Superman Returns

[Haggisboy]

There are two fixtures in pop culture to which I’ve completely geeked out in my lifetime. One is Star Trek, the other is Superman. Therefore, I don’t know if it’s because of my avid interest in all things pertaining to the Man of Steel, or in spite of it, that I was grossly disappointed with Superman Returns.

Director Brian Singer of X-Men fame goes to great lengths to make this movie (with a completely new cast) a continuation of the saga started under Christopher Reeve, with the casting of newcomer Brandon Routh whose acting consists of little more than trying to nail the perfect imitation of Reeve, right down to the goofy Clark Kent persona smile.

In fact, the entire cast appeared to be walking through their lines, delivering them on cue without much in the way of passion or characterization – with the sole exception of Kevin Spacey who turns in a masterfully maniacal portrayal of arch nemesis Lex Luthor. He chews up the screen during his scenes, and almost made me forget the lousy performances turned in by the rest of the sub-par cast.

Easily running 45 minutes too long (the film clocks in at an excruciating 154 minutes), the screenwriting tandem of Michael Dougherty and Dan Harris devote an enormous amount of time trying in vain to breathe chemistry into the whole Superman/Lois Lane sub-plot, with abysmal results. This is the sort of stuff that’s been done countless times better on Supes’ small screen incarnations of Smallville or Lois & Clark. This time around it not only bombs, but drags the movie away from things it should be delivering; such as the last son of Krypton’s heroic display of his powers.

It’s only during the movie’s few action scenes (totaling 3 in all) that we actually are given a glimpse of what this movie could have been. Impressively executed, it’s a wonder why studio execs couldn’t have strong armed Singer into re-tooling the film to place a greater emphasis on the effects and a far lesser degree on the insipid romance story.

Far from leaving me in a state of wonder over the return of Superman to the theatre, this production left me wondering if perhaps Warner Bros had dropped the ball after all by not giving Smallville producers Alfred Gough and Miles Millar the green light to bring their project to the big screen. Now that’s a nut I doubt even Superman could crack.

[Up_All_Night]

i disagree. The film was awesome..

a greater emphasis on effects?? there were 1400 effects shots what did you want?

the acting wasnt bad at all, Routh had a take on some aspects of the reeve performance and he handles aspects such as clark kent way better.

[damo]

Three words, long, slow, boring.

Future directors, the word for today is editing, use it!!!!

[Haggisboy]

i disagree. The film was awesome..

a greater emphasis on effects?? there were 1400 effects shots what did you want?

the acting wasnt bad at all, Routh had a take on some aspects of the reeve performance and he handles aspects such as clark kent way better.

You're confusing CGI shit, of which few films these days have none, with actual action.

The film was emotionally cold, far too drawn out, and made very little effort to plot it's own course in Superman mythology (as some of the TV productions have done) and instead perferred to stick with prolonging the agony that had already run past it's expiry date in the Reeve films - right down to keeping the now tired John Williams musical score.

[Up_All_Night]

i was refferring to a comment in the review above.

I dont know i didnt find it emotionally cold or drawn out. But each to their own.

Also in no ways is the john williams theme worn out, it was awesome when the movie started with it. To me thats like saying the star wars prequels shouldnt have had the star wars theme.

I think the thinking has been, this film was to establish everything, and then they can go nuts in the sequel. Biggest problem with superman is that he's too powerful so having a good nemesis or danger is hard.

[Haggisboy]

I think the thinking has been, this film was to establish everything, and then they can go nuts in the sequel.

But they didn't actually establish anything. The only "new" tidbit they brought to the table was to show how Superman "hears" every crime being committed by going into orbit and listening, and deploying from there. Beyond that, they relied heavily on viewer knowlege of the Reeve films, which is a shame. They should have opted to chart their own course from scratch - as if the Reeve films never existed.

For all it's weak points, this is what I enjoy about Smallville, at least when it's telling the Superman back story (as opposed to the mostly insufferable freaks of the week). They've drawn heavily from the comics and added their own healthy measure of uniqueness to craft a compelling history for the character, as well as the villains.

I think Warner Bros would have been better advised to either:

a) give Gough and Millar a kick at the big screen can - after all, they DID pen the screenplay for Spiderman 2, or

b) Do a "Battlestar Galactica" and start afresh, completey rejigging the big screen franchise. The Reeve films were a product of their time. The first two, at least, had an undeniable quaintness about them. But that was then. This is now.

[Up_All_Night]

by establish i mean reintroducing superman, i think they've gone about it the right way. If you released spiderman 2 with out the establishing work of spiderman 1, it wouldnt have worked aswell. Now they can get to the balls right away with the next film.

Smallville the movie would have come with all the bagage of the series, and those that dont watch the series would be turned off going.
A re-do would literally just be superman 1 with a better evil plot by lex luther, would have been a bit of a waste.
How much different could they have rejigged superman it with out completely going nuts changing heaps of things pissing off fans? It worked with batman begins, but that was telling a story that hasnt been done on film, and batman is a more flexible character.

I do understand with what you're saying though, and they could have done something better, but that can be said for anything and i thought what they did was excellent.

[Haggisboy]

Unlike other superhero franchises like Spiderman, Superman has been rehashed on the small and big screen, not to mention comics and graphic novels, so many times that you'd have to be tribesman from Borneo not to be familiar with the Superman story - at least on a cursory level that would allow you to jump into a movie and enjoy it. So to re-start the franchise for the big screen, they could dispense with having to "refamiliarize" the audience and simply get into establishing whatever new dimensions to the story that they wish to bring to the table.

Insofar as Smallville goes, there wouldn't really be any need to do a "Smallville the Movie" in the capacity in which I think you indicate. That series is focused on filling in the unknown back story of Clark Kent prior to his incarnation as Superman. If they brought that franchise to the big screen, they could virtually make a clean break because by that time, the story would have moved to Metropolis and the only carry-over characters would be Clark/Superman, Lois, Lex and Braniac. For the fans who invested years watching the series, they would enjoy it on one level, and for the fans who couldn't care less about the TV show, they could enjoy it from the starting point of the Superman story.

[t101]

by establish i mean reintroducing superman, i think they've gone about it the right way. If you released spiderman 2 with out the establishing work of spiderman 1, it wouldnt have worked aswell. Now they can get to the balls right away with the next film.

"To set the basis of a good sequel" is no excuse for making a crap film. A good sequel should be able to build on a good movie.

Superman returns was just plain dull. And several times Superman flying looked more plastic than Neo flying.

For me the whole Superman franchise is ruined by the fact his arch-nemesis is basically a real estate agent gone bad. A human one at that.

Oh, and I liked the way they totally repeated the whole "bad guy's female sidekick pulls a _totally unexpected_ turnaround on the bad guy" thing from the first film. :rolleyes: