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

[Hellion]

How can you know you like it if you don't watch it yourself?

I've been getting into the comics more recently and haven't seen the film yet...I just wanted to know if any recommends the film?

 

[Billy Batson]

I recommend you watch the film.
Come back here and let us know.
What side of the 50/50 club you stand on?

 

[afan]

Well, its funny, in 'For Tomorrow' when Superman leaves for the Phantom Zone, the ONLY person he tells is Father Leone, he doesnt know how long he will be away (like SR), he doesnt know what he'll find there (like SR) and he doesnt even know if he will return (like SR, IMO), not to mention he makes no world announcement (like SR) or doesnt tell his loved one's (sort of like SR). And FT is considered one of the best Superman stories of recent years, so are you saying he acted out of character in that?

Haven't read "For Tomorrow" so I can't accurately comment on it's details, and how they compare to SR. Have to look it up some day.

 

[turtlefocker]

Why don't Superman fans like Superman Returns?

slow, dingy, boring, pointless, lacked character development, superson, lacked action, stalker not hero, lois is fugly.

 

[X Knight]

Some superman fans don't like SR for the same reason some spiderman fans didn't like Spidey 3 ( or 1 and 2 ).......some Transformer fans didn't like Transformers.................

it's all personal opinion.......

oh, and Hellion, I wouldn't recommend SR to anyone, but if you are interested in it, by all means rent it, watch it, and see how you like it.

I, however, would not view it as the "definitive" portrayal of the Superman character / universe. IOW, if you are new to Supes, don't walk away from the movie thinking that that is what kind of character Supes is.

I would just treat SR as an "Elseworlds / What if" story ( as I suppose all movie adaptations are ) and view it in the larger context of other interpretations of the character ( be it comics, animated series, past movies, etc. ).....

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

I've been getting into the comics more recently and haven't seen the film yet...I just wanted to know if any recommends the film?

I recommend it highly, its one of the best superhero movies ever IMO.

Haven't read "For Tomorrow" so I can't accurately comment on it's details, and how they compare to SR. Have to look it up some day.

Read it soon, its a fantastic story, and Zod is awesome in it, if they do have him in a movie, i wouldnt mind so long as he is done like this.

 

[El Payaso]

Why don't Superman fans like Superman Returns?

slow, dingy, boring, pointless, lacked character development, superson, lacked action, stalker not hero, lois is fugly.

Faster than Batman Begins, interesting, a step ahead in the Superman myth, more character development trhan in the average action crap, Jason was a great idea, action enough (the lack of action is just a myth that exists just out of the repetition of it) and at least more action than STM, stalekr has been in the comics too, want pretty girl visit the right sites on the net.

 

[El Payaso]

I've been getting into the comics more recently and haven't seen the film yet...I just wanted to know if any recommends the film?

I do. But this is seriouis stuff. It's not a movie for people who needs to relax and forget their everyday problem - what I call the "footmassage" kind of movie - nor is the usual pointless collection of the last special effects. It's a movie that's not afraid to go beyond the usual Superman territory and to break the traditional bidimentionality

I do recommend it if you're aware of those points.

 

[mego joe]

Well, its funny, in 'For Tomorrow' when Superman leaves for the Phantom Zone, the ONLY person he tells is Father Leone, he doesnt know how long he will be away (like SR), he doesnt know what he'll find there (like SR) and he doesnt even know if he will return (like SR, IMO), not to mention he makes no world announcement (like SR) or doesnt tell his loved one's (sort of like SR). And FT is considered one of the best Superman stories of recent years, so are you saying he acted out of character in that?

Not having read "For Tomorrow" I cannot comment on it in depth, but I would say that since he and Lois are already married there is an understanding between them much like Firemen and Policemen and their wives, so the context is different. Plus, if he came back and Lois wasn't pisssed at him in "For Tomorrow" we can assume he said something or they have the understanding that I spoke about.

Plus, the story is not about SUperman making a mistake in not saying goodbye to anyone, so it's neither here nor there and there is no fallout of him not saying goodbye in "For Tomorrow." If there is please fill me in since I have not read it.

I think context has a lot to do with understanding how charcters act, and I think the context of the relationship in SR is far different from the context of the relationship in "For Tomorrow."

Also, what is his motivation in "For Tomorrow." Is time of the essence? Is the world doomed anyway if he doesn't come back?

 

[NUFFSAID2004]

Why don't Superman fans like Superman Returns?

slow, dingy, boring, pointless, lacked character development, superson, lacked action, stalker not hero, lois is fugly.

Well put! However, let me add a few other things that you might have forgotten to mention..
1) Terrible costume
2) Ludicrous plot
3) Bringing back poor Marlon from the grave
4) Lois's fella being more likeable than Supes
5) No fresh villians (*Braniac, Metallo, Parasite, ect*)
6) Cheap copy of the original Donner classic
7) Lois Lane terribly miscast (*she looks more like a teeny bopper than an adult journalist "woman"*)
8) Trying to express Supes as a God figure rather than a superhero
9) Having Brian Singer direct (*the greatest blunder of all*)

 

[superbaby]

I recommend you watch the film.
Come back here and let us know.
What side of the 50/50 club you stand on?

exactly, hellion, you should watch it. and as a movie itself, it isn't bad at all.

 

[Lighthouse]

I do. But this is seriouis stuff. It's not a movie for people who needs to relax and forget their everyday problem - what I call the "footmassage" kind of movie - nor is the usual pointless collection of the last special effects. It's a movie that's not afraid to go beyond the usual Superman territory and to break the traditional bidimentionality

I do recommend it if you're aware of those points.

There is barely any character development. We barely get to know this Superman at all.

And "For Tomorrow" is one of the worst Superman books I've ever read. Azzarello is a great writer, but I thought "For Tomorrow" was a bunch of pretetious crap.

 

[CLARKY]

slow, dingy, boring, pointless, lacked character development, superson, lacked action, stalker not hero, lois is fugly.

I think boring and lacked action are linked for you. If action means Supes hitting a bad guy the strongest that he can in order to instill order in the universe through his fists, then yes SR was boring, (hopefully) boring.
There is the plane scene, the boat rescue, the whole island scene, and the save of Metropolis. Furthermore, action doesn't only mean big fight, but scene with something happenning. This is the case with Lex Luthor, he is always in movement, always learning something. And the scenes between Lois and Superman, something is happening.
Stalker if you want but I think all the scenes I mentionned before (plane, boat, island) are heroic.
I found Lois really pretty. Not that it is what matter the most for me, and even if I keep loving Teri Hatcher as L.Lane. K.Bosworth expressed enough sensitivity and concern toward Superman, it's good enough for me.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Not having read "For Tomorrow" I cannot comment on it in depth, but I would say that since he and Lois are already married there is an understanding between them much like Firemen and Policemen and their wives, so the context is different. Plus, if he came back and Lois wasn't pisssed at him in "For Tomorrow" we can assume he said something or they have the understanding that I spoke about.

Plus, the story is not about SUperman making a mistake in not saying goodbye to anyone, so it's neither here nor there and there is no fallout of him not saying goodbye in "For Tomorrow." If there is please fill me in since I have not read it.

I think context has a lot to do with understanding how charcters act, and I think the context of the relationship in SR is far different from the context of the relationship in "For Tomorrow."

Also, what is his motivation in "For Tomorrow." Is time of the essence? Is the world doomed anyway if he doesn't come back?

Lois and a million other Americans vanished a year ago with no trace, so he is missing Lois, the world is not doomed in any way at all, its just that he misses Lois, so again, like SR it is something personal he leaves for. Of course this turns all the other hero's against him, as they feel if he activates the orb responsible for the 'vanishing,' more people and possibly the world will dissappear. This leads to a fight with Wonder Woman that destroys the 'Fortress Of Solitude' in the arctic, hence why Superman had to find another one just after.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

There is barely any character development. We barely get to know this Superman at all.

And "For Tomorrow" is one of the worst Superman books I've ever read. Azzarello is a great writer, but I thought "For Tomorrow" was a bunch of pretetious crap.

You cant honestly say there is no character development in SR, if you think that, your not watching it properly.

And i thought 'For Tomorrow' was amazing, go to Bluetights and you'll find that many people agree with that statement.

I think boring and lacked action are linked for you. If action means Supes hitting a bad guy the strongest that he can in order to instill order in the universe through his fists, then yes SR was boring, (hopefully) boring.
There is the plane scene, the boat rescue, the whole island scene, and the save of Metropolis. Furthermore, action doesn't only mean big fight, but scene with something happenning. This is the case with Lex Luthor, he is always in movement, always learning something. And the scenes between Lois and Superman, something is happening.
Stalker if you want but I think all the scenes I mentionned before (plane, boat, island) are heroic.
I found Lois really pretty. Not that it is what matter the most for me, and even if I keep loving Teri Hatcher as L.Lane. K.Bosworth expressed enough sensitivity and concern toward Superman, it's good enough for me.

Exactly, action isnt just punching someone to sort them out, it never works that way, and i like that the action in SR is different. I also thought KB wasnt as bad as everyone makes out either, this is a different Lois than the one's previously, she is a mother for one, so her sensibilities are different.

 

[Super Kal]

Also, what is his motivation in "For Tomorrow." Is time of the essence? Is the world doomed anyway if he doesn't come back?

His motivation is that he has to fix a problem that he caused... also people could have been killed.

 

[El Payaso]

There is barely any character development. We barely get to know this Superman at all.

Fiurst, we got to know Superman in the two first movies, this movie is based on them.

And then, we know Superman even more than in those two movies. We know now he sometimes feels alone even when he had hords of people cheering him for his amazing actions. We also know he feels sometimes overwhelmed by all those shouts claiming for his help. That he suffers for the consequences of his decisions (leaving Earth to discover possible traces of his roots). That he can risk Lois' life (and Jason's) because of a greater good. That he can become a father and still be Superman.

 

[C. Lee]

.

Unplanned, yes......unexpected no!

A pregnancy is most definitely a predictable result of an intimate relationship.

Between two humans....yes.

Between a human and an alien from another world.....no.

 

[Qwerty©]

Fiurst, we got to know Superman in the two first movies, this movie is based on them.

And then, we know Superman even more than in those two movies. We know now he sometimes feels alone even when he had hords of people cheering him for his amazing actions. We also know he feels sometimes overwhelmed by all those shouts claiming for his help. That he suffers for the consequences of his decisions (leaving Earth to discover possible traces of his roots). That he can risk Lois' life (and Jason's) because of a greater good. That he can become a father and still be Superman.

Yet many fans ignore this because the suit is too dark or Lex wears a wig for one scene

 

[chief103182]

I didn't hate the film, but at the same time it bugged me in so many ways. If this is a continuation of Superman II, that means Superman abruptly left the planet right after General Zod almost took over Earth. Did he not learn his lesson after he gave up his powers? Why would he leave again? It's not the same Superman.

THAT, is what bugs me. And THAT essentially is the set-up for the entire movie. I can tolerate the suit, I can tolerate Lois being so unpleasant all the time, and I think I can even tolerate Jason without calling for his head as some are doing. If Singer makes a jump like he did between X-Men and X2, then I think the next movie will be much more enjoyable.

 

[Qwerty©]

I didn't hate the film, but at the same time it bugged me in so many ways. If this is a continuation of Superman II, that means Superman abruptly left the planet right after General Zod almost took over Earth. Did he not learn his lesson after he gave up his powers? Why would he leave again? It's not the same Superman.

THAT, is what bugs me. And THAT essentially is the set-up for the entire movie. I can tolerate the suit, I can tolerate Lois being so unpleasant all the time, and I think I can even tolerate Jason without calling for his head as some are doing. If Singer makes a jump like he did between X-Men and X2, then I think the next movie will be much more enjoyable.

How did you come to that conclusion? SR is a story set after Superman II, not a direct continuation of the same story.

 

[afan]

Between two humans....yes.

Between a human and an alien from another world.....no.

I am always amused by this oft qouted standard.
Exactly where does it spring from.
In fiction, humans successfully breed with virtually any humanoid, be it an elf, alien, demon, or even god, creating any number of half human / half something else beings.
Indeed the proliferation of these hybrid offspring most definitely points to an opposing assumption.....

"Between a human and an alien from another world.....sure why not."

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

I am always amused by this oft qouted quasi-standard.
Exactly where does it spring from.
In fiction, humans successfully breed with virtually any humanoid, be it an elf, alien, demon, or even god, creating any number of half human / half something else beings.
Indeed the proliferation of these hybrid offspring most definitely points to a opposing assumption.

It is a possibility that Superman didnt know he whether he could reproduce with a human or not though.

 

[afan]

It is a possibility that Superman didnt know he whether he could reproduce with a human or not though.

Certainly he possesses the requisite equipment

Unless this belief is made clear by the writers of SR, and it was not, we must use the standard that humans and "humanoids" are innately compatible procreators.

So Superman would have no reason to expect that his alien heritage should prohibit Lois' pregnancy.

 

[C. Lee]

I am always amused by this oft qouted standard.
Exactly where does it spring from.
In fiction, humans successfully breed with virtually any humanoid, be it an elf, alien, demon, or even god, creating any number of half human / half something else beings.
Indeed the proliferation of these hybrid offspring most definitely points to an opposing assumption.....

"Between a human and an alien from another world.....sure why not."

I feel there is a difference between "magical" critters and ones from another planet in another solar system whose DNA is fundamentally different from people who reside on Earth.