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

[Super Kal]

some of you also seem to forget the piece of kryptonite that was still stuck in his side... that raises even more questions, like how he was able to lift the island with kryptonite still in his side...

 

[Superwoman Prime]

Lois removed the kryptonite shard before he left the plane.

 

[Super Kal]

not all of it... there was still a piece in him, and if the smallest sliver can weaken him, than he shouldn't of even been able to fly out of the plane

 

[Superwoman Prime]

I think it was Superman tapping into his energy reserves. The sunlight gave him that last boost he needed to achieve his mission. It's a stretch, I admit. However... it's not like he flew back down to earth afterward, unscathed. The "feat" took all that he had. There was a price for his exersion. He died.

By no means am I defending SR as a movie. That part was nice, though, and VERY true to the character's personality, when everything else in SR seemed very out of character.

 

[Wushuboy]

I think it was Superman tapping into his energy reserves. The sunlight gave him that last boost he needed to achieve his mission. It's a stretch, I admit. However... it's not like he flew back down to earth afterward, unscathed. The "feat" took all that he had. There was a price for his exersion. He died.

By no means am I defending SR as a movie. That part was nice, though, and VERY true to the character's personality, when everything else in SR seemed very out of character.

And the question still stands.. why couldnt he tap into this so called reserve when he's gettin his butt kicked by luthor's henchmen?

 

[C. Lee]

And the question still stands.. why couldnt he tap into this so called reserve when he's gettin his butt kicked by luthor's henchmen?

It takes concentration....a concerted focalized effort. That isn't easy to do when getting kicked and punched.

 

[mego joe]

It takes concentration....a concerted focalized effort. That isn't easy to do when getting kicked and punched.

Or maybe it just requires good writing....

 

[C. Lee]

Or maybe it just requires good writing....

That's a possibility (they could have wrote something in there that explained this possibility better).....but my response was to the people who seem to only think in absolutes. The ones who seem to not be able to concieve any alternatives to why something can or can not be done. I wasn't saying it was the best the idea in the world...just a possibility to think about.

 

[mego joe]

That's a possibility (they could have wrote something in there that explained this possibility better).....but my response was to the people who seem to only think in absolutes. The ones who seem to not be able to concieve any alternatives to why something can or can not be done. I wasn't saying it was the best the idea in the world...just a possibility to think about.

Understood.

 

[Angeloz]

How can the bottom of the landmass provide protection if there are huge spears of kryptonite jutting and creeping out of it only inches away from his face? Or did you not see that scene? If the landmass shields him when he's below why not when he's on top? In the movie it took him a while to realize there's kryptonite all around. Just look at the scene where he sees his fingers. Ishould be the same principle. He should still have the energy to fight and not be totally powerless since by your assessment he should be shielded somewhat by the landmass. Lead only shields him from it if it either encases the kryptonite or encases his whole body. If any part of his body is exposed he will feel the radiation eminating from the kryptonite. And when did earth and dirt ever block radiation. The only thing that blocks it's effects is lead.

In the end the writers conveniently through out logic with respect to superman's universe when they needed it. And it's convenient to say he did it through will power to explain the plothole. So you're basically saying superman lacked the will to stop lex when he first landed on the island and saw lex come out.

It depends if you want to believe it or not. As has been pointed out it might not be pure K on the island (i.e. seabed-crystal-kryptonite mix plus the Fortress isn't ice it's crystal I believe). Also Luthor did have pure K on him. So the effects could be explained that way. As the K in Luthor's pocket affected him worse than the island did. Another fun fact is the further away an object emitting radiation is the less you feel. Double the distance and you feel a quarter of the radiation. So it isn't just the packed earth by itself that protected him it was the distance it provided too. So maybe the K was weakening him and that's why he struggled and seemed in pain but it wasn't enough to completely depower him. Plus he was so determined to lift the thing that he gave more than he would normally.

some of you also seem to forget the piece of kryptonite that was still stuck in his side... that raises even more questions, like how he was able to lift the island with kryptonite still in his side...

It was small. And maybe it was like a bee sting. It is extremely painful and if allergic will eventually kill if it's not removed. But not always immediately. I will point out he did look like he was in pain lifting the landmass. So he wasn't unaffected. Plus that whole falling unconscious and seeming dying in hospital also said there was a consequence.

And the question still stands.. why couldnt he tap into this so called reserve when he's gettin his butt kicked by luthor's henchmen?

It takes concentration....a concerted focalized effort. That isn't easy to do when getting kicked and punched.

Also if the dirt was diluting or made the radiation less concentrated whereas Luthor's piece was the pure unadulterated version. He wasn't protected as much from it. I'll note he started sweating near Luthor. Coincidence?

Or maybe it just requires good writing....

Call me silly but I like that he was willing to die to save a lot of the world. Also kryptonite often makes no sense in comics or television (in the same universe). So you either accept that he could just overcome his weakness or not. And I'm glad there were consequences i.e. nearly dying. And frankly a lot of comic films don't stand up to logic often including the end. I don't care I like them anyway.

Angeloz

 

[dr collossus]

Another fun fact is the further away an object emitting radiation is the less you feel. Double the distance and you feel a quarter of the radiation.

Inverse-square law.

So you either accept that he could just overcome his weakness or not. And I'm glad there were consequences i.e. nearly dying. And frankly a lot of comic films don't stand up to logic often including the end. I don't care I like them anyway.

That's what it comes down to. It's safe to say that this scene was more than a little inconsistent, but if you're going to suspend disbelief for a film about a man who flies and bounces bullets off his chest, then this inconsistency shouldn't bother you that much.

On the other hand, if that bit ruined the movie for you fair enough. Personally, it didn't bother me that much, and that's coming from someone who was really unimpressed with this movie.

 

[mego joe]

It depends if you want to believe it or not. As has been pointed out it might not be pure K on the island (i.e. seabed-crystal-kryptonite mix plus the Fortress isn't ice it's crystal I believe). Also Luthor did have pure K on him. So the effects could be explained that way. As the K in Luthor's pocket affected him worse than the island did. Another fun fact is the further away an object emitting radiation is the less you feel. Double the distance and you feel a quarter of the radiation. So it isn't just the packed earth by itself that protected him it was the distance it provided too. So maybe the K was weakening him and that's why he struggled and seemed in pain but it wasn't enough to completely depower him. Plus he was so determined to lift the thing that he gave more than he would normally.



It was small. And maybe it was like a bee sting. It is extremely painful and if allergic will eventually kill if it's not removed. But not always immediately. I will point out he did look like he was in pain lifting the landmass. So he wasn't unaffected. Plus that whole falling unconscious and seeming dying in hospital also said there was a consequence.





Also if the dirt was diluting or made the radiation less concentrated whereas Luthor's piece was the pure unadulterated version. He wasn't protected as much from it. I'll note he started sweating near Luthor. Coincidence?



Call me silly but I like that he was willing to die to save a lot of the world. Also kryptonite often makes no sense in comics or television (in the same universe). So you either accept that he could just overcome his weakness or not. And I'm glad there were consequences i.e. nearly dying. And frankly a lot of comic films don't stand up to logic often including the end. I don't care I like them anyway.

Angeloz

I think people would be more forgiving with issues like this is the characterization and story had been better AND better executed.

 

[El Payaso]

Superman has displayed before more of his powers when the situation is more critical.

On STM, he couldn't catch two missiles accross America and yet he could surround Earth many times per second when Lois was dead.

Same here, when it was about himself, Kryptonite got it, but after a sun charge and having his last chance to save Earth, he could endure the Kryptonite radiation enough to lift NK to the space.

I know it doesn't sound logical in either case, but it sounds consistent in the depiction of the character.

 

[X-Maniac]

A friend of mine groaned at the scene with him lifting the island and thought it happened because, having created the island, the writers and director didn't know what else to do with it. It had to be removed, it couldn't be just left in the ocean growing.

The scene would have worked better if

a) Superman didn't have a sliver of kryptonite still stuck in his flesh

b) he'd spent more time in front of the sun, absorbing energy and charging up much more obviously.

In some of the storyboards the island looked to be made entirely of kryptonite, and was glowing bright green, so heaven's knows what would have happened in that scenario.

 

[Man-E-Toys]

I think it was Superman tapping into his energy reserves. The sunlight gave him that last boost he needed to achieve his mission. It's a stretch, I admit. However... it's not like he flew back down to earth afterward, unscathed. The "feat" took all that he had. There was a price for his exersion. He died.

By no means am I defending SR as a movie. That part was nice, though, and VERY true to the character's personality, when everything else in SR seemed very out of character.

he didn't die in the movie. seemed to me he was just put into a coma from the kryptonite.

 

[stargazer]

A friend of mine groaned at the scene with him lifting the island and thought it happened because, having created the island, the writers and director didn't know what else to do with it. It had to be removed, it couldn't be just left in the ocean growing.

The scene would have worked better if

a) Superman didn't have a sliver of kryptonite still stuck in his flesh

b) he'd spent more time in front of the sun, absorbing energy and charging up much more obviously.

In some of the storyboards the island looked to be made entirely of kryptonite, and was glowing bright green, so heaven's knows what would have happened in that scenario.

You crack me up, X-Maniac. It is always a friend of yours or a person you know.. why don't you just speak for yourself or admit that it is you who think so.

 

[stargazer]

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?

To answer your question, I think it's impossible to please everyone, especially with a character like Superman, whose mythology and history is so vast and everybody has "the perfect movie' in their minds. Too many versions of the character to choose from. Personally, I agree with you, SR is such a great and beautiful movie, so full of heart and subtext that is just amazing. It was crafted with such passion and love for the character and his world.

IMO, Singer should follow his vision and try to make a movie that pleases the mainstream. Forget about what the fans want, they can't agree to anything.

 

[Orin]

It isn't a small minority that didn't like Superman Returns. But funny that you always put it that way. However, it is true that you can't please everyone and that there are always nitpickers, who are saying this and that isn't like in the comic book, even through it isn't even possible to adapt a character like Superman in a way that feels ultimate to everyone. But if someone would just follow his vision and forget what the fans want, like you're advising, he certainly wouldn't be the right man for a franchise like Superman. After all, the fans are the ones who love, know and care about this character and if a big part of these people aren't pleased with your movie, you did something wrong. As simple as that...

 

[mego joe]

It isn't a small minority that didn't like Superman Returns. But funny that you always put it that way. However, it is true that you can't please everyone and that there are always nitpickers, who are saying this and that isn't like in the comic book, even through it isn't even possible to adapt a character like Superman in a way that feels ultimate to everyone. But if someone would just follow his vision and forget what the fans want, like you're advising, he certainly wouldn't be the right man for a franchise like Superman. After all, the fans are the ones who love, know and care about this character and if a big part of these people aren't pleased with your movie, you did something wrong. As simple as that...

...hence SR.

 

[stargazer]

It isn't a small minority that didn't like Superman Returns. But funny that you always put it that way. However, it is true that you can't please everyone and that there are always nitpickers, who are saying this and that isn't like in the comic book, even through it isn't even possible to adapt a character like Superman in a way that feels ultimate to everyone. But if someone would just follow his vision and forget what the fans want, like you're advising, he certainly wouldn't be the right man for a franchise like Superman. After all, the fans are the ones who love, know and care about this character and if a big part of these people aren't pleased with your movie, you did something wrong. As simple as that...

Show me where I said that. I was talking about the fans, those people who live on these message forums, those people who have seen STM almost every day for many years, and about those people who read the comics and know what post or pre crisis Superman means, for instance. They are impossible to please because they have "the perfect Superman movie" all mapped out in their minds for years! Most people's complaint (the mainstream and critics) was that the film was too slow and that it needed more action. They didn't care about Superman having a kid or about the suit. Go read the reviews and you'll see. It is The fans who complain about those things because it goes against their ideal vision of the character. The mainstream just want to be entertained, they could care less about all "the details," and by the numbers, SR was not the most entertaining movie ever, still it did well and IMO deserves a sequel.

 

[stargazer]

...hence SR.

Or BB? It did less at the BO..

 

[mego joe]

Or BB? It did less at the BO..

I don't think Orin mentioned box office take, did he? It's been discussed ad infinitum that BO take is not an indicator of quality. FTR (for the record), ignoring the fans of the character is commercial suicide.

The difference was that BB was one of the best comic movies ever and SR was one of the worst. Batman in character, Superman out of character. Batman- captured the spirit of the comics, Superman- captured the spirit of a cliched soap opera and deadbeat dad. BB getting a sequel, Superman mired in 'next film' development hell.

I know you liked it Mostpowerful, but that doesn't mean it was a good Superman film. Sure it was pretty to look at, but the substance of the film was not represtative of the character.

 

[Orin]

Show me where I said that.

Well, that's what i read from your post, if you don't think so, sorry.

I was talking about the fans, those people who live on these message forums, those people who have seen STM almost every day for many years, and about those people who read the comics and know what post or pre crisis Superman means, for instance. They are impossible to please because they have "the perfect Superman movie" all mapped out in their minds for years!

Like i siad, of course there are Überfanboys and nitpickers, who can't be pleased, no matter what you do. But that people aren't the majority of the Superman fandom and that people aren't the only ones who didn't like SR. I read Superman comics for more than 15 years now, know the history of the character (pre- and post-crisis), saw pretty much every movie, tv-show or carton and i do have my personal perfect version of the character. But i do also know that no movie will ever unite all elements of that perfect version and that certain changes can be needed, when you're translating the character from the comics to the screen. It's very well possible to please me, but SR didn't...

Most people's complaint (the mainstream and critics) was that the film was too slow and that it needed more action. They didn't care about Superman having a kid or about the suit. Go read the reviews and you'll see. It is The fans who complain about those things because it goes against their ideal vision of the character. The mainstream just want to be entertained, they could care less about all "the details," and by the numbers, SR was not the most entertaining movie ever, still it did well and IMO deserves a sequel.

Yeah, a new Superman Returns, with all it's details, would most likely be a well recived by the mainstream and box office success if it'd just have more action. But that shouldn't be your only goal. The avarage moviegoer may not mind the kid, but you've got fans, that mind things like that and all the other stuff Singer got wrong about Superman, not because it's not the same than their favorite version of the character, but no relevant version of the character. It shouldn't be forgotten that these people are the reason Superman still exists...

 

[stargazer]

I don't think Orin mentioned box office take, did he? It's been discussed ad infinitum that BO take is not an indicator of quality. FTR (for the record), ignoring the fans of the character is commercial suicide.

The difference was that BB was one of the best comic movies ever and SR was one of the worst. Batman in character, Superman out of character. Batman- captured the spirit of the comics, Superman- captured the spirit of a cliched soap opera and deadbeat dad. BB getting a sequel, Superman mired in 'next film' development hell.

I know you liked it Mostpowerful, but that doesn't mean it was a good Superman film. Sure it was pretty to look at, but the substance of the film was not represtative of the character.

Right, because YOU say so? Please.. To me BB is good, but I don't enjoy it nearly as much as I enjoy SR. It is a matter of taste, you know what that means? Such arrogance.. It comes down to your word against mine, and in My world, I'm totally right. Got it?

And many fans like it as well, but honestly? Fans are a tiny minority, they don't really matter in the grand squeme of things. It is the mainstream that makes or breaks a movie.

 

[mego joe]

Well, that's what i read from your post, if you don't think so, sorry.


Like i siad, of course there are Überfanboys and nitpickers, who can't be pleased, no matter what you do. But that people aren't the majority of the Superman fandom and that people aren't the only ones who didn't like SR. I read Superman comics for more than 15 years now, know the history of the character (pre- and post-crisis), saw pretty much every movie, tv-show or carton and i do have my personal perfect version of the character. But i do also know that no movie will ever unite all elements of that perfect version and that certain changes can be needed, when you're translating the character from the comics to the screen. It's very well possible to please me, but SR didn't...


Yeah, a new Superman Returns, with all it's details, would most likely be a well recived by the mainstream and box office success if it'd just have more action. But that shouldn't be your only goal. The avarage moviegoer may not mind the kid, but you've got fans, that mind things like that and all the other stuff Singer got wrong about Superman, not because it's not the same than their favorite version of the character, but no relevant version of the character. It shouldn't be forgotten that these people are the reason Superman still exists...

BINGO!