Superman Returns Why Don't Some Superman Fans Like Superman Returns?

[The Kid]

The kid is less offensive to me than the completely ******ed lex luthor plot and characterization... meh....

this movie just messed us all up didn't it.

 

[El Payaso]

this movie just messed us all up didn't it.

According to polls and BO not all of us.

 

[The Kid]

According to Box office X3's better than x2 anc x1 so let's not hinge too much on that.

I just mean in terms of general consensus on the future of superman...

 

[Cyrusbales]

I currently place SR higher than most CB films, I think it's got a brilliant first half, and the second half is decent, although not as good, which does bring it down a fair bit, but there is far more depth and emotion here than most other CB films. I think people hate it because it's more like a decent film, than a comic book.

 

[buggs0268]

According to polls and BO not all of us.

According to box office it did poorly compared to the box office of other studio tentpole superhero films and other films. Funny thing is that Pirates 3 is making bucko bucks, but Spiderman 3 is still making bucko bucks too with it and Shreck 3. And that film is 4 weeks old. Pirates 2 devastated SR, which was in it's 2nd week out. And SR had only that film to contend with and not another big film. So comparing one superhero film to another with the same conditions, or stumbling blocks, Spiderman 3 is almost at 800 mill at only a month, and SR just squeeked to 370 or so mill in it's entire run. So, taking the same litmus test, SR failed to connect with audiences based on story and not just because Pirates 2 unfairly came out so close to it.

And bad WOM doesn't seem to be hurting Spiderman 3 even a month out. Seems there isn't bad WOM, but good WOM based on its domestic and foreign box office.

 

[Pickle-El]

According to box office it did poorly compared to the box office of other studio tentpole superhero films and other films.

It did poorly when compared to the biggest blockbusters of all time.

Funny thing is that Pirates 3 is making bucko bucks, but Spiderman 3 is still making bucko bucks too with it and Shreck 3. And that film is 4 weeks old.

Actually, they are all underperforming at the domestic box office when you look as some of the expectations. Especially Spiderman 3 and it's HUGE record-breaking weekend. It dropped immensely with NO competition its second week out.....

Pirates 2 devastated SR, which was in it's 2nd week out. And SR had only that film to contend with and not another big film.

So....going head to head with the second highest grossing film of all time isn't a big enough obstacle?

So comparing one superhero film to another with the same conditions, or stumbling blocks, Spiderman 3 is almost at 800 mill at only a month, and SR just squeeked to 370 or so mill in it's entire run. So, taking the same litmus test, SR failed to connect with audiences based on story and not just because Pirates 2 unfairly came out so close to it.

That's BS. You're all about the box office numbers....I guess films like Shawshank, BB, and even Stand By Me didn't connect with audiences....I mean, none of those hit 100 million in 2 days.....Please explain to me how that works. I have yet to have anyone do it successfully. I guess the 250 million ww dollar 'Borat' was a failure with audiences because it didn't touch Spiderman numbers. Oh wait, this is the part where you tell me it's all about the budget again....the people that actually saw the film and continued to see it all summer don't matter. It's all about budget....okay, yeah. If SR was the failure you people paint it to be....it would have 'Hulked' right away after the opening and dropped off the radar in 3 weeks. Not even passing 150 million domestically. Get a grip on reality. SR had it's issues. And now it's time to address that for the sequel, but to be so blind as to say that it's all black and white is......a fanboy at his worst best.

And bad WOM doesn't seem to be hurting Spiderman 3 even a month out.

Oh really? Then why after absolutely SMASHING box office records, it's on pace to be the weakest in the series?(by at a large margin) I'll give you a hint, it has to do with the way people are talking about the film amongst themselves.

Seems there isn't bad WOM, but good WOM based on its domestic and foreign box office.

Seems like North America and the rest of the world disagree on this....you'd have to be a blind follower of all that is Spiderman to not see it

 

[mego joe]

Clark Kent really? 'Cos the clothes and goofiness. Though I didn't mind when younger also he was my first Superman. So I'll always love him. Even as an adult.

Angeloz

Yea, b/c George Reeves was not a goofy Clark, he actually did things as Clark that chanced revealing himself at time and you'd see him stop himself. I think the George Reeves Clark was a much better version than the goofy klutzy Kent from the Reeve/ Donner films.

BTW, that business suit Reeves wore as Clark was classic '50's attire.

 

[superbaby]

I currently place SR higher than most CB films, I think it's got a brilliant first half, and the second half is decent, although not as good, which does bring it down a fair bit, but there is far more depth and emotion here than most other CB films. I think people hate it because it's more like a decent film, than a comic book.

don't be confused. lack of action doesn't mean the story will be more depth and emotion.

 

[Cyrusbales]

don't be confused. lack of action doesn't mean the story will be more depth and emotion.

No, but dialogue and direction does create depth, in addition with some nice performances, not too reliant on heavy dialogue, making the dialogue they do use much better.

 

[Rezzo]

Two reasons I didn´t like it

1. The design of the suit made him look bulky, it was like his own muscles couldn´t fit out the suit

2. I just couldn´t stand Kate Bosworth as Louis Lane

 

[Angeloz]

Yea, b/c George Reeves was not a goofy Clark, he actually did things as Clark that chanced revealing himself at time and you'd see him stop himself. I think the George Reeves Clark was a much better version than the goofy klutzy Kent from the Reeve/ Donner films.

BTW, that business suit Reeves wore as Clark was classic '50's attire.

I thought you meant Christopher Reeve. My mistake 'cos George was great as Superman and Clark (though they haven't released the last box set here with the final two seasons ).

Angeloz

 

[BareKnucklez]

It did poorly when compared to the biggest blockbusters of all time.

It did poorly compared to Bruce Almighty! So yea it did bad period...

Actually, they are all underperforming at the domestic box office when you look as some of the expectations. Especially Spiderman 3 and it's HUGE record-breaking weekend. It dropped immensely with NO competition its second week out.....

A movie that makes over 300million domestic in 1 month is NOT under performing... A movie that takes 9months to crawl it's way to 200million is what the industry calls under performing.
Spiderman 3 has A LOT more competition then SR did, and just to let you know in case you didn't know almost all these blockbusters now a days make most of their boxoffice in the first month.
Heck the first two weeks counts for a big chunk of their intake... Spiderman 3 is a major hit, and believe me Marvel is very happy with it.
It will end up around 350million domestic, and maybe a bit more... It might even make more domestic then SR did world wide.
That would hurt wouldn't it? heh

So....going head to head with the second highest grossing film of all time isn't a big enough obstacle?

Who went head to head with "Return of the King?"

That's BS. You're all about the box office numbers....I guess films like Shawshank, BB, and even Stand By Me didn't connect with audiences....I mean, none of those hit 100 million in 2 days.....Please explain to me how that works. I have yet to have anyone do it successfully. I guess the 250 million ww dollar 'Borat' was a failure with audiences because it didn't touch Spiderman numbers. Oh wait, this is the part where you tell me it's all about the budget again....the people that actually saw the film and continued to see it all summer don't matter. It's all about budget....okay, yeah. If SR was the failure you people paint it to be....it would have 'Hulked' right away after the opening and dropped off the radar in 3 weeks. Not even passing 150 million domestically. Get a grip on reality. SR had it's issues. And now it's time to address that for the sequel, but to be so blind as to say that it's all black and white is......a fanboy at his worst best.

lol Hulk was terrible... Almost as bad as SR...

Oh really? Then why after absolutely SMASHING box office records, it's on pace to be the weakest in the series?(by at a large margin) I'll give you a hint, it has to do with the way people are talking about the film amongst themselves.

Spiderman is on pace to 350million... Ask anyone over at marvel if they are disappointed by the numbers, and watch them laugh at you! lol

 

[Mr. Socko]

You pretty much summed it all up, BK.

 

[BareKnucklez]

You pretty much summed it all up, BK.

happy to be of service heh...

 

[buggs0268]

Pickle, I am seeing your reply in bareknuckles post. I again, have you on ignore, so I am not seeing your own post. So I am going to respond to points you made.

First, Spiderman 3 has made $808,751,817 World Wide, and $307,754,583 domestic. You have no ground to stand on as far as it's intake as opposed to SR's. None. It has made 107 more million more domestic.

Second, you bring up Shashank, Stand By Me, etc. Small films costing nothing to make. Those films made over it's budget and were considered hits in their days in terms of cost per what it made. So your argument is moot there.

As far as this summer's box office, it is doing better than last years so far.

Spiderman 3 made $18,112,261 in it's 4th week out domestic. Superman Returns made $12,288,317 on it's 4th week out. Spiderman 3 has WW take is $808,751,817. Spiderman 2's WW take is Worldwide: $783,766,341. So Spiderman 3 has beaten Spiderman 2's take. Please do your homework before you post.

So right now it is on it's way to beat Spiderman 1's record. So what exactly is your arguement? Cause I don't see one.

 

[Diamondhead]

Can someone explain to me why Superman fans seem not to like Superman Returns?

Personally, I think it's a great film, and one of the best superhero movies of all time, probably only behind Batman Begins and Spider-Man 2.

What don't they like? The fact that it's a rehash/homage to Donner? Who cares? It's the start of the franchise, what better way to start out?

Not enough action? Call me crazy, but I think the airplane sequence is one of the coolest things I've ever seen a movie.

The suit? I mean, c'mon, it looks fine. Compare it to what Batman and the X-Men wear relative to the comics.

So what is it? To me, other than Lois Lane (Bosworth sucks) the casting is great, the production values and effects are MAGNIFICENT and the story is a classic Superman story. What do people hate? That he has a kid?

Sorry, I'm not the hugest Superman fan in the world, but I loved this movie and it seemed like a fantastic adaptation to me. What don't people like about it?

You had to go there, huh?
Only behind batman begins!
You said it yourself!
You are not the biggest superman fan
Which means, you don't know scat about the character.

As for batman begins, I think it's an insult to compare it with a masterpiece of a superhero movie such as Spiderman 2

Superman returns has just about the same level of excitement as batman begins
Which means, both movies are not so great
No wonder why they made about the same money at the box office
And why you also like superman returns!
I once explain in another thread why superman returns was not so good.
and I’m not going to do it again!

And please stop overrating Batman begins ,because honestly Batman just don't have the wherewithal to be as exiting as a Spiderman movie

Perhaps if you can come up with a superhero like,...let's see ...Spiderbat
You know a superhero with half the skill of Spiderman and batman riding some kind of spiderbatmobile able to swing from building to building etc etc...

Anyway if you have a success with that
I want my share of the profit too lol.

 

[Qwerty©]

Why are we arguing box office when it is no impact on the quality of the movie?

Is it because that is the only way to justify your negative opinions other than nonsensical arguments about kryptonite?

 

[El Payaso]

Why are we arguing box office when it is no impact on the quality of the movie?

Is it because that is the only way to justify your negative opinions other than nonsensical arguments about kryptonite?

Isn't that obvious?

 

[buggs0268]

What quality? There is editing mistakes, plot holes, the main character barely has anything to say and is just a glorified prop, a stupid villain plan, violates it's own established rules in 10 minutes, obviously bad CGI effects, rips off characters and pages of dialog from a 30 year old movie. What the heck quality are you guys talking about? You keep bandying that term around, but I and a lot of people don't see it. And don't quote IMDB or other sites user voting on it, because I went through page after page of user comments for SR and the majority states that it is a poor or bad film in their posts.

And I am a Superman fan. But besides a few poorly done scenes, Spiderman 3 has much more character development, character interaction, story, motivation in story, plot, and other things. Yeah I hated it when I first saw that movie because of a stupid set of hecklers ruining the movie, but after seeing it again, it is a great film. SR on the other hand just limps and goes nowhere.

 

[El Payaso]

but I and a lot of people don't see it.

And I and a lot of people do.

And don't quote IMDB or other sites user voting on it, because I went through page after page of user comments for SR and the majority states that it is a poor or bad film in their posts.

Not that imdb is a source of realiability and good taste.

And I am a Superman fan. But besides a few poorly done scenes, Spiderman 3 has much more character development, character interaction, story, motivation in story, plot, and other things. Yeah I hated it when I first saw that movie because of a stupid set of hecklers ruining the movie, but after seeing it again, it is a great film. SR on the other hand just limps and goes nowhere.

A jewel in cinematography. Really good.

Lots of character (pelvis) development and respect for the the main role.

Quality oozes.

 

[Qwerty©]

What quality? There is editing mistakes, plot holes, the main character barely has anything to say and is just a glorified prop, a stupid villain plan, violates it's own established rules in 10 minutes, obviously bad CGI effects, rips off characters and pages of dialog from a 30 year old movie. What the heck quality are you guys talking about? You keep bandying that term around, but I and a lot of people don't see it. And don't quote IMDB or other sites user voting on it, because I went through page after page of user comments for SR and the majority states that it is a poor or bad film in their posts.

That's pretty much where opinion comes into it. My comment said nothing about there being a definitive unarguable quality, I just said box office does not always represent the quality of a film. Box office only represents the appeal.

And I am a Superman fan. But besides a few poorly done scenes, Spiderman 3 has much more character development, character interaction, story, motivation in story, plot, and other things. Yeah I hated it when I first saw that movie because of a stupid set of hecklers ruining the movie, but after seeing it again, it is a great film. SR on the other hand just limps and goes nowhere.

I liked SM3 too, but I recognize it has problems. Same goes for SR.

 

[mego joe]

I thought you meant Christopher Reeve. My mistake 'cos George was great as Superman and Clark (though they haven't released the last box set here with the final two seasons ).

Angeloz

I thought you might have done that. I really do prefer George Reeves on the whole, even though Christopher Reeve's Superman is fantastic and he is a visual doppleganger for the comic rendition of the character.

 

[BareKnucklez]

Pickle, I am seeing your reply in bareknuckles post. I again, have you on ignore, so I am not seeing your own post. So I am going to respond to points you made.

First, Spiderman 3 has made $808,751,817 World Wide, and $307,754,583 domestic. You have no ground to stand on as far as it's intake as opposed to SR's. None. It has made 107 more million more domestic.

Second, you bring up Shashank, Stand By Me, etc. Small films costing nothing to make. Those films made over it's budget and were considered hits in their days in terms of cost per what it made. So your argument is moot there.

As far as this summer's box office, it is doing better than last years so far.

Spiderman 3 made $18,112,261 in it's 4th week out domestic. Superman Returns made $12,288,317 on it's 4th week out. Spiderman 3 has WW take is $808,751,817. Spiderman 2's WW take is Worldwide: $783,766,341. So Spiderman 3 has beaten Spiderman 2's take. Please do your homework before you post.

So right now it is on it's way to beat Spiderman 1's record. So what exactly is your arguement? Cause I don't see one.

U know! I could not have said it better my self... Awesome post, and way to put teh Pickle in his place! t:

 

[BareKnucklez]

And I and a lot of people do.



Not that imdb is a source of realiability and good taste.



A jewel in cinematography. Really good.

Lots of character (pelvis) development and respect for the the main role.

Quality oozes.

Ur just hatin kid!
Tobey was F'in awesome in Spiderman 3!
He has simply captured the role as perfect as Reeve did Superman, and the day they replace him people will be just as upset...

If Tobey doesn't do more Spiderman movies then Marvel should wait, and then in 10 years give another director, and cast a chance to continue to legacy fresh.... Maybe a new take on the origin since it worked so well for BATMAN BEGINS.
That really is the only way a movie like this can be a hit.... If it does it's own thing without trying to jam itself as a sequel to past movies with a new cast...

Oh man I loved this scene in Spiderman 3!

Simply hilarious!!!

 

[buggs0268]

And I and a lot of people do.



Not that imdb is a source of realiability and good taste.



A jewel in cinematography. Really good.

Lots of character (pelvis) development and respect for the the main role.

Quality oozes.

Not, but for some reason you guys used to bring up the IMDB boards all the time. "If the film is so hated, then why does ut rank so high in the IMDB polls?" you guys would say. Well it actually doesn't in user comments. I guess IMDB is only reliable when it reflects your point of view.

And even with those goofy scenes, and the emo stuff, it was still more enterraining, had more character development, more plot development than SR was. People clapped when the title came up after my second showing. People just got up and grumbled as the credits came up after the end of SR.