elgaz
Sidekick
- Joined
- May 11, 2005
- Messages
- 4,670
- Reaction score
- 1,196
- Points
- 103
I commented on this film in the Smallville forum but the thread in question has now been closed, so I'll repeat myself here 
Superman Returns is a film full of climatic moments - Superman returning to Earth, Lex stabbing him, his subsequent fall and near death in the ocean, then lifting New Krypton, then falling to earth, then his near death (again) in the hospital.
There problem is there is no buildup to each moment.
He's returning to Earth? Really? We hardly knew he was gone, and by removing the scenes detailing his visit to New Krypton they effectively removed any kind of understanding the viewer may have had of just why he was gone for 5 years.
Don't get me wrong; I saw the film in the cinema when it was released and really, really liked it. But in hindsight I think I was bowled over by the limited good points (the airplane save, the few 'action' scenes, etc) and the fact that we finally had a new Superman movie with modern effects after a long time waiting. Subsequent viewings have shown up the many flaws in the story, the style and the execution.
One of my major gripes is also the near-complete lack of resolution at the end of the film. New Krypton is still there out in space, growing. Lex is still free, though temporarily trapped on a small island. Superman still has a kid, who still lives with Richard and Lois. And what happened to Metroplis? The entire structure of the city was strongly affected by the continent growing next to it, yet nothing more is mentioned about it in the film.
The only real progression we get is that Superman realises the kid is his and Lois accepts the 'world needs Superman' - which we all knew anyway.
Lex Luthor was also woefully misused in this. Bryan Singer had a great opportunity to portray Lex as a more modern villain, but he instead chose to pursue the 70s-era version of Lex as someone who's primary goal was real estate. Logically speaking, I also found that something of a plot hole; at one point in the film, Lex has advanced Krptonian technology in his possession and access to a wealth of knowledge in the Fortress of Solitude - he could make billions by reverse engineering this technology, using it to develop new Earth technology (a la Lexcorp), selling it to military, etc - but instead he decides to create new land (!!!!).
Indeed, that blatant worship of Donner's universe was really the underlying problem with Superman Returns.
I watched the film again the other night to reacquaint myself with it, and it's a bit bizarre really. A weird tone, a weird colour/hue throughout the film, a very different Perry White, a very different Superman (one who has no problem spying on people), a very bland Lois, a superkid, etc. Jimmy Olsen was about the only thing that felt right. I imagine in years to come, when Smallville has ended and the new Superman movie has come out and perhaps produced a few sequels, Superman Returns will feel like a bit of an enigma, a one-off Superman film which doesn't really fit in anywhere despite trying to be a sequel to the Donner films.

Superman Returns is a film full of climatic moments - Superman returning to Earth, Lex stabbing him, his subsequent fall and near death in the ocean, then lifting New Krypton, then falling to earth, then his near death (again) in the hospital.
There problem is there is no buildup to each moment.
He's returning to Earth? Really? We hardly knew he was gone, and by removing the scenes detailing his visit to New Krypton they effectively removed any kind of understanding the viewer may have had of just why he was gone for 5 years.
Don't get me wrong; I saw the film in the cinema when it was released and really, really liked it. But in hindsight I think I was bowled over by the limited good points (the airplane save, the few 'action' scenes, etc) and the fact that we finally had a new Superman movie with modern effects after a long time waiting. Subsequent viewings have shown up the many flaws in the story, the style and the execution.
One of my major gripes is also the near-complete lack of resolution at the end of the film. New Krypton is still there out in space, growing. Lex is still free, though temporarily trapped on a small island. Superman still has a kid, who still lives with Richard and Lois. And what happened to Metroplis? The entire structure of the city was strongly affected by the continent growing next to it, yet nothing more is mentioned about it in the film.
The only real progression we get is that Superman realises the kid is his and Lois accepts the 'world needs Superman' - which we all knew anyway.
Lex Luthor was also woefully misused in this. Bryan Singer had a great opportunity to portray Lex as a more modern villain, but he instead chose to pursue the 70s-era version of Lex as someone who's primary goal was real estate. Logically speaking, I also found that something of a plot hole; at one point in the film, Lex has advanced Krptonian technology in his possession and access to a wealth of knowledge in the Fortress of Solitude - he could make billions by reverse engineering this technology, using it to develop new Earth technology (a la Lexcorp), selling it to military, etc - but instead he decides to create new land (!!!!).
Indeed, that blatant worship of Donner's universe was really the underlying problem with Superman Returns.
I watched the film again the other night to reacquaint myself with it, and it's a bit bizarre really. A weird tone, a weird colour/hue throughout the film, a very different Perry White, a very different Superman (one who has no problem spying on people), a very bland Lois, a superkid, etc. Jimmy Olsen was about the only thing that felt right. I imagine in years to come, when Smallville has ended and the new Superman movie has come out and perhaps produced a few sequels, Superman Returns will feel like a bit of an enigma, a one-off Superman film which doesn't really fit in anywhere despite trying to be a sequel to the Donner films.