Superman Returns Ugh! Watched STM then SR....

[dark_b]

well, I didn't really like SR, but I bought the DVD so I could give the movie a second chance. I wanted to be sure that my negativity towards the film was justified ( for me ), as I had only seen it once in the theater.

that being said, my opinion really didn't change much.........

you are rich or dumb. if you dont like a movie and if you want to give it a second chance then you RENT the movie.

 

[Zen Ith]

you are rich or dumb. if you dont like a movie and if you want to give it a second chance then you RENT the movie.

I didn't like X3, so I didn't buy the DVD. The only reason I own F4, a movie I do not like very much, is because I got it as a christmas gift.

There is no reason to buy a movie if you do not like it.

 

[dark_b]

I didn't like X3, so I didn't buy the DVD. The only reason I own F4, a movie I do not like very much, is because I got it as a christmas gift.

There is no reason to buy a movie if you do not like it.

ok

 

[mathhater]

Hmmmm sorry but you dont strike me as someone who really likes the movie. Anyway, i am someone who really didnt like STM, so you'd think the similarities would bother someone like me more, but they really dont, for me SR is a better and more serious version of STM, as STM is just too corny for me.

Honestly, I really do love the movie. But, as with most films, it has it's faults. So it depends on what kind of conversation I get into as to whether or not you'll hear mostly positive or negative comments from me. In this instance, we're discussing the many similarities between this new movie and what's come before...and for me, this topic is what I consider to be one of the faults of the film.

Despite some of my negativity, SR is probably my favorite movie-going experience...I finally got to see Superman on the big screen...something I'd been waiting my whole life for.

And I'll go on record right now that the plane rescue is my favorite movie scene ever.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

I didn't like X3, so I didn't buy the DVD. The only reason I own F4, a movie I do not like very much, is because I got it as a christmas gift.

There is no reason to buy a movie if you do not like it.

Well i hated X3 but bought to complete my collection as i wanted an X-Trilogy on my shelf. But thats different to buying SR if you dont like it IMO.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Honestly, I really do love the movie. But, as with most films, it has it's faults. So it depends on what kind of conversation I get into as to whether or not you'll hear mostly positive or negative comments from me. In this instance, we're discussing the many similarities between this new movie and what's come before...and for me, this topic is what I consider to be one of the faults of the film.

Despite some of my negativity, SR is probably my favorite movie-going experience...I finally got to see Superman on the big screen...something I'd been waiting my whole life for.

And I'll go on record right now that the plane rescue is my favorite movie scene ever.

I must only ever read your negative posts then LOL!!! But seriously, thats fair enough if you like the movie but recognise its faults, as with most other movies there are plenty. But the movie is enjoyable enough for them not to bother me when i watch it.

Oh and yeah, the plane scene is awesome!

 

[X-Maniac]

why has it taken you so long to see similarities most people realised on their first viewing on the big screen?



i'm almost suprised you didn't even bring the end flying scene in as a reference or the similar opening title scenes...

Answer: I couldn't recall that much of STM until I watched it again the other night. I haven't seen it for many years. Rather than basing my views on other people's comments, I eventually watched the movie for myself because I got sent the Ultimate Edition (all the movies) for free.

It just felt horrible to see so many parts of STM repeated in SR. SR is not a pure remake, it's a new story with different situations, new characters and challenges, so it's not acceptable to me to see pieces of the original movie repeated like this.

 

[Maze]

Well (and without animosity Xmaniac hi ) that if you saw it , you really don't find acceptable many parts of Terminator 2

 

[Zen Ith]

Well (and without animosity Xmaniac hi ) that if you saw it , you really don't find acceptable many parts of Terminator 2

Terminator 3 is a much better example.

 

[Maze]

Terminator 3 is a much better example.

yes if we were talking about real copy cat.(but i kinda like the movie well paced and fun overall )

but ,the plot structure of Terminator 2 really copy a lot T1(and in some parts it is even awfully similar in dialogues and situation and a lot more than Sr , and it is still a great movie imo)

 

[X-Maniac]

Well (and without animosity Xmaniac hi ) that if you saw it , you really don't find acceptable many parts of Terminator 2

Well, I'm not much of a Terminator or Schwarzenegger fan, I can remember parts of the movies but not everything.

I just expected SO MUCH MORE from Bryan Singer's SR. I hated it at the cinema, I couldn't believe how disappointed I felt. Then when i got the Ultimate Edition (for free.. I did not pay) I had chance to see SR again - and I liked it much more. It's a very nice film but it is, to me, not always a very good Superman film and not a good superhero movie.

In X-Men, Bryan brought so many bizarre characters to life - all those mutants and their weird and wonderful powers. So I expected more sci-fi in Superman Returns, that Bryan would have the chance and the money to show so much (since he said budget and time was the reason he had to cut so much from X-Men). The one really sci-fi thing - the Krypton exploration - got cut.

The fact that he took so many things from STM is something i do not like because SR is not a remake of STM. It doesn't feel right to see the same things repeated, especially when all the movies are released together in this special edition and there is the chance to notice all these things.

 

[Dan33977]

OK, I'm going to make a new thread, too.

 

[DrMylesOBoogie]

Well thats how i viewed the scene anyway, he was kind of reminding Lois of their first meeting, while at the same time addressing the others.

The only thing that scene reminds me of is how good of an actor Reeve was and how miscast Routh is.

 

[lexlives]

I decided to watch the movie the other night...and on impulse I just decided to make a list of all the scenes in SR that mirrored scenes from S: TM.

The list is a page long...the beats and scenes that are nearly recreated from S: TM....one handwritten page long.

Unacceptable.

It was unacceptable and WB should have never accepted/agreed to the script including the child. Ultimately the fault lies with them and didn't the chickens come home to roost on that.

 

[dark_b]

i think the homages and the stuff that was a copy was not in the original script. i htink they changed a lotof things when they filmed.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Well (and without animosity Xmaniac hi ) that if you saw it , you really don't find acceptable many parts of Terminator 2

Or Spiderman 2, it basically is structured EXACTLY the same as Spiderman yet people (including me BTW) dont complain about it.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

The only thing that scene reminds me of is how good of an actor Reeve was and how miscast Routh is.

To YOU maybe, i thought Brandon was perfectly cast.

 

[blind_fury]

Brandon still cant touch Reeve's performance.

 

[November Rain]

brandon's clark and supes are different interpretations

brandon's clark is more believable while his superman is more godlike

reeve's clark is more clumsy and so Un-superman while his supes is pretty much a boy scout on acid.


swings and roundabouts, a direct comparison isn't really fair considering the directors wanted different things from their main stars but meh.

 

[blind_fury]

brandon's clark and supes are different interpretations

brandon's clark is more believable while his superman is more godlike

Brandon's Clark wasn't a disguise as it has been in mostly every interpretation of Superman. And how was Brandon's Superman more "god-like".

reeve's clark is more clumsy and so Un-superman while his supes is pretty much a boy scout on acid.

Clark is supposed to be clumsy and "unsuperman" so no one will suspect he's Superman. So that makes perfect sense. And I don't understand by what you mean by boy scout "on acid".

swings and roundabouts, a direct comparison isn't really fair considering the directors wanted different things from their main stars but meh.

Reeves was a better Superman period. The best Brandon could do was imitate legendary performance.

 

[dude stannis]

I wouldn't say boy scout. IMO Reeve's portrayal was the consumate Superhero. Agreed, Routh played the more spiritual diety Superman.

 

[blind_fury]

How was his portrayal more spiritual outside of spreading his arms to a christ-like position?

 

[Lucidious]

Statistically speaking for Lois, she should avoid air travel.

I think Bryan wanted to pay respect to what he is continuing, though like Lucas did with Episode 1, the nods and winks and self-referential humour and plotline affect it as a stand-alone movie. It loses a lot of spontaneity.

In X-Men, Bryan brought so many bizarre characters to life - all those mutants and their weird and wonderful powers. So I expected more sci-fi in Superman Returns, that Bryan would have the chance and the money to show so much (since he said budget and time was the reason he had to cut so much from X-Men). The one really sci-fi thing - the Krypton exploration - got cut.

I agree with this. There is not much sci-fi. In fact, when they are interviewing the writers, Dan Harris describes the movie as "action/adventure, romance and comedy" but not "sci-fi", which is what Singer and co. should be focusing on and which could finally break the series away from STM and Superman II, which aren't very sci-fi either. If he concentrates on that instead of trying to make the next 'Titanic' and making Superman some pseudo-Christ figure, maybe he can win some more fans back with the sequel. We know he can do it after X-Men.

 

[Lucidious]

How was his portrayal more spiritual outside of spreading his arms to a christ-like position?

To me, it's all that Brando voice-over about "I have sent them you, my only son", which actually annoys me more and more. It starts to feel pompous, since it's trying to hammer all this "meaning" to it. Jor-El was a scientist trying to save his son from dying, not God trying to make Earth a better place by sending them a saviour, it really weighs this basically popcorn movie down.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Brandon's Clark wasn't a disguise as it has been in mostly every interpretation of Superman. And how was Brandon's Superman more "god-like".

Brandon's Clark wasnt a disguise? So you think Brandon's Clark and Superman acted exactly the same?

Clark is supposed to be clumsy and "unsuperman" so no one will suspect he's Superman. So that makes perfect sense. And I don't understand by what you mean by boy scout "on acid".

Which is exactly what Brandon's Clark was like, someone no one will miss when he's gone also.

Reeves was a better Superman period. The best Brandon could do was imitate legendary performance.

I strongly disagree