bound to be some cynical manoeuvring just to be controversial. In fact, it is a common ploy.

With lists compiled from public voting, this could also happen unless results are independently verified. But, if we assume the results are genuinely presented, it could simply reflect the usual trend for people voting for films that are fresh in their minds. This would explain the high position of Transformers. People vote for what they can remember and it's not uncommon for fairly recent movies (or, in other cases, music releases) to make 'best ever' lists.

Transformers was an excellent adaptation of what is already a strong toy and cartoon brand, but I didn't find it to be fantastic. I found the final battle scenes to be fatiguing to watch, all that endless collateral destruction made me numb after a while. It all worked very well for an action film but I didn't find much depth, and have only seen it once.

Transformers is one of the shallowest movies I've seen in awhile. Fun though.

 

[SymbioteKal-El]

^Well really the concept itself is shallow, yet Simon Furman manages to get a bit of deepness in the comics, they should have consulted him on both movies and he could have given them a wealth of help.

I'll be honest, I love the movie, and thought it was deep enough considering it was a Michael Bay. But Furman could have given them a wealth of additional knowledge on the characters.

 

[stargazer]

According to this girl, the November issue Empire magazine (OZ edition) has the 100 greatest characters in cinema on the front cover. The cover is probably the same elsewhere.

Inside the mag Superman is number 12 in all the ranking. It reads,

Superman - Superman Series played by: Christopher Reeve, Brandon Routh Heart-on- sleeve, he's the biggest, most well-known superhero if not extra-terrestrial-to save humanity. And get away with tights.



It seems that Empire supports Brandon as Supes. Niiice!

 

[El Payaso]

Transformers is one of the shallowest movies I've seen in awhile. Fun though.

It didn't have enough robot-peeing!

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

^Well really the concept itself is shallow, yet Simon Furman manages to get a bit of deepness in the comics, they should have consulted him on both movies and he could have given them a wealth of help.

I'll be honest, I love the movie, and thought it was deep enough considering it was a Michael Bay. But Furman could have given them a wealth of additional knowledge on the characters.

Absolutely agreed, I wish Furman was a consultant on the first and 2nd movie as he could have added a bit of deepness and a plenty of info about the character's he has been writing since the 80's. I have the latest Furman series from IDW sitting there on the shelf waiting to be read , I just need Escalation to complete the series.

I suppose that would be the problem with them getting a suitable consultant on a Superman movie. SO many writers have written the character, and ALL of those characters have taken different approaches to the character, so when it comes to them getting a consultant on a new Superman movie, who do they choose?