Superman Returns Ugh! Watched STM then SR....
- Thread starter X-Maniac
- Start date
Maze
Proud AquaMomoa inventor
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2003
- Messages
- 9,398
- Reaction score
- 1,133
- Points
- 103
Yup .
The reasonning i assume (and sorry Xmaniac i agree with Bosef ) is that Xmaniac open a tread each time he saw again the movie , or one of his friends saw it ,you get the point.
and ultimately what is the point? Superman was reallyy a a failure ( despite that he liked some bits like he says )
personnaly ,imo, that is almost trolling but again imo
so Bosef parodied him . (and that was kinda funny imo
)
bosef982
Superhero
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2003
- Messages
- 6,211
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 31
I'm not saying X-Maniac's ****ing pathetic. I'm saying this entire split, this entire "war" is just gone beyond pathetic...
Billy Batson
Sidekick
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2005
- Messages
- 1,954
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 31
And yet! A great
movie it was.
t: 
Yeah supes vs little supes "leave my mommy alone" .
t:exactly. and SR is not STM
exactly - the divide has not healed and will be there if Singer does a sequel. WB can't afford that IMO. No see absolutely nothing of anywhere near this magnitude with the FF, BB and Spiderman sequels.
This captures a key reason S: TM was such a bettter film. Its how it made you feel. I lifted viewers up while SR brought viewers down with its sad melancholy.
From Gabe at DVDACTIVE:
Watching the film in theaters this past summer, I was already expecting to be under whelmed and unimpressed, and shockingly enough I wasn't, not completely. The film opens with the same credit music and title graphics as the original. Everything's happy and silly, but as Bryan Singer's name faded, so did all those dated, warm-fuzzy feelings. Despite the production's assurances that Superman Returns would be a continuation of Donner's films, this is a much darker, and more modern film. It isn't dark in that bloodthirsty way most modern comic book films like Batman Begins or Blade tend to be, Superman Returns is a shockingly melancholy film. It's concerned with emotion and levity even more than spectacle or entertainment. It is this sad streak that was the film's ultimate downfall, but it's also the only thing that made the film at all memorable to me.
.
From Gabe at DVDACTIVE:
Watching the film in theaters this past summer, I was already expecting to be under whelmed and unimpressed, and shockingly enough I wasn't, not completely. The film opens with the same credit music and title graphics as the original. Everything's happy and silly, but as Bryan Singer's name faded, so did all those dated, warm-fuzzy feelings. Despite the production's assurances that Superman Returns would be a continuation of Donner's films, this is a much darker, and more modern film. It isn't dark in that bloodthirsty way most modern comic book films like Batman Begins or Blade tend to be, Superman Returns is a shockingly melancholy film. It's concerned with emotion and levity even more than spectacle or entertainment. It is this sad streak that was the film's ultimate downfall, but it's also the only thing that made the film at all memorable to me.
.
No, I am just noting that Gabe hit the nail on the head with this one. The movie was an emotional downer and no Superman film should ever be that.
El Payaso
Avenger
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2005
- Messages
- 15,262
- Reaction score
- 9
- Points
- 31
Why not? Why so scared of having different opinions?
Why should be any different?
Now, considering no movie makes 100% of people agree about its quality, should I assume people like you would love to have 90% of one side and 10% on the other, so the smaller fraction can be easily ignored? And so we can know which one is the 'right bandwagon'?
What magnitude is that you're talking? Moneymaking?
So this guy was happy as long as the film felt 'happy and silly' and had problems when the movie connected with 'emotion' and 'melancholy'?
And someone is supposed to read that as a bad thing per se?
For me, he and anyone else can watch as many happy and silly movies as they want to. 'Home Alone', 'Beethoven' and sequels, no problem. I fail to see how happy and silly means a good movie.
Showtime
Your Friend In Time
- Joined
- May 10, 2005
- Messages
- 41,475
- Reaction score
- 25
- Points
- 58
I didn't feel down at all at the end of the movie, and neither did Superman.
El Payaso
Avenger
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2005
- Messages
- 15,262
- Reaction score
- 9
- Points
- 31
Why exactly?
Super Kal
whatever
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2004
- Messages
- 47,991
- Reaction score
- 66
- Points
- 73
I'm not scared of different opinions... in fact, I welcome them, but it's a tragedy to see the Superman fandom almost at war with each other just because of a comic book character's interpretation...
Superman is about lifting us up - a person to emulate, ideals to follow. He is the shining light to the darkness that is in the world.
But SR brought him down to our level - he became just one of us who could fly.
The brighness that should be Superman was gone visually from this film. The muddy look, dark tones and all the night shots where you could not clearly see Superman.
That set a visual cue that did not compute with audiences. They know who Superman is supposed to be but this film radically tries to alter that - and failed at the BO on the way.
If Singer is allowed to do a sequel and if visually that film is dark, inward-looking and melancholy, it will be a bigger bust that SR was.
