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

[batbat_29640]

The film just isn't true to Superman's character. He leaves Earth without telling the people who have come to depend on him where he's going, doesn't even tell the woman he loves where he's going, and is then reduced to a slacker dead beat dad when it turns out he knocked up Lois Lane and STILL didn't have the decency to tell her where he was going, and then the film becomes more fixated on him pining over Lois and even stalking her despite the fact that she now has a committed life companion in the form of Richard White, thus wrecking the little family unit she has. This does not match up with the traditional image of Superman as a mature, responsible figure.

Additionally, the film failed to properly update Superman the way "Batman Begins" updated Batman. By obsessively clinging to the Donner films, the film is more of a misguided nostalgia love fest than a proper restart of Superman's film franchise for the 21st century. And no, sticking Superman in a rubbery, de-colorized version of his costume does not count as "updating", that is blasphemy.

And of course, Brandon Routh and Kate Bosworth were WAY too young to be believable as an established Superman and Lois Lane who has a pulitzer and a 5 year old son - unless Lois was 16 when she got herself knocked up with the little bastard. Plus neither of them really felt like they inhabited the characters, they just came off as really flat and empty.

~claps~chears~bows~tears~
Okay folks . . . we know the problem, we know who's to blame. Now what are we gonna do about it? I still wanna see a great Superman movie that this generation can give us. Singer did not provide. How bout we let somebody know about this?

 

[matthooper]

We didn’t need a remake of Donner’s Superman:The Movie. The only difference is the kid. It’s essentially the same story. No origin like the first, but instead a return where it is essentially the same effect, where we can see the public reaction to Superman. We wait 20 years for a Superman movie and we get Lex Luthor.... again, with a real estate plan....again. It was a boring, unimaginative retread of a movie we saw already.

I didn’t even mention ridiculously leaving earth for 5 years and causing plot holes the size of Texas. There were kryptonite inconsistencies, a bland costume, a terrible Lois, and Spacey sleepwalking through his performance. We had Smallville flashbacks that look like they were edited in by mistake, and a worthless score other than William's stuff.

There’s a few.

 

[Justice Bringer]

Tell your mom.

 

[superbaby]

the reason people dont like it is because singer made superman into a *****

made clark kent a useless non existant character

made superman a "bastard" with an illegitimate child

made superman a stalker

made superman wear a "gayed" up costume with a tight neckline, brown maroon cape, victorias secret panties, and a stupid plastic s shield on the belt,

not only that, the story was rubbish, the action was non existant

superman was "gayed" up beyond recognition

Singer truly did FUBAR this movie

and the sadistic tone.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

We didn’t need a remake of Donner’s Superman:The Movie. The only difference is the kid. It’s essentially the same story. No origin like the first, but instead a return where it is essentially the same effect, where we can see the public reaction to Superman. We wait 20 years for a Superman movie and we get Lex Luthor.... again, with a real estate plan....again. It was a boring, unimaginative retread of a movie we saw already.

I didn’t even mention ridiculously leaving earth for 5 years and causing plot holes the size of Texas. There were kryptonite inconsistencies, a bland costume, a terrible Lois, and Spacey sleepwalking through his performance. We had Smallville flashbacks that look like they were edited in by mistake, and a worthless score other than William's stuff.

There’s a few.

Your kidding right? Ottmans additions were stunning IMO.

 

[Qwerty©]

Because they didn't like the movie as much as they wanted to, so therefore EVERYTHING was wrong with it. The same thing is happening with Spider-Man 3.

 

[buggs0268]

Your kidding right? Ottmans additions were stunning IMO.

Dude, you think everything is great with this film. You are so non-objective about it one would think you were either Singer, or one of his two hack writers. If Singer had had a flying piece of poo in this thing you would think it is brilliant and be waiting to see where it lands in the sequel.

Ottman's stuff was generic, uninspired and bland, much like his other scores. There is a big difference between William's and Ottman. William's will be rememered and Ottman will be forgotten.

 

[buggs0268]

edit double post

 

[Billy Batson]

the reason people dont like it is because singer made superman into a *****

made clark kent a useless non existant character

made superman a "bastard" with an illegitimate child

made superman a stalker

made superman wear a "gayed" up costume with a tight neckline, brown maroon cape, victorias secret panties, and a stupid plastic s shield on the belt,

not only that, the story was rubbish, the action was non existant

superman was "gayed" up beyond recognition

Singer truly did FUBAR this movie

The best explanation I have seen on these boards.
Sir you are indeed a scholar and a gentlemen.
t:
I LOVE SUPERMAN.
I HATE SR.

 

[buggs0268]

As far as the general public is concerned I agree, action was the biggest issue.

I can understand why people didn't like the plot; I loved it as a modern day update of S:TM but I can see why people weren't fond of the rehash. I can also see why people hated Richard and Jason, and I agree Lois was a b*tch...

Here's what I dont get:

I don't get the suit talk. Really, I don't see how any fan could be so nitpicky as to dislike the movie over that. It's too dark... The neckline... Who cares? It's still the Superman costume. The Batman Begins costume wasn't perfect, but it's not like he doesn't look fine.

I don't get how anyone could say the movie was too depressing. What was remotley depressing about it?



Explain to me how this movie had any less of a message than any Spider-Man, Batman, or X-Men movie.

They sissified the suit. They took something iconic and girlied it. They changed the shorts from an the old mexican wrestler shots to a low cut speedos/womens panty cut. That is the biggest crime of all. If you don't see what is wrong with that, then you won't ever get what most the world bi***ed over. Furthermore, this dropping of the height of the shorts made Routh look like he had a pot belly. Look in his flying scenes and it looks like his gut sticks out below him.

Since they made Routh wear a muscle suit, they moved the collar up. It took the character from having a grand collar as most kings are drawn in comics to a turtleneck to hide the damn un-needed muscle suit.

Since they had to change the collar, now the cape looks tucked in like some kid with a towel instead of the way it draped over the shoulders in grand fashion as kings and roman cloaks would. Took the grandness out of the character.

They took the belt, which was originally the seat belt from his ship, and made it into a women styled guci belt.

Now if this was Supergirl, I would not have as much of a problem. But this is SuperMAN. MAN. Not WOMAN. MAN. Again, if you can't see what is wrong with this change, then you will never get it. but they took design elements from women's clothing and put it on a MAN.

The cape was turned into something that looks like a shower curtain. A shower curtain for god sake. Enough said.

The boots look stupid enough. And with the stamped S's over it, it looks really bad.

In fact, what the hell is it with Singer thinking that a superhero needs it logo stamped all over it's suit? Why. It is the same as just because X men starts with an X, there has to be X's everywhere in the damn film. God. Do something original.

The shield. It did not need to be 3 dimensional, or at the least, not that 3D. because of it, whenever he folded his arms, the S folded and looked like crap, so they had to keep making it small until it would not fold anymore, which is something stupid to do. Hey lets do something that will limit ourselves.

And the colors. Superman has not had maroon in his suit if you don't count those dumb very shot lived changes where DC tried it, comic book buyers hated it, and they had to go back to the classic colors. His suit is basic red, blue and yellow. Not maroon, blue and gold. Period.

Again, the design changes sissified the character and made him look like the lost Villiage People member. If you can't understand what I pointed out above, then you will never get it no matter how many times we try to explain it to you. This is what Superman looks like:

and not this

Again, if you don't see what is wrong with the SR suit, then you will never get it no matter how many times we try to explain it.

 

[mathhater]

I enjoyed the movie...and I still watch it and like it. But I'll readily admit it has some serious problems. And I'll probably forever hate Singer for them.

Here's my list:

Lex Luthor. The version we got in SR would've been fine if this was 1980. But it's been 20 years and Luthor has become so much more deep and cunning than what was shown in SR. Gone is the mogul...the man with enough legitimate smarts and power to literally own Metropolis. What we have in SR is lunatic...his "plan" made no sense and could never have worked. And he was still too comedic and light. We just got another Hackman-esque Lex.

The story was 100% entirely dependent on a 20 year old film. SR is in no way a standalone movie that tells a complete story. Superman & Luthor have a history, but it's all hinted at, never explained. Superman and Lois apparantly had a serious relationship, but also, just alluded to. (I refuse to accept that Superman II is in continuity with SR...it just opens up too large a can of worms...) And then the timing it must have taken for Lois to have hooked up with both Richard and Superman in such a short time frame that she had the entirely wrong idea about the parentage of her son. It just seems like a stretch used for the sole purpose of creating a twist by the end of the film.

And there was no action.

Superman returned to movies and offered us nothing new from what we saw 20 years ago, aside from a bastard child and better special effects.

(BTW, one night, while watching SR, I made a list of the BLATANT rip-offs from S: TM. It filled an entire page. Man, I'm a loser...but you get the point.)

And I didn't have many problems with the suit. But the lack of the "S" on the back was a bummer. I know it's a small detail, but the costume honestly loses a lot without that element. It adds a lot of regality to Superman's look, and should always be there, I think.

 

[batbat_29640]

They sissified the suit. They took something iconic and girlied it. They changed the shorts from an the old mexican wrestler shots to a low cut speedos/womens panty cut. That is the biggest crime of all. If you don't see what is wrong with that, then you won't ever get what most the world bi***ed over. Furthermore, this dropping of the height of the shorts made Routh look like he had a pot belly. Look in his flying scenes and it looks like his gut sticks out below him.

Since they made Routh wear a muscle suit, they moved the collar up. It took the character from having a grand collar as most kings are drawn in comics to a turtleneck to hide the damn un-needed muscle suit.

Since they had to change the collar, now the cape looks tucked in like some kid with a towel instead of the way it draped over the shoulders in grand fashion as kings and roman cloaks would. Took the grandness out of the character.

They took the belt, which was originally the seat belt from his ship, and made it into a women styled guci belt.

Now if this was Supergirl, I would not have as much of a problem. But this is SuperMAN. MAN. Not WOMAN. MAN. Again, if you can't see what is wrong with this change, then you will never get it. but they took design elements from women's clothing and put it on a MAN.

The cape was turned into something that looks like a shower curtain. A shower curtain for god sake. Enough said.

The boots look stupid enough. And with the stamped S's over it, it looks really bad.

In fact, what the hell is it with Singer thinking that a superhero needs it logo stamped all over it's suit? Why. It is the same as just because X men starts with an X, there has to be X's everywhere in the damn film. God. Do something original.

The shield. It did not need to be 3 dimensional, or at the least, not that 3D. because of it, whenever he folded his arms, the S folded and looked like crap, so they had to keep making it small until it would not fold anymore, which is something stupid to do. Hey lets do something that will limit ourselves.

And the colors. Superman has not had maroon in his suit if you don't count those dumb very shot lived changes where DC tried it, comic book buyers hated it, and they had to go back to the classic colors. His suit is basic red, blue and yellow. Not maroon, blue and gold. Period.

Again, the design changes sissified the character and made him look like the lost Villiage People member. If you can't understand what I pointed out above, then you will never get it no matter how many times we try to explain it to you. This is what Superman looks like:

and not this

Again, if you don't see what is wrong with the SR suit, then you will never get it no matter how many times we try to explain it.

Agreed on all points. The changes for the suit were not needed whatsoever. The two pics you have here prove that. I look at that manip and think "Wow he looks so cool like that." and " Man he looks so much more like Chris Reeves in that suit."
I have the dvd and watched all the extra features and I noticed they had ALOT of Alex Ross' artwork hanging up for reference but they went the complete opposite of Ross' design . Which I'm sure most Superman fans will agree with me when I say that Ross has produced the "Holy Grail" of Superman images.
I look at these two pics and am amazed at why anyone who claims to love Superman would change something so iconic and enduring. That top pic looks so much better to me. I can't believe they traded up Superman for the gawdy and dull image below. Superman does not need a Spidey/X-men suit!
That combined with everything that Math hater brought up is why SR was not the grand Superman movie I was hoping for . And if that is all they have to give us for Superman in the new millenium . . . then I'll stick with my 70's Superman. Thank God for Donner's Superman II cut.

 

[Qwerty©]

Dude, you think everything is great with this film. You are so non-objective about it one would think you were either Singer, or one of his two hack writers. If Singer had had a flying piece of poo in this thing you would think it is brilliant and be waiting to see where it lands in the sequel.

Ottman's stuff was generic, uninspired and bland, much like his other scores. There is a big difference between William's and Ottman. William's will be rememered and Ottman will be forgotten.

How dare he like what the movie has to offer!

Come on, he likes the movie, you don't. Shouldn't that be enough for you?

Why is it that I can be confident in my opinion of the movie and not terrorise anyone who thinks different, but you can't?

 

[buggs0268]

Another reason that Superman fans don't like the film:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytqV6GEHW24

 

[Super Kal]

Agreed on all points. The changes for the suit were not needed whatsoever. The two pics you have here prove that. I look at that manip and think "Wow he looks so cool like that." and " Man he looks so much more like Chris Reeves in that suit."
I have the dvd and watched all the extra features and I noticed they had ALOT of Alex Ross' artwork hanging up for reference but they went the complete opposite of Ross' design . Which I'm sure most Superman fans will agree with me when I say that Ross has produced the "Holy Grail" of Superman images.

it's REEVE, not Reeves, and Ross did NOT make the holy grail ofSuperman images... That man draws his shield like it were supposed to engulf the entire suit, and I hate his Look for Superman.

I look at these two pics and am amazed at why anyone who claims to love Superman would change something so iconic and enduring. That top pic looks so much better to me. I can't believe they traded up Superman for the gawdy and dull image below. Superman does not need a Spidey/X-men suit!

On the contrary, I think he does... Spidey wise, anyways... they got the colors right.

That combined with everything that Math hater brought up is why SR was not the grand Superman movie I was hoping for . And if that is all they have to give us for Superman in the new millenium . . . then I'll stick with my 70's Superman. Thank God for Donner's Superman II cut.

The Donner Cut is not all it's cut up to be... I'll pick the Restored International version every time over the Donner Cut.

 

[batbat_29640]

it's REEVE, not Reeves, and Ross did NOT make the holy grail ofSuperman images... That man draws his shield like it were supposed to engulf the entire suit, and I hate his Look for Superman.



On the contrary, I think he does... Spidey wise, anyways... they got the colors right.



The Donner Cut is not all it's cut up to be... I'll pick the Restored International version every time over the Donner Cut.

Dude go back to Star Trek.
You must be the ONLY Superman fan who doesn't like Ross' Superman. And no Supes does not need a Spidey suit and the colors are not right.
Hey you can have your newly restored cheesefest. Donner's cut was much better than the original farce they gave us in 82.

 

[El Payaso]

William's will be rememered and Ottman will be forgotten.

Crystals balls everywhere. And me? Here, the only one without one.

The boots look stupid enough. And with the stamped S's over it, it looks really bad.

In fact, what the hell is it with Singer thinking that a superhero needs it logo stamped all over it's suit? Why. It is the same as just because X men starts with an X, there has to be X's everywhere in the damn film. God. Do something original.

Thanks for the pic mate. Now I love the boots even more.

Well, the symbol in details of the suit has been done in Batman etc etc. Nothing terrible about that.

 

[Qwerty©]

Dude go back to Star Trek.
You must be the ONLY Superman fan who doesn't like Ross' Superman. And no Supes does not need a Spidey suit and the colors are not right.
Hey you can have your newly restored cheesefest. Donner's cut was much better than the original farce they gave us in 82.

Since when did you dictate what people should like and what is better?

 

[buggs0268]

Crystals balls everywhere. And me? Here, the only one without one.



Thanks for the pic mate. Now I love the boots even more.

Well, the symbol in details of the suit has been done in Batman etc etc. Nothing terrible about that.

As I said, some people, no matter how much we explain it to them, will never get it. As far as crystal balls, I said this film would fail, and fail it did. While everyone was accusing me of having a crystal ball, and that the film would make more then Spiderman 1 or 2, I said it would not, and fail. And it did. Sorry you guys like a lame film. There is a reason Superman 1 connected with the audience and is considered a classic. There is a reason the Spiderman films connect with the audiences. There is a reason that Spiderman 3 made in 3 days what Superman Returns made in it's entire theatrical run. And there is a reason why SR failed to, and will be forgotten within 5 years. It did not connect with the audience. And it will be forgotten. Blame it on stupid theory's like it being released on the 4th of July weekend (many movies released on the weekend became the biggest money makers of the year). Blame it on supposed poor marketing, which I didn't see, as you couldn't go anywhere without seeing SR marketing. I'll blame it on a lame plot, poor takes on the characters, and a story that failed to connect with the audience. So far history has been on my side.

 

[CLARKY]

Napoleon said the same and finished in jail.
Anyway, I didn't consider (nor am nor will) a film by its economical results. I want to specify that it is only my subjectively personal and humble opinion.

 

[alabamaassassin]

i love both superman returns and smallville for the new passion they brought me. i never read a comic book while growing up, but these 2 presentations have made me fall in love with the superman legend. i have been purchasing superman graphic novels as fast as i can read them. so some may not be happy with these new forms of superman stories, but they have made me a passionate fan.

the new suit color scheme is far better than the rainbow brite colors of the old suit, in my opinion. its texture and materials also blow away the shiny and cheap looking spandex of superman 1-4 and lois and clark.

 

[alabamaassassin]

i'm sorry but to me this looks like something i would rent at a costume store. the boots, belt, and shiny material look very cheap.

 

[CLARKY]

Same here.
When I see all the different interpretations of all the fans in the fan-art sections of all the different boards (Blue boots, black logo, no trunk, kryptonian suit, no cape, etc ...) and when I see how actual Hollywood transforms the superheroes suits without considering the comic book look, I keep telling myself we are sooooo lucky that Bryan Singer just played with the different parts without changing the suit at all.
Throughout comics history, the blue has changed, the red has changed. Ye it is still Superman, B.Singer keep the suit, the exact suit, he just played with the different parts ; This is not how I would have done it, but I like it.

 

[Super Kal]

Dude go back to Star Trek.
You must be the ONLY Superman fan who doesn't like Ross' Superman. And no Supes does not need a Spidey suit and the colors are not right.
Hey you can have your newly restored cheesefest. Donner's cut was much better than the original farce they gave us in 82.

no, I'm not the only one here who thinks Ross's work is terrible. If you ask around you'd be able to find that out very easily.

The spidey suit got the colors right, and still had that updated feel to it, whether you want to agree or not.

As Far as Superman II goes, the theatrical cut was pretty bad, but The Donner Cut was even worse because it was an unfinished project. I'd rather see a combination of the two instead of an unfinished project.

i'm sorry but to me this looks like something i would rent at a cotume store. the boots, belt, and shiny material look very cheap.

you're absolutely right... those specific colors are pretty bad... a little too bright.

 

[Qwerty©]

As I said, some people, no matter how much we explain it to them, will never get it. As far as crystal balls, I said this film would fail, and fail it did. While everyone was accusing me of having a crystal ball, and that the film would make more then Spiderman 1 or 2, I said it would not, and fail. And it did. Sorry you guys like a lame film. There is a reason Superman 1 connected with the audience and is considered a classic. There is a reason the Spiderman films connect with the audiences. There is a reason that Spiderman 3 made in 3 days what Superman Returns made in it's entire theatrical run. And there is a reason why SR failed to, and will be forgotten within 5 years. It did not connect with the audience. And it will be forgotten. Blame it on stupid theory's like it being released on the 4th of July weekend (many movies released on the weekend became the biggest money makers of the year). Blame it on supposed poor marketing, which I didn't see, as you couldn't go anywhere without seeing SR marketing. I'll blame it on a lame plot, poor takes on the characters, and a story that failed to connect with the audience. So far history has been on my side.

LOL, Ridiculous. You are ridiculous.

You realise what you are doing? You are schooling us over how you were 'right' over a MOVIE. You are insulting us ( "Sorry you guys like a lame film." ) over a MOVIE. A movie about a flying guy in tights, no less. How about you act like a normal human being, stop being so antagonistic over something that doesn't matter and you know, have an adult discussion? I have not seen one post from you that doesn't attack someone or paint yourself as some kind of message board martyr.

Lighten up. There's a reason the majority of people here don't like you. Because you won't let them.