• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

The Superman Returns spoiler thread.

Cthulhudrew said:
I noticed this, too, and it actually got me to looking at Superman/Clark Kent in a different way than I ever had before.

It's long been said that one of the central differences between Superman and Batman is that for Superman, Superman is the secret ID whereas for Batman, Bruce Wayne is the act. That has been the central change in Superman's character in modern times. In the comics.. he simply doesn't do the stumbling act and hasn't for some time. But most people expect it from older comics and the media portrayals of the character.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Lord Pendragon said:
I'm curious. When exactly was Lex campy? When he was plotting to destroy the North American continent? When he shoved a dagger into Superman's side, or was brutally kicking him on the ground?

From comments here and elsewhere, I went into the movie expecting Lex to be cheesy. Instead, I was rather surprised at the degree of brutality Spacey brought to the character. Though he shared a bit of the soft-spoken mannerisms of Hackman's Lex, I found their differences to be profound.

Hackman's Lex wrapped a piece of kryptonite around Superman's neck.

Spacey's Lex shoved a kryptonite dagger into his guts.

World of difference.

I'll go out on a limb here and say that I actually preferred Spacey's Lex to Hackman's! I mean Lex is Superman's nemesis and as such he should actually be pretty threatening - Hackman's Lex was pretty much a joke!
 

I enjoyed this movie so much, I drove 3 hours just to watch it a 2nd time in IMAX 3D. Routh is a perfect compliment to both Reeve's Superman and Clark Kent. Spacey took Hackman's goofy Luthor, and without changing the essense of the character, made him more menacing and plausable as a foe for Supes. Bosworth was a decent Lois Lane. She obviously wasn't trying to emulate Kidder's character, but the writers did a good enough job of that for her. She a lot cuter as a brunette than blonde, too, I gotta say. The guy playing Jimmy was awsome. The guy playing White was pretty good, too. Marsen's character is as wussy as his Cyclops, unfortunately. But that helps make Lois look stronger, I suppose (we sure know who wears the pants in that household).

Kudos to Singer for going with the homage to the original films. While that unfortunately brings baggage forth as cannon from those movies, such as large plastic 'S' logo nets, super-memory sucking kisses, and spinning the world around backwards to reverse time, at least the new movie had no such silliness. The constant nods ot the originals thorughout the movie were great, especially the score. I hardly ever enjoy the opening credits of a movie, but this was certinaly an exception.

Why this movie is being panned by some is beyond me. But then, I didn't much like PotC, so to each their own, I guess.
 

DouglasFir said:
I'll go out on a limb here and say that I actually preferred Spacey's Lex to Hackman's! I mean Lex is Superman's nemesis and as such he should actually be pretty threatening - Hackman's Lex was pretty much a joke!
I agree. The only problem I had was the girlfriend. She was very much reminiscent of Hackman Lex's squeeze, and interjected too much silliness into Lex's scenes for my taste. Had she been replaced with a more competent henchwoman, he would have come across as more serious in general, and his more dangerous, aristocratic interpretation would have really shone.
Agamon said:
Kudos to Singer for going with the homage to the original films.
It was too much of an homage in my eyes. I was particularly disappointed that they went with the "bumbling Clark Kent." Eventually, Lois is supposed to choose Clark over Superman. Choose the real personality over the flashy powers. But Reeves' Clark Kent was never the kind of man Lois would fall for. It was one of the strongest points of the Lois and Clark TV series, IMO, that Clark Kent was actually a cool enough guy that you could believe Lois actually picking him over Superman. Still wholesome and good, but with positive qualities. Reeves' Clark just does not strike me as the kind of guy a powerful, career-oriented woman like Lois Lane is going to pick over Superman. I was disappointed to see that Singer decided to use that interpretation, pretty much whole-turkey.
Why this movie is being panned by some is beyond me.
Well, I did enjoy the movie. I just wish it would have been even better. I had hoped for a Spider-man level of quality, and wound up with an X-Men level of quality. Good, but not great. ;)
 

Cthulhudrew said:
I noticed this, too, and it actually got me to looking at Superman/Clark Kent in a different way than I ever had before. I think the tendency is to look at Clark Kent as the bumbling, hucksterish secret identity of Superman, much as Bruce Wayne is seen as the decadent, playboyish secret identity of Batman. Thus it might seem weird that Superman doesn't come across with a bit more bravado in his superheroic guise, since he is freed of having to perform to keep his secret.
Comparisons to the Batman make me think about the way Tim Burton and Christopher Nolan presented the character in their films.

In the Burton films, Michael Keaton's Batman is an outsider. Much has been said about the relationship between the heroes of Burton's films and the oddball Burton himself, but it's interesting to note that for all of this, Burton's Batman still communicates with the people he's helping a lot more than the Donner/Singer Superman.

In point of fact, he announces himself in exactly the way Superman doesn't, for instance, during the spaceplane rescue in Superman Returns - crashing in through the roof, roaring up in the Batmobile with flaming exhaust pipes. Even in Batman Returns, in which the Batman (almost awkwardly) retreats from Selina Kyle's attempt at conversation, there's more communication with both villains and regular folks - smirking as he waits for the big clown to notice the bomb stuffed in his waistband, reaching out verbally to Catwoman, confronting the Penguin and Max Schreck.

Part of it has to be the suite of fear and intimidation tactics the Batman relies upon to get the job done, but it's intriguing that the psychologically and emotionally isolated Batman seems to have a lot more to say to the people he meets than noble and self-sacrificing Superman. I guess it's part of their complexity as characters - the scary Batman paradoxically reaches out to others while the infinitely compassionate Superman sets himself apart.

The Nolan version of the Batman as played by Christian Bale isn't so different. He reaches out to people he needs as allies throughout the film, both before and after his transformation into the Batman. He even feels to need to reveal his plans to Rachel Dawes despite (presumably) predicting her disgusted reaction. He even takes the time to treat the kid from the Narrows with kindness, even if he doesn't say anything.

The performance Routh gave, however, made me start to look at Superman and Clark Kent as the same person, no "secret identities" involved. IE, Clark Kent was a farm boy who grew up as an outsider due to his abilities and the need to keep them secret. His social skills should be somewhat malformed; it shouldn't be seen as an act that he is bumbling and shy around Lois Lane, who he nurtures a strong affection for- he acts that way because he truly hasn't developed the social skills of emotional interaction at that level. So he comes across that way not because he's performing, but because that's who he is. When he puts on the Superman tights, he isn't changing at all- he's still awkward Clark Kent who doesn't really know how to interact quite so socially with people. He's now in a different role from other people's perceptions, though- he's their savior and hero, and rather than see him as awkward, they become awkward because, really, how do you interact with someone on that level? So Superman ends up coming across as the cool collected one, in a complete role reversal.
I think that's pretty cogent. In the comics, it hasn't been true for quite a while that Superman is psychologically alien, and Clark Kent is the mask he wears to move in human society; this was an element of his pre-Crisis characterisation, and eloquently summarised by Bill in Kill Bill, Volume II, but since the Crisis On Infinite Earths and the John Byrne revamp of Superman in The Man of Steel Clark Kent is not a cover identity, it's the fundamental truth of who Superman is. He's more a child of the warm, loving Kents who raised him than of the cold, emotionally sterile world of Krypton, and he was even "born" on Earth since he gestated during the flight from Krypton in a "birthing matrix".

I think it's certainly true that Singer's take on Superman makes the hero and the reporter basically the same person. I think it's interesting the way that Clark takes advantage of his appeal as Superman to play "come hither" with Lois Lane; by contrast, in Lois and Clark my memories suggest that Clark played it "strictly business" when he wore the tights and only pursued Lois as Clark Kent. Perhaps this simply reflects a differing take on Clark Kent's attitude to letting Lois in on his secret: in Lois and Clark he only revealed his powers to Lois once they were already together (or nearly so), while in the Donner/Singer version he appears happy to romance Lois as Superman and presumably let her in on the secret once they were together in that context.

It's a complicating element of the Singer film that we don't know the circumstances in which "Jason-El" was conceived, because whether or not the memory-erasing kiss is canon for Superman Returns is important to the question of who, exactly, Lois believed she was sleeping with when she got pregnant: "I Spent The Night With Superman" indeed. Her lack of surprise and willingness to ask Jason to help them get out of the galley after the piano incident suggests that she was at least half-expecting Jason to be capable of such a thing; it's also fairly clear that Richard doesn't know and genuinely thinks he's the father. Hell, no wonder she resents Superman for leaving, and was happy to settle down (to a certain extent) with Richard.

It's very interesting that the most probable explanation is that Clark romanced her and slept with her as Superman. For argument's sake, compare with Clark Kent in Smallville: he's still psychologically as human as the Donner/Singer Superman or the comics Superman, but at least in the first three seasons it seems that his fear of the grey areas of the relationship between "Clark Kent" and "Kal-El" overrides his romantic interests, especially with Lana Lang. He can't be with her as Clark and reveal his secret, and he certainly doesn't have the option to do it the other way. In some ways, it suggests that the creation of the Superman identity for the Smallville Clark Kent will be a way of interacting with society without anyone ever forcing him to deal with the issue, but for this Clark it will be explicitly as a coping mechanism as opposed to the Donner/Singer practicality.

Contrast, then, with someone like Batman, who (IMO) really is the underlying personality, and the Bruce Wayne identity is just one that he adopts out of necessity to deal with the rest of the world. Two different characters, essentially.
Another interpretation of the Batman is that Bruce Wayne wears two different costumes to deal with the world. He becomes the Batman to accomplish his mission, striking fear into the hearts of the criminal element and destroying evil. He becomes "Bruce Wayne, billionaire playboy" to deflect suspicion as to his nocturnal activities. Batman Begins, I think, takes this attitude, and actually shows you the genesis of the Batman and of "Bruce Wayne, billionaire playboy".

Christian Bale's performance outside of the costume is different when he is the real Bruce Wayne, discussing his plans with Alfred, and when he is the billionaire playboy, buying hotels and persuading Lucius Fox to give him surplus experimental devices for extreme sports purposes. One of the more subtle elements of the film is the way in which he gradually reveals at least part of the real Bruce Wayne to Fox and drops the playboy charade, in contrast to the way Rachel Dawes gets to know the real Bruce Wayne through her dealings with the Batman.

Of course, it's also true that Ra's al Ghul knows the real Bruce Wayne, which is why it's never a question that he recognises the Batman for who he is. In a way it's what makes him a supremely dangerous villain for Nolan's version of the character: there's no sense that Jonathan Crane or Carmine Falcone have the capacity to figure out who the Batman really is, but Ra's is an enemy who knows Bruce Wayne as intimately as Bruce knows himself.

BTW, Mhacdebhandia, I just wanted to say that I found this to be a really well written and insightful review. Thanks for sharing it!
Thanks for saying so. :)
 
Last edited:

Like all revisions of Icon characters...doing Supes, is by no means, easy.

Singer has stated, he had to trimmed the film down, from 2:45 hrs, to 2:34. And he was NOT asked by the major studios heads to do it, he did it on his own. I guess to bring it, to more 'comfortable' level of telling the story.

Anyway, a redone of this nature, is considered, a alpha state production.

As someone else said, yes...Singer will learn, as everyone else involved.

I like the film every much, and want to see it again. Probably at IMAX.

The only differences about the whole experience...was Brandon's voice. Quite a departure, from Christoper's. In the first hour, I didn't adjust to it. But on the second half, I did.

Acknowledging in my thoughts...the mantle is now passed, for good or ill. The mantle is now, been passed.

Time to look forward.

But in the background of the past...will cherish and remember with reverence...on those who carried the S, from before.
 
Last edited:

2nd weekend at boxoffice and dropped 58 percent, earning $21.9 million this weekend and $141.7 million in 12 days.

Domestic: $141,677,000 87.6%
+ Foreign: $20,000,000 12.4%
---------------------------------
= Worldwide: $161,677,000
 

"Not that there's anything wrong with that...."

Ok, did anyone else get the overall impression that Brandon Routh's Superman was, well... more gay-looking than he should have been? (And I'm not meaning this as any kind of homophobic insult at all during this post, please, but it is the main image that we all came away with from his casting.)
 
Last edited:

Archetype said:
Ok, did anyone else get the overall impression that Brandon Routh's Superman was, well... more gay-looking than he should have been?

No. It sounds like you were more interested in making sophmoric snarky comments with your friends than actually paying attention to the movie.
 

Archetype said:
Ok, did anyone else get the overall impression that Brandon Routh's Superman was, well... more gay-looking than he should have been? (And I'm not meaning this as any kind of homophobic insult at all during this post, please, but it is the main image that we all came away with from his casting.)
Before I saw it, the first thing my best friend said to me when I asked him how the movie was is "Superman's gay now".
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top