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

[Super Kal]

In the first Reeve Superman film.....Lex buys up land that he plans on becoming "oceanfront" property that he will own.....after he sets off a nuclear weapon (that he stole from the U.S. Military) in the San Andreas fault line (killing millions of people)......and he thinks there will be no investigation or no way to link him to it.......yeah, that's campy.

In Superman Returns......Lex uses alien technology (that he only tests once in a totally non equal environment than he plans to use it in to it's full extent later) to create a new continent (which if allowed to go to fruition, displaces and destroys parts of four other continents and kills billions of people).....but seems to have no idea how long it will take for this conversition to take place, so doesn't have anything more than several lightly armed (if armed at all) henchmen to fight off any assault that can me mustered by the armed forces of half the world......yeah, that's campy.

I think you mean regurgitated, C. Lee

 

[afan]

In the first Reeve Superman film.....Lex buys up land that he plans on becoming "oceanfront" property that he will own.....after he sets off a nuclear weapon (that he stole from the U.S. Military) in the San Andreas fault line (killing millions of people)......and he thinks there will be no investigation or no way to link him to it.......yeah, that's campy.

Not campy ingenious.

Your synopsis sells Luthor in STM somewhat short.
He lives undetected, yet located smack dab in the middle of Metropolis, in a luxurious apartment, replete with an indoor pool, outfitted with hig tech equipment that reaches out and manipulates public infrastructure.

The anonymous purchasing of large tracts of "worthless" real estate speaks to an immeasurable wealth and a corporate organization that would rival the largest companies. Do you believe that he, Otis and Ms. Techsmacher were the agents making all the purchases, and processing the countless documents that would result from such purchases?

The nuclear explosion that activates the fault would be considered a horrific accident, and more than likely the blame would be placed squarely on the imcompitence of US military operations. Exactly what evidence indicating the tampering done to the missles would survive a nuclear impact, and let's not forget the destruction of Hackensack, N.J., how does that point to Luthor?

Undoubtedly STM's Luthor and his scheme is in the tradition of classic adventure villianry a grandiosely impossible plan, but not campy, and compared to Luthor in SR it is pure genius that is inspirationally conceived and written.

 

[SuperDaniel]

Luthor and his goons are just stupid in SR AND STM. But STM had more great than bad. Singer`s SR didnt.

Even Smallville gets Luthor right. Watch the episode Memoria. Singer couldnt. Its that simple.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

In the first Reeve Superman film.....Lex buys up land that he plans on becoming "oceanfront" property that he will own.....after he sets off a nuclear weapon (that he stole from the U.S. Military) in the San Andreas fault line (killing millions of people)......and he thinks there will be no investigation or no way to link him to it.......yeah, that's campy.

In Superman Returns......Lex uses alien technology (that he only tests once in a totally non equal environment than he plans to use it in to it's full extent later) to create a new continent (which if allowed to go to fruition, displaces and destroys parts of four other continents and kills billions of people).....but seems to have no idea how long it will take for this conversition to take place, so doesn't have anything more than several lightly armed (if armed at all) henchmen to fight off any assault that can me mustered by the armed forces of half the world......yeah, that's campy.

The thing is though, he didnt need a defence against the armed forces of the world, if they attacked him air or sea, all he would have to do is drop another crystal into the water and those vehicles would be immobilised for long enough for them crash into each other or the island.

I still want to know how and why Jor-El was speaking 20th century English in holograms that were created thousands of years ago on a distant planet. And why Superman left his front door wide open when he knew Lex knew where the fortress was.

Superman was gonna be raised by humans, so if the recordings Jor-El made were in kryptonian, Superman wouldnt have a ****ing clue what was said would he? Jor-El HAD to speak earth language for Clark to understand him, surely this is obvious.

 

[X Knight]

actually, I think instead of the NK land mass, if SR had Lex using the crystals to make Kryptonian Weapons, and have Supes duke it out with those........the action would have been upped manyfold. And, most likely, the audience would have been better contained.

Indeed, I recently read a Superman graphic novel ( Up, Up, and Away, I believe? ) where that was the plot. Would have loved to see that in SR.....sigh.

 

[Super Kal]

you know, I would of rather see Lex create some sort of war machine, and then kidnap Jimmy, drug them, put them as the pilot of the machine, and through Kryptonian technology, cause havoc and destruction while Superman tries to figure out how to get Jimmy out without hurting him while trying to avoid the kryptonite that powers it

 

[Qwerty©]

actually, I think instead of the NK land mass, if SR had Lex using the crystals to make Kryptonian Weapons, and have Supes duke it out with those........the action would have been upped manyfold. And, most likely, the audience would have been better contained.

Indeed, I recently read a Superman graphic novel ( Up, Up, and Away, I believe? ) where that was the plot. Would have loved to see that in SR.....sigh.

I think there was concept art made for something like this, but they ran out of money.

 

[superbaby]

I still want to know how and why Jor-El was speaking 20th century English in holograms that were created thousands of years ago on a distant planet. And why Superman left his front door wide open when he knew Lex knew where the fortress was.

don't question. and don't think.
just take it or leave it. because this is a movie about a man could fly.

 

[dr collossus]

I still think a year on that SR was extremely disappointing, for all the same reasons that I thought a year ago; nothing has changed. To all the people who loved it, great! I envy you, and I'm happy for you.

However, it was not a great film, it was mediocre at best, and no amount of 'it could have been so much worse because...' ie in relation to cosutme changes and comparing it to much greater differences in for example the X Men films, will make it any better. I'm only of average height, and the fact that I could have been shorter doesn't make me tall. Yes, SR could have been a lot worse, but that still doesn't make it good. It is only an average movie, and that to me is extremely disappointing.

 

[afan]

don't question. and don't think.
just take it or leave it. because this is a movie about a man could fly.

Indians speak English, Germans speak English, Romans speak English(sometimes with British accents), Greeks speak English, alien interstellar races speak English. Lions, mice, ducks, dogs, fish and even insects speak English!

Being a fanciful film including flying men is not a requirement for the device, with the occasional exception("Letters from Iwo Jima) it always has been and always will be a film standard.

 

[slave2catwoman]

Superman is a science fiction film, not a magical or fantasy film. It is not about anthropormorphised animals. Your "just because" answer is not acceptable. It is silly to have people from a zillion miles away, thousands of years ago speaking a language that didn't even exist when they were alive.
Lots of people in other countries do speak English. Not so far fetched. If it is supposed to be their primary language, then that is a bit silly. But if I am supposed to believe that Kryptonians can't understand Russian, but they do speak English (Superman II), that just makes no sense.

 

[afan]

Superman is a science fiction film, not a magical or fantasy film. It is not about anthropormorphised animals. Your "just because" answer is not acceptable. It is silly to have people from a zillion miles away, thousands of years ago speaking a language that didn't even exist when they were alive.
Lots of people in other countries do speak English. Not so far fetched. If it is supposed to be their primary language, then that is a bit silly. But if I am supposed to believe that Kryptonians can't understand Russian, but they do speak English (Superman II), that just makes no sense.

Respectfully: do you watch many films? Characters, regradless of their native tongue, historic period, or home planet, speak English in American films. It is, by and large, the standard.
Were Spartans in ancient Greece fluent in a language that did not yet exist?

 

[slave2catwoman]

The dialogue is in English so that American audiences can understand it (sometimes it is subtitled in English). But it is understood that the characters are not actually supposed to be speaking English. When we watch Shakespeare's Julius Caesar, we know that the ancient Romans did not speak English. It has been translated for our benefit. If you somehow transported Caesar to modern day America, and he could converse with us, I need a reason why.

 

[afan]

The dialogue is in English so that American audiences can understand it (sometimes it is subtitled in English). But it is understood that the characters are not actually supposed to be speaking English. When we watch Shakespeare's Julius Caesar, we know that the ancient Romans did not speak English. It has been translated for our benefit. If you somehow transported Caesar to modern day America, and he could converse with us, I need a reason why.

Ahh....I see your point now, and I agree, however It's not a major issue for me. I just accept, in most cases, the "translated for our benefit" device you mentioned.

 

[Cyrusbales]

People want a kryptonian war machine?

Does action really hold more weight than character and story?

 

[El Payaso]

People want a kryptonian war machine?

Does action really hold more weight than character and story?

I don't know about people, but for fans it is that way. Whatever is useful to allow them brag with their friendies is good, BO numbers, CGI fests, shaking camera in action scenes, etc. If characters and story doesn't allow them to brag with teenie friends, then they won't care about it.

 

[buggs0268]

In the first Reeve Superman film.....Lex buys up land that he plans on becoming "oceanfront" property that he will own.....after he sets off a nuclear weapon (that he stole from the U.S. Military) in the San Andreas fault line (killing millions of people)......and he thinks there will be no investigation or no way to link him to it.......yeah, that's campy.

In Superman Returns......Lex uses alien technology (that he only tests once in a totally non equal environment than he plans to use it in to it's full extent later) to create a new continent (which if allowed to go to fruition, displaces and destroys parts of four other continents and kills billions of people).....but seems to have no idea how long it will take for this conversition to take place, so doesn't have anything more than several lightly armed (if armed at all) henchmen to fight off any assault that can me mustered by the armed forces of half the world......yeah, that's campy.

The only thing though is that Both missles were a test of a new guidance system, so he did it so it looked like the guidance system failed and did it. Also, all evidence to investigate would be in the bomb, which would have been part of a radiation cloud. It is goofy, but at least there was some thought. How was Lex to make his money in SR with devalued currency of the counties he destoryed. And yes, those bery same poeple who's land he destroyed would come onto his land with open arms. they would reip him apart in two seconds.

 

[buggs0268]

I just have to say SO ****ING WHAT. I could give you plenty of examples of critics who loved the movie, here is one:

http://www.empireonline.com/reviews/review.asp?DVDID=117462

Read that one!



I agree with all except the criticisms (except number 4). It wasnt a traditional CB movie, which i found very refreshing.



I agree, i thought Lex in the 3rd act was extremely vicious and evil. I hope we get more of that in MOS.

Ummm Roger Ebert has been considered the king of reviewers with the late Siskel since the 1980's. So him dissing a movie does carry a lot of weight.

 

[El Payaso]

Ummm Roger Ebert has been considered the king of reviewers with the late Siskel since the 1980's. So him dissing a movie does carry a lot of weight.

King of reviewers is like saying King of Carrots. Only thing reviewers do is having an opinion and express it... which is exactly what everyone does.

But if reviewers is what you care for, most of them liked Superman Returns.

 

[Mr. Socko]

Everyone stop yagging the mustard.

 

[hippie_hunter]

Luthor and his goons are just stupid in SR AND STM. But STM had more great than bad. Singer`s SR didnt.

Even Smallville gets Luthor right. Watch the episode Memoria. Singer couldnt. Its that simple.

Spacey got Luthor right. He made him evil. The problem is that Spacey played Hackman's Luthor which in today's day and age is just not the way to go.

They could have still set it in the same continuity as Superman the Movie and Superman II but have Lex with a completely different motif than just real estate like he wanted in Superman the Movie and Superman II.

Singer had great ideas for Lex, he's guilty of stealing nuclear weapons, he's guilty of trying to blow away California, he's guilty of treason, and escaping prison, but because Superman turned the world backwards erasing all evidence, knowledge, and afterefects of Lex's crimes, along with Superman going away therefore unable to testify (after all Superman always tells the truth...for the most part) he was able to get away with it all scotchfree.

The problem was that even with great ideas and making Lex darker, Hackman's Lex is still a f**king goofball that's only interested in real estate and Singer put that characteristic in there also. Which really dragged the execution of such great ideas.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

I still think a year on that SR was extremely disappointing, for all the same reasons that I thought a year ago; nothing has changed. To all the people who loved it, great! I envy you, and I'm happy for you.

However, it was not a great film, it was mediocre at best, and no amount of 'it could have been so much worse because...' ie in relation to cosutme changes and comparing it to much greater differences in for example the X Men films, will make it any better. I'm only of average height, and the fact that I could have been shorter doesn't make me tall. Yes, SR could have been a lot worse, but that still doesn't make it good. It is only an average movie, and that to me is extremely disappointing.

SR was not a good film IN YOU OPINION. IMO it WAS a GREAT Film.

Ummm Roger Ebert has been considered the king of reviewers with the late Siskel since the 1980's. So him dissing a movie does carry a lot of weight.

I couldnt give a **** how respected he is, he offered an opinion, nothing more. And evidently he is FAR outnumbered by the number of critics who liked SR.

King of reviewers is like saying King of Carrots. Only thing reviewers do is having an opinion and express it... which is exactly what everyone does.

But if reviewers is what you care for, most of them liked Superman Returns.

Exactly.

 

[afan]

I couldnt give a **** how respected he is, he offered an opinion, nothing more. And evidently he is FAR outnumbered by the number of critics who liked SR.

If I understand your point regarding Ebert's expertise......
....each one of them offered only an opinion, which is no more proof of the quality of the film than the opinion of the one.

 

[slave2catwoman]

To Aveit....
But HOW could Jor-El speak a language that didn't exist during his lifetime??? He had been dead for thousands of years. English is not that old a language. I din't ask WHY he would want to speak English, I asked how he could possible speak English if the language had not even developed yet? And what about General Zod and crew? The cosmonaut spoke Russian to them, and they did not understand him (How could they?). Yet they conversed in fluent, late 20th century, British accented English. Impossible.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

I don't know about people, but for fans it is that way. Whatever is useful to allow them brag with their friendies is good, BO numbers, CGI fests, shaking camera in action scenes, etc. If characters and story doesn't allow them to brag with teenie friends, then they won't care about it.

Actually my main concern is rather I like a movie or not, critics, you and boxoffice be damned. It's fun to talk about boxoffice and root for movies you like and against movies you don't IMHO. It's like rooting on a football team, you don't really get anything if they win and it's ultimately unimportant but it's something people do everyday anyway. SR didn't have a good story nor characters, if it did I would be talking positively about it but still realize that it was a disappointment at the boxoffice. It wouldn't change my opinion but I wouldn't bury my head in the sand and pretend it wasn't to make myself feel better like you and a few other fans of the movie seem too. I don't know what other people do but I don't base my opinions on a film because of it's boxoffice numbers.... unless I was getting some of the money, the movie would look more awsome if I was.

Must you constantly insult people who disliked SR and it's poor (I know this is my opinion but lets pretend it's not) storyline and characterzations with the claim that they only disliked the film because it didn't make enough money?

Read my Post: I didn't dislike SR because of it's boxoffice I disliked it because it had a terrible rehased storyline, bad characterzations and acting (Sleepwalking Spacey is who I'm talking about) and it portrayed Superman as a fratboy and Lois as a ****. And it forgot that a Superman movie should have a supervillain, we actually have the tech to do it now! Yes I wanted more action not a dumber movie more action because lets face it the movie couldn't get any dumber than it already was. Did I forget the miscast teenage looking Bosworth as a 35 year old mother? Yes I did so there it is! Enjoy. You liked the film because it didn't make more at the boxoffice apparently (correct me if I'm wrong) and I disliked it because of the above reasons.