Master Index of Archived Threads


Superman Returns

*

0 votes

**

0 votes

***

4 votes

****

5 votes

*****

2 votes

Elster88 Jun 28 2006 08:17 PM

I liked it.

Elster88 Jun 28 2006 08:18 PM

Nothing super special. But a fun (if long) evening at the movies. Saw a trailer for Spidey 3. I'll leave the reviewing to someone else. He did look a little (actually a lot) plasticy from time to time.

dgwphotography Jul 02 2006 08:33 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Jul 02 2006 08:41 AM

I liked it - a lot. Set approximately 5 years after Superman II, Superman Returns, directed by Brian Singer, finds Superman absent from Earth for 5 years in an attempt to find any remains from his destroyed home planet, Krypton. Earth, especially Lois Lane, has moved on, with Lane even winning a Pulitzer Prize for an editorial titled, "Why We Don't Need Superman", and having a five-year old son and a new fiance. Singer pays homage in so many little moments to the original films, from the opening sequence (using John Williams original theme), throughout the movie, including Superman telling the passenger of a rescued jet that, "Flying is still the safest way to travel". Also look for Noel Neill and Jack Larson in cameos. Brendan Routh is very good as Superman/Clark Kent. He's no Christopher Reeve, but he does bear a striking resemblence to him in many scenes. Kevin Spacey plays Lex Luther much more twistedly than Gene Hackman, and excels, as usual. Frank Langella does his usual enjoyable scene-chewing as Perry White. My only nit is with the casting of Kate Bosworth as Lois Lane. While she and Routh have obvious chemistry, she just seems to be too young for this role. At this point in time, Lois Lane is supposed to be a fierce, pulitzer prize-winning reporter with a five year-old son, but at times I couldn't get past the fact that Bosworth was only 23 here... Overall - this movie really deserves the big-screen treatment - don't wait for DVD to see it. 4 out of 5 stars.

ScarletKnight41 Jul 02 2006 08:41 AM

Caple's vision of the next sequel. BTW, Impulse2 enjoyed Superman Returns, and is dying to see it on the IMAX in New York at some point. In the meantime, D-Dad plans to see the film out here with Impulse2 and her brother.

Elster88 Jul 02 2006 11:12 AM

What does the phrase "scene-chewing" mean?

dgwphotography Jul 02 2006 11:50 AM

It basically means over-the-top acting or to ham it up.

SteveJRogers Jul 02 2006 02:15 PM

Iubitul wrote: It basically means over-the-top acting or to ham it up. Shatner, William is a fine example. Essentially, and usually when doing ultimate bad guy roles (Bond villans, most of your good sci-fi/fantasy/horror villians) or the uber-leader hero (Star Trek's captains, ect), the actor will over-compensate his (or her) lack of acting talent, or just plain having fun with the role, will go over the top and turn the character in the scene into a complete one-dimensional character. It works when giving long dramatic speechs

Edgy MD Jul 02 2006 03:50 PM

My only nit is with the casting of Kate Bosworth as Lois Lane. While she and Routh have obvious chemistry, she just seems to be too young for this role. At this point in time, Lois Lane is supposed to be a fierce, pulitzer prize-winning reporter with a five year-old son, but at times I couldn't get past the fact that Bosworth was only 23 here... My local free paper said she gave the effect of a prom queen with a fake ID.

Elster88 Jul 02 2006 08:34 PM

Edgy DC wrote: My only nit is with the casting of Kate Bosworth as Lois Lane. While she and Routh have obvious chemistry, she just seems to be too young for this role. At this point in time, Lois Lane is supposed to be a fierce, pulitzer prize-winning reporter with a five year-old son, but at times I couldn't get past the fact that Bosworth was only 23 here... My local free paper said she gave the effect of a prom queen with a fake ID. She was actually quite good, IMHO.

Edgy MD Jul 02 2006 11:02 PM

By the way, as disappointing as Superman III and Superman IV were, so much so that this film is a sequel that pretends that they didn't happen, the opening scene of Superman III is wonderful, and it may be the last excellent thing that Richard Lester ever did. Richard Lester (second "by the way" here): Still Alive.

Edgy MD Jul 04 2006 09:59 AM

Without giving it away, did they satisfactorily handle explaining the odd coincidence that the five-year absence of Superman and the five-year absence of Clark Kent coincided?

dgwphotography Jul 04 2006 10:49 AM

Edgy DC wrote: Without giving it away, did they satisfactorily handle explaining the odd coincidence that the five-year absence of Superman and the five-year absence of Clark Kent coincided? No - it was a suspension of belief thing...

SteveJRogers Jul 05 2006 06:45 AM

Iubitul wrote: Edgy DC wrote: Without giving it away, did they satisfactorily handle explaining the odd coincidence that the five-year absence of Superman and the five-year absence of Clark Kent coincided? No - it was a suspension of belief thing... Actually they did, seemed like both Supes and Kent were off doing the same thing "Trying to find themselves" At least you got the impression that Kent did tell Lois, White, ect that he'd be gone. Superman just dissapeared without a trace

Vic Sage Jul 05 2006 11:37 AM

This is the best live-action "superman" ever. The original SUPERMAN movie was in 3 acts... Act I on Krypton and Act II on the Kent farm were both successful at capturing the spirit and essence of the SM mythology. But then, after Superman leaves the Fortress of Solitude, his arrival in Metropolis marks an Act III notable mostly for its buffoonish silliness. Chris Reeve almost single-handedly lifts it above the cartoony milieu, with his dignified and humane portrayal, and the film ended strongly enough to overcome (for me) an overall sense of disappointment in the film. Still, i always felt SM 1 to be 2/3 of a great movie, betrayed by the inability of the filmmakers to take the story seriously once the hero became a guy who flew around in blue and red tights. SM 2 was more funny than silly, but still suffered the same problem... the failure to respect the source material or treat it with the dignity and seriousness that Reeve himself was able to inject into his performance. SM 3 and 4 are better forgotten. But SUPERMAN RETURNS achieves a majestic tone from the opening moments, and maintains it throughout. It trusts the audience to look at a man in red, yellow and blue tights and see not a childish clown but a spiritual figure of great profundity that has survived as an icon of our popular culture for over 65 years. Director Bryan Singer (as he did with X-MEN 1 & 2) understood that he was dealing with mythology, not just a "funny book" (as my father used to call them), and therefore gave it the weight it deserved. Some have criticized the movie for its length and pacing, but it is less a summer action/popcorn flick and more a stately epic. There is time taken to develop character, not just to push the narrative. There is space to let the characters breath, and for emotion to well up. Singer also delights in recreating certain visual tableaus, like Superman holding the car over his head in the pose evocative of the Cover of Action Comics #1, or his holding the Daily Planet globe on his back, depicting the myth of Atlas, which also forshadows the movie's climactic moment where he almost literally carries the world on his back. And of course, a tableau of crucifiction is recreated as well, reinforcing the interpretation of they myth as religious allegory. The film's visuals are a feast, and the action sequences are appropriately impressive. But its in its focus on character where this movie surpasses all prior live-action adaptations of the story. Brendan Routh communicates the sense of loss and emptiness that lives inside a being who is the last of his kind, whose father is a disembodied voice dead for thousands of years. He floats above the world, listening to the prayers for help from people he is isolated from but, unlike other gods before him, he chooses to answer our prayers. When trying to reconnect with Lois Lane, he takes her on a flight similar to the "can you read my mind" pas de duex from SM 1 (even incorporating the musical motif from that song into the underscoring), but instead of syrupy lyrics underlining Lois's schoolgirl-ish crush on the big blue hero, the scene is about a more mature love... about love AND responsibility. There is a real romantic chemistry between Routh and Kate Bosworth as Lois Lane who, despite her youth, convincingly conveys her conflict between professional ambition and maternal instinct, as well as her pain in loving the wrong man... loving the man who leaves more than the man who stays. And never, other than in the animated series, has Lex Luthor been so convincingly menacing. Despite his engaging twinkle, Spacey makes Lex a serious killer... an ex-con with a shiv, not a ludicrous super-villian. Even Parker Posey, as Luthor's "moll" has more than the usual depth for this type of supporting character. The movie is not perfect, by any means. Some of the plot points seem odd, at best, and nonsensical at worst. But the film's ability to capture the tone and spirit of Superman makes such problems seem like quibbles. Superman has, indeed, returned. Welcome back, big fella.

MFS62 Jul 05 2006 12:11 PM

whose father is a disembodied voice dead for thousands of years. Vic, that's an interesting comment. If that is the proper timespan, how do we reconcile that with the "fact" that the baby did not age/grow while in the capsule on the way to Earth, but grew once there? Is this ever addressed in the movie, the comics or in any of the writings about SM? Or must we just chalk it up to Einstein's theory that time moves slower as one approaches the speed of light (the speed of the capsule while on its voyage)? BTW - nice review. Later

Centerfield Jul 05 2006 12:18 PM

By the way, as disappointing as Superman III and Superman IV were, so much so that this film is a sequel that pretends that they didn't happen, the opening scene of Superman III is wonderful, and it may be the last excellent thing that Richard Lester ever did. Richard Lester (second "by the way" here): Still Alive. This is, perhaps, the most encouraging thing I have heard about this movie. On top of making this a better movie, by ignoring Supermen III and IV, has Superman Returns just opened the door to ignoring any botched sequels? Can we pick up the Batman Series pretending only Batman Begins and the Tim Burton movies exist? Can someone re-make the Prequel Trilogy keeping none of the elements of the last three movies (except maybe the double-ended lightsaber)? Can someone make "Karate Kid 2 (the last one didn't count)"?

Edgy MD Jul 05 2006 12:34 PM

Somebody agreed with me about Supe III.

Elster88 Jul 06 2006 06:56 AM

How come his cape didn't have a yellow S? Not that I'm complaining.

Edgy MD Jul 06 2006 07:20 AM

When did that appear? It sort of makes it like a sports uniform, like he has to be indentifiable from all angles. "Son, that guy over there freezing the Bulletteers with arctic breath. Check the program and see who he is. He's got an S inside a diamond shape on his back."

Elster88 Jul 06 2006 07:37 AM

When did what appear? The S on his cape? In the first four movies at least, I couldn't say for sure about the comics.

Rotblatt Jul 06 2006 02:52 PM

What Vic said. Wasn't crazy about Bosworth, but she got the job done. I'm really quite excited for the next one. There WILL BE a next one, right? In the same vein?

Frayed Knot Jul 06 2006 08:53 PM

Partially off-topic but I always liked this Don McLean tribute to TV's Superman; a song which doubles as his oft-visited metaphor for drifting American values and waning strengths. I don't want to be like old George Reeves Stuck in a Superman role. I've got a long way to go in my career And some day my fame will make it clear That I had to be a Superman He came from another place deep in his mind As far as the planets in space. As galaxy's mysteries start to unwind Some changes are bound to take place. Though gravity constantly weighs on my travels My mission is close to adrift Though I can be strong when my power unravels I still come to you for a lift. I know I can fly when my plane hits the sky I believe I've got nothing to lose. But when I'm alone with the bed and the phone I get the terminal metropolis blues I flew to the coast where Superman's Ghost Lay shot on the bedroom floor He said "Watch out for TV it crucified me, but it can't crucify me no more." "I'm red white and blue, I've got justice to do I'm the man of your fantasy dreams But I'm an alien man from an alien land Who's alive on your orthicon screens. I once ruled the world and when flags were unfurled I performed for you live not on tape. But the public is cruel when played for a fool As you see by the blood on my cape." "Well I never was real or stronger than steel. I'm a figment of Freudian need. And the video screen is a psychotic scene And it's all done with mirrors and green My agent just called, the talks have been stalled I soon will be pulled from the air. But the image persists in the video mists That a Superman still will be there!"

Johnny Dickshot Jul 06 2006 09:30 PM

One time I recall finding a lost of songs on the Internet that mention Superman and the sheer volume was just mindboggling.

Edgy MD Jul 06 2006 10:58 PM

Part of the magic I guess is that, as a character, he's (seemingly) so shallow, but something in his condition touches people so deeply to turn him into a metaphor for anything. McLean's tribute is all the more touching in light of his career trying to --- like Reeves --- show people he's more than the larger-than-life role he played early on, with an epic 8-1/2-minute. number-one song.

Willets Point Jul 07 2006 06:28 AM

Superman is a dick.

Vic Sage Jul 07 2006 09:54 AM

Speaking of Superman's dick, here is Larry Niven's classic essay on Kryptonian reproduction, "Man of Steel, Woman of Kleenex" http://www.rawbw.com/~svw/superman.html

Elster88 Jul 07 2006 09:57 AM

(*One should not think of Superman as a Peeping Tom. A biological ability must be used. As a child Superman may never have known that things had surfaces, until he learned to suppress his X-ray vision. If millions of people tend shamelessly to wear clothing with no lead in the weave, that is hardly Superman's fault.*)

Vic Sage Jul 07 2006 09:59 AM

There is a movie coming out in September about George Reeves' suicide... HOLLYWOODLAND http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0427969/ "A uniquely compelling exploration of fame and identity. The drama, inspired by one of Hollywood's most infamous real-life mysteries, follows a 1950s private detective (Academy Award winner Adrien Brody) who, investigating the mysterious death of "Superman" star George Reeves (Academy Award winner Ben Affleck), uncovers unexpected connections to his own life as the case turns more personal. The torrid affair Reeves had with the wife (Academy Award nominee Diane Lane) of a studio executive (Academy Award nominee Bob Hoskins) might hold the key to the truth."

Centerfield Jul 07 2006 10:07 AM

What is it about Diane Lane that gets her cast all the time as a cheating wife?

Vic Sage Jul 07 2006 10:09 AM

cuz she's every studio exec's MILF.

MFS62 Jul 07 2006 10:15 AM

Elster88 wrote: (*One should not think of Superman as a Peeping Tom. A biological ability must be used. As a child Superman may never have known that things had surfaces, until he learned to suppress his X-ray vision. If millions of people tend shamelessly to wear clothing with no lead in the weave, that is hardly Superman's fault.*) If its is going to be an either/ or situation, I'd prefer that Superman learn to suppress the laser-like heat beam component of his vision rather then the X-ray part. To us mere mortals, "hot rocks" doesn't mean Kryptonite. Later

dgwphotography Jul 13 2006 08:56 AM

Kevin Smith talking about Superman

Edgy MD Jul 13 2006 09:22 AM

Wow. I'm going to have to stay late now.

Vic Sage Jul 13 2006 09:53 AM

the clip is from a long "concert film" which was basically Kevin Smith talking to a college audience for 3+ hours. It's actually pretty engaging, cuz Smith, while not exactly a "raconteur", is a pretty funny guy. i saw him speak once, in a talk he gave in Hoboken. He makes rambling into an artform, of sorts. Much like his movies, which have little cinematic quality, but are great for stylized conversations amongst interesting characters.

ScarletKnight41 Jul 13 2006 11:17 AM

Iubitul wrote: Kevin Smith talking about Superman Thanks - Impulse2 really enjoyed the clip.

dgwphotography Jul 13 2006 12:03 PM

That was a great clip - I hope I get the opportunity to see him speak in person.

Benjamin Grimm Jul 13 2006 12:10 PM

I enjoyed the movie. It was nice seeing the exploration of how difficult and lonely it can be to be Superman. I, too, noticed the nod to the cover of Action Comics Number 1. DC movies can't give me goosebumps, but that, along with the theme song playing during the credits, almost did the trick. Kate Bosworth is way too young to be Lois Lane. I had a similar beef with Katie Holmes in Batman Begins. I have nothing against pretty young actresses, but both Holmes' character and Lois Lane are accomplished women, who need to have had a certain number of years of experience to get to their position. There are plenty of attractive actresses in their mid-thirties would could have been cast. Another cool scene: when the thug shot Superman in the eye. Routh, by the way, is also too young. I assume that they cast younger actors because they want this franchise to continue for a while, and with a cast this young they may be able to do ten years worth of movies before they have to recast. The movie, though, was too long. Once Luthor was defeated I started getting fidgety. They could have wrapped things up a bit sooner. I didn't time it, but the film seemed to have a twenty-minute epilogue, which is just too long.

Vic Sage Jul 13 2006 01:49 PM

i agree about Lois and Clark being too young, and about the "bullet in the eye" scene... its great. But the movie DID give me goosebumps... repeatedly. And i can certainly understand why you'd complain about the length of the attenuated ending, but i wasn't bored or fidgety... i was moved by it. Its part of why this is more an "epic" than your standard "summer action pic".

Elster88 Jul 14 2006 02:43 PM

Do you think that whole story Kevin Smith told was true?

MFS62 Jul 16 2006 03:17 PM

Finally saw it today. It was everything I've read here (especially from Vic) and more. The length didn't bother me at all. In many (most) movies I have found myself looking at my watch and wondering how much longer to go. But I did not look at my watch, or feel the need to, throughout this film. It was perfect escapist fare for a hot summer day. Later

Centerfield Dec 15 2006 10:33 AM

I watched it last night. The length of it didn't bother me at all. I was completely engaged the whole time. I loved how they kept the Williams music and the "fly at you" 3-D credits in the opening. I like how the movie was treated seriously and wasn't cartoony or ridiculous as some super-hero movies get. Great character development. They gave the character depth he never had before. As is mentioned in this thread, Bosworth was too young and gave only an adequate performance. At no point did I ever get the feeling she was an accomplished journalist. Routh, who was also too young, was great. He had a tall order to fill...with Christopher Reeve's likeable and engaging performance still in our minds, but he did a great job staying true to that character while making the role his own. Spacey, I thought, was excellent. One of the best villain performances...and I feel like he even captured a bit of Gene Hackman to him during his scene with Lois Lane. Everyone else was passable. Unfortunately, the plot was awful. It was full of holes, and at times the coincidences were so far-fetched you have to roll your eyes. The ultimate showdown between Lex and Superman is also a letdown...and I don't think it was explained adequately enough how Superman managed to ultimately succeed. That being said, I liked the movie. I like the direction it's being taken in. Put in a slightly better plot, and we could be looking at a fantastic sequel.

Edgy MD Dec 19 2006 08:33 AM

Stylistically, they do it almost all right. Script-wise, dumber than a box of rocks. It must be really hard to write a good adventure story about a guy vulnerable to almost nothing --- except ho-hum Kryptonite. The romantic story will work, because of the contrast between his invulnerable body and his vulnerable heart. Action-wise, well, the guy can bend time and space, so even when he screws up, he can get a do-over. Damn, that kid looked like a Culkin.

Edgy MD Dec 19 2006 08:42 AM

The suit was odd, seemingly made out of a smokey-colored magic rubber, instead of a brightly colored magic silk/spandex blend. It kills for me one of the best things of the admittedly bad Superman III, in which he's corrupted by a variation of kryptonite, and, as his character fades, so does the color of his suit, until he rebounds, rips off his suit, and there's inexplicably (but cooly) another bright one underneath. How did the Doctors get that suit off of him? Man, a lot of holes in that script. But I guess it's stylistically a great place from which to re-launch the serial. They also gave Metropolis some of its own character, so it's more than just New York with a different name, and they briefly mentioned another city called Gotham, showing it's clearly set in the DC universe, and perhaps setting up for a future movie in which Routh's Superguy teams up with Christian Bale's Batguy and maybe a few other Justice Leaguers.

Centerfield Dec 19 2006 09:03 AM

They can make it smoky all they want, I don't think there is any way to make the suit look cool until they lose the red and yellow. And I know it sounds blasphemous, but they did away with Batman's yellow belt too, so there is precedent for it. Until then, it's just going to look like he has the same custom tailor as Robin.

Edgy MD Dec 19 2006 09:45 AM

I don't think Superman has to look cool. I think it's best (or coolest) portraying him as a dork who has to deal with the notion that cool sailed away for him back in Smallville.

Benjamin Grimm Dec 19 2006 09:58 AM

Edgy DC wrote: I don't think Superman has to look cool. I think it's best (or coolest) portraying him as a dork who has to deal with the notion that cool sailed away for him back in Smallville. I agree. Superman is a regular guy from Kansas who wouldn't know how, or be interested in, looking cool. The corny uniform is a key part of the package.

Nymr83 Dec 19 2006 08:38 PM

They also gave Metropolis some of its own character, so it's more than just New York with a different name, and they briefly mentioned another city called Gotham, i thought Gotham was NYC and Metropolis was always supposed to be somewhere in the midwest, most likely Chicagi?

Edgy MD Dec 19 2006 08:42 PM

Metropolis was played by New York in the Christopher Reeve Superman. The connection has a long pedigree.

Benjamin Grimm Dec 20 2006 04:39 AM

I've also heard it described that Gotham is New York below 14th Street and Metropolis is New York above 14th Street.

AG/DC Mar 03 2008 10:54 PM

I think Gotham is New York before World War II and Metropolis is New York after.

Elster88 Mar 07 2008 11:24 AM

Edgy DC wrote: the opening scene of Superman III is wonderful, and it may be the last excellent thing that Richard Lester ever did. It was awful. Slapstick is not what I want in my Superman movies.

The Second Spitter Mar 08 2008 05:05 AM

AG/DC wrote: I think Gotham is New York before World War II and Metropolis is New York after. I've heard described as: "Metropolis is New York during the day, and Gotham is New York at night."

The Second Spitter Mar 08 2008 05:16 AM

Metropolis was played by New York in the Christopher Reeve Superman. The connection has a long pedigree. The link had an interesting little snippet about pro-baseball. Like New York City, it is home to two teams in baseball and football. Of the two baseball teams, the Metropolis Monarchs are Clark Kent's favorite, while the other team, the Metropolis Meteors, is mentioned in 52 as having a rivalry with the St. Louis Cardinals. Okay, so we know the Meteors play in the National League. But, if the Mets moved to Metropolis, they would be called the Metropolis Mets, or even the Metropolis Metropolitans. So if they met the Los Angeles Angels in the World Series, it will be dubbed the Tautology Series.

Benjamin Grimm Mar 08 2008 05:46 AM

You need to narrow that avatar, 3D.