The Superman Returns spoiler thread.

[ShadowDenizen]

Sometimes Superman can be an interesting character -- this usually occurs when a comic writer decides to confront the moral issues being immensely more powerful than everyone else presents. In this movie, however, he's just not interesting. He has no personal conflict, except that he's hung up on his ex-girlfriend.

Superman has, since his inception, been a figure of hope and optimism. Unlike Batman, he (for the most part) doesn't HAVE to wrestle with moral ambiguity or being persecuted by the general populace, so that affords a different tone to the Superman films than the Batman or X-Men films.

More, I think Superman films should be able to stand the test of time, and have an almost "timeless" quality to them, as most of the themes explored are universal. They got "topical" with the last big-screen Superman film (Remember Nuclear Man?), and people tuned out in droves.

I think this film was just bittersweet enough, without being bleak. (Honestly, I could have done without "Superbaby", though.)

Y'know, Supes, while you're using your X-Ray vision to violate their personal privacy, I'm sure hundreds of people around the world are dying.

It's been established that there's no possible way that Superman can save everyone in Metropolis, let alone the state, or the country, or the world. The point is that he does what he can personally, and more importantly, he stands as a sybol to others to better themselves. (They actually make reference in the film to him being able to "inpsire others to their true potential.")

I don't want a Superman movie to be bleak, but I don't want it to be blind either. I honestly had expected a bit more from Bryan Singer.

I didn't want to go in to this and see a "Grim'n'gritty" Superman movie: I can watch "The Punisher" for that. I think the film did a decent job in portraying both sides of the story of whether "The World Needs Superman" or the "World Doesn't Need Superman". (I thought the scene where Lois and Calrk are in the air, talking about how she doesn't hear anything calling out for a savior, where that's all he seems to hear.)

This movie encourages:
1. Dead-beat dads.
2. Being a creepy stalker.
3. Skipping out on your civic duties (not appearing in court, not paying your medical bills, and I'm pretty sure Clark didn't pay any taxes the year he up and vanished)

If you're being serious, I think you took the wrong things away from this film.

I enjoy realism in film as much as the next person, but honestly, I don't care if Superman paid his taxes, especially where there's only two hours or so to explore other prominent themes in the Superman mythos. (And they established that Lex was freed due to Superman's non-show in court, so it's established that there ARE ramification to Supermans actions.)

 

[Starman]

I loved the movie. There was very little I didn't like.

I didn't mind the kid because I thought it was handled well. I had read next to nothing about the movie and had only seen part of one trailer, so it was a complete surprise to me. I kept expecting the kid to do the typical kid things-being annoying, smarter than the adults, using his super-powers to save Mom and Richard in the boat, yadda, yadda. I was impressed that there wasn't any of that. I think that as long as the kid is handled in a similar fashion in sequels that his presence will only add to the movie.

While it would have been cool to see a post-death confrontation with Lex, it didn't really feel missing to me. I thought the end worked fine.

I thought the performances were incredible. Routh, especially, nailed his dual roles. He was Superman/Clark Kent. Kevin Spacey was, as usual, stellar.

I was glad to see that Richard Perry was just a normal guy and not the typical jackass 'other guy' that women end up with in movie romantic triangles. I get sick of seeing the girl with a prick while you wonder why she doesn't pick the good guy. Richard was a normal, decent guy.

Was I the only one that wanted to jump up and start cheering as soon as John Williams' Superman Theme started playing?

I came out of the movie grinning and wanting to turn around and see it again.

 

[Chain Lightning]

I'll give it a 5 out of 10.

Fairly underwhelming. Not a bad movie,but nothing fantastic....or even semi-fantastic.


Pros:
-Brandon Routh and Kate Bosworth are good. I like their performance.
-Special Effects are good.
-Love the homage to the beginning sequence of the old Superman movie.

Cons:
-bland and unoriginal/uncreative third act climax.
-bad cutting -- my goodness, there are long strings of cuts NON-action sequences where the camera wouldn't hold on anything for more than 3 seconds before cutting to a different angle (minor gripe, but after a while it started to annoy me)
-side story arcs, like the son for instance, don't have a satisfying conclusion.
-many dramatic moments lost impact due to Singer's directing.

Another I didn't like was having to endure yet....ANOTHER movie where Superman has to be paired up against Lex. But I thought to myself, well....they are relaunching the character for a new generation, so ....yeah, you gotta do Lex for the first one again. Even though some of fanboys have seen it ad-naseum. But...not all of the audience are fanboys...so.....ok, fine....let it be Lex again. But...if its gonna be Lex again, please oh please let his scheme of how he fights Superman be more than just simplyl getting a hold of Kryptonite....please.....

Nope....disappointed again. Another thing that feels repetative is the whole villian girl-pal betraying you at the 11th hour thing again. Luthor's secretary Mercy in the cartoon makes a better female companion than any of the ones in the movies. They all seem to loose their nerve and betray Lex. First time was fine....but again?

I enjoyed the Superman action set pieces, but man....a movie has to more than about sfx shots. This movie was very mediocre. Too bad, the cast did a good job acting....too bad the writers and the director didn't rise to the occasion too.

 

[shilsen]

Wow. While I can see how aspects of it wouldn't appeal to everyone, I'm surprised by the amount of negativity. I think it's one of the top five comic book movies I've ever seen.

I'm not thrilled about the "super son" angle, but I'm interested in seeing how they follow it up in sequels. And I thought the casting and acting were absolutely spot-on.

Man, I need to get a "What Mouseferatu said" flag now, considering how often I seem to be saying that.

I actually liked the fact that the movie didn't have a big knock-down drag-out brawl to end it. And I think the film nailed a lot of the things that make Superman as a character very different from Batman, Spiderman, etc. Could it have been better? Sure. Was it well done? IMNSHO, yes.

 

[Chain Lightning]

I actually liked the fact that the movie didn't have a big knock-down drag-out brawl to end it.

I don't mind the end not being a big action slugfest, but I did want to be more cleverly written.

Wow. While I can see how aspects of it wouldn't appeal to everyone, I'm surprised by the amount of negativity. I think it's one of the top five comic book movies I've ever seen.

Well, weird things happen. Sometimes I see a movie and think, "I bet the people on the boards will really like this movie/tv show." Then I come here and people are bashing on it. Or vice versa.....I think you guys will hate it with me, and instead a majority love it. Just how it goes I guess. Different buttons are pushed with different people.

To me, top 5 comic book movies I've every seen are:

-Spiderman
-Spiderman 2
-Superman the Movie
-The Rocketeer
-Blade

Do you count "Road to Perdition" , "Ghostworld", and "From Hell"? How about non-comic book movies ,but yet are super-hero movies? If so, "The Incredibles" would go up there for me too.

And I thought the casting and acting were absolutely spot-on.

I agree. But for me, the writing and the majority of the directing wasn't.

 

[horacethegrey]

Well, I just watched this today, so here be my thoughts.

The movie was good. It's worthy of the title Superman, rather than those awful 3 & 4 movies.

But man, I can't help but feel it could've been better.

I think the problem with Bryan Signer is that reveres the first Superman film too much. So much so that this movie feels like a love letter to Richard Donner's flick, rather than a film with any hint of originality. Hell, there were several shots in the movie that were very similar to those in the first film. I'm not saying that it's wrong for Singer to pay lip service to Superman 1, but couldn't it have killed him to do something more original with the character for once? It's been almost 30 years since the release of the first movie, I think we can look forward rather than look back in regards to the Man of Steel.

As for the cast, well, they were okay. Brandon Routh was by no means hideous, I think he does all right here. My only problem is that he tries to hard to emulate Christopher Reeve, that he looks a bit stiff in the process. Despite what many people think, Reeve brought wit, screen prescence, and genuine warmth when he played the Man of Steel, qualities that don't come out in Routh's performance IMO. Also Reeve could garner some laughs as Clark Kent, whereas Routh doesn't.

Kate Bosworth is another matter. Sorry to say this, but I think she makes a fairly average Lois Lane. Now I've heard people rag on how Margot Kidder was the ugliest actress to play the role. Sure, she wasn't hot like Teri Hatcher or Erica Durance, but at least she brought some spunk and vitality to the role. Stuff that Bosworth fails to convey, as she spends most of the film looking wistfully away at the horizon (probably pining for Orlando Bloom ).

And Kevin Spacey, well, his Luthor was fine, but a bit lacking in the megalomania department. A big part of Gene Hackman's appeal as the bald nemesis was his willingness to chew up the screen with insane rants and occasional black humor. Oh Spacey does this as well, the big problem is that he doesn't do enough of it, as there are long stretches where Luthor just lurks in the background. The energy Spacey exuded would helped the film's occasional languid pace. As for Luthor's grand masterplan in the movie, why does the hell it have to be real estate again? Couldn't he move to more greener pastures? Like say... world domination?

Really, the story and plot were okay but really nothing to harp about. I think the only reason to watch this flick is to see what Superman can do with today's visual effects. And whoa, he does a LOT. And thankfully in small doses, so that each moment is filled with a real sense of wonder (BULLET IN THE EYE! ). The musical score is another matter, while I'm glad they're still using John William's theme, couldn't it have killed them to get him to do a new score? John Ottman's score just doesn't mesh well with it.

So all in all, Superman does indeed return. I only wish it could've been more exciting.

On a scale of 1 to 10, I give it 7.5.

P.S. Another thing, is it just me or are the title credits just a bit tacky? Give me the old opening credits anyday!

 

[Dagger75]

I liked it. I was never a huge Superman fan, don't watch Smallville. I think I had seen 2 trailers on TV and the opening just happen to coincide with my day off so I just went and saw it.

I loved it, thought it was great. Brandon nailed the Clark/Superman role. I liked Kevin Spacey as Lex. The first movie had Lex trying to be a land Baron also by making California sink into the ocean so his desert property would be beach front property.

I could have done with out the little kid being his son but it was handled pretty good. I was waiting for Richard to die and he never did. I actually felt sorry for him and he got a bum rap in this movie. He was nice guy, cared about Lois and "his" son, risked his life to save them and Superman.

I am actually surprised by the negativity in this thread. And for the record Batman Begins was a GREAT movie, my favorite superhero movie.

 

[RangerWickett]

It wasn't a bad movie, but it certainly wasn't a good one. Regarding my earlier post, I don't want a grim and gritty Superman, but I do want one with some depth. I mean, even Jesus has a few scenes in his movies where the stress of his life gets to him. With Superman in this movie, he's like, "Ho hum. Isn't it great that I can do anything?"

There's no drama there. You want a superhero to triumph over adversity, but he's never really challenged. Oh, sure, he gets shivved by Luthor*, but he has nothing to do with how he survives that situation. Our man of steel is inept, and is not deserving of his powers. Apparently he can even defy his own genre conventions. Kryptonite in small quantities in the rocks around him renders him powerless, but huge stalactites of kryptonite dangling right beside him do nothing.

I enjoyed it, and I actually liked Luthor, Richard, and Jimmy Olsen. But I didn't respect Superman in the least.


* I imagined Luthor whispering, "I learned this one in prison," just before he stabbed Superman. And then he says, "Now bend over."

 

[shilsen]

Apparently he can even defy his own genre conventions. Kryptonite in small quantities in the rocks around him renders him powerless, but huge stalactites of kryptonite dangling right beside him do nothing.

Different strokes for different folks. I've always liked the idea of a Superman temporarily fighting through his weakness to kryptonite on sheer will.

As for genre conventions - bah, humbug! Genre conventions exist only for messing around with, as this really fun game (run by a DM whose name I can't recall) illustrates.

 

[Vigilance]

Well I enjoyed it... right up until the lightning struck and the sound went out.

Then I drove home in the driving rain with a free ticket to try again later.

I missed the entire third act.

Chuck