Superman Returns

[JayBee74]

Re: Superman Returns

Pretty much, which is why I really enjoyed the movie. It was an escape from the depressing nature of the world today. I don't want to go see a superhero movie that mirrors real life but a bit exaggerated. I want to see something where the good guys win in the end and to re-affirm the goodness in mankind even tho supes is an alien.

I agree with you Sportsman, but it was this movie that depressed me.

[neovsmatrix]

Re: Superman Returns

IMO that would've made the movie a bit too dark. A world without Superman would be over run with criminals and the world would be plunged into an almost dystopian state. Do you really want to see a world plunged into that kind of chaos? (tho granted it'd be a bit more realistic)

Superman left the world for 5 years. I wanted to see how the world changed as a result. Show why the world needs or doesn't need Superman. After all, they mentioned it several times, that should have been the central thesis of the movie. If it was, it wasn't done well at all. And if it wasn't, they really shouldn't have even addressed that topic. I'm not expecting a dark rendition of the movie, I'm just expecting something more than I got, which was really unfocused, and meandering seemingly without a central theme.

They didn't even mention anything significant about how the world changed after Superman's departure. There was no dynamic in terms of how the world progresses into its re-embracing of Superman. He's just automatically embraced, there is no backlash, nothing whatsoever (save for Lois, and that was more of a personal issue than anything ideological). It's ultimately meaningless. We don't even see Superman's affect on the people. His heroism isn't demonstrated as an ideal that people seek to strive for. We see a few instances of heroism in the film (well, one that I can remember, really, and that involved Richard flying to rescue Lois even though he had no superpowers, and that too wasn't really selfless). We see Superman being selfless by turning back to rescue everyone else while Lois is in danger, showing he can put aside his personal feelings for the greater good. But we don't see how he inspires others or anything of that sort. We don't see the greater good of humanity really, just the greater good in Superman, and that was a given. I wish there were more uplifting moments in the movie, but there didn't seem to be many.

Given that he's practically invincible, he's selfless, and almost divine in terms of his qualities, there has to be another place for a sense of conflict other than an internal one or the superficial enemy of the week conflict. Lex Luthor's ridiculous machinations isn't where it should be coming from. It should be about the world and Superman's relation to it, his place among the people. And the movie failed to do that. I honestly didn't feel much of anything throughout the movie. There was not one moment where I was in awe of him or anyone around him, and that to me is a failure to make Superman relevant.

[JayBee74]

Re: Superman Returns

Given that he's practically invincible, he's selfless, and almost divine in terms of his qualities, there has to be another place for a sense of conflict other than an internal one or the superficial enemy of the week conflict. Lex Luthor's ridiculous machinations isn't where it should be coming from. It should be about the world and Superman's relation to it, his place among the people. And the movie failed to do that. I honestly didn't feel much of anything throughout the movie. There was not one moment where I was in awe of him or anyone around him, and that to me is a failure to make Superman relevant.

I couldn't have said it better myself (no way I could have said it better). And...you...still liked it???

[neovsmatrix]

Re: Superman Returns

Pretty much, which is why I really enjoyed the movie. It was an escape from the depressing nature of the world today. I don't want to go see a superhero movie that mirrors real life but a bit exaggerated. I want to see something where the good guys win in the end and to re-affirm the goodness in mankind even tho supes is an alien.

The goodness in mankind wasn't re-affirmed. Just the goodness in Superman. Mankind hardly played any factor in this movie, and that was a major source of disappointment for me. All we got was Lois's change of heart over the course of the movie about her feelings for Superman after he came back, and it pretty much served as a romantic movie more than anything else.

A pretty empty romance at least for me, so the movie just kind of meanders along. We don't even know why Lois is in love with Superman. What makes him so special other than his powers. Her relationship to Richard serves as being a poor contrast to show anything that makes Lois's relationship with Superman in a special light. All we have to go on is that Lois had a child with Superman, and that seems to be their only real reason for being connected.

By the way, Jaybee, the more I think over Superman and the reasons I was underwhelmed with it, the less I'm enchanted with it. Its plot frankly sucked, the characters themselves were thinly drawn, the depiction of Superman as a Jesus figure (as it was clearly meant to be shown) has been done better in other superhero movies, and it really seemed to lack a focal point upon which the movie could revolve.

I like Superman as a character, and I don't buy the idea that there's little anyone can do with the character given his invulnerability and his moral values. That's just a cheap excuse, IMHO, and if the writers couldn't have done anything interesting and meaningful with the character the least they could have done is borrow from some of the more interesting story arcs from the comics such as the Death of Superman and make it into a great action movie.

[neovsmatrix]

Re: Superman Returns

I couldn't have said it better myself (no way I could have said it better). And...you...still liked it???

I'm still seeing it in 3d just for the spectacle, but that's all that's drawing me back to it for repeat viewings.

I liked it only for the spectacle, the visual effects and the nostalgic feeling (more or less) that it brought for me.

When I said I liked it, that's from my first viewing of the movie (and so far, the only viewing). I really don't know if I'll find anything redeeming the second time seeing the movie, but I'm hoping I find something there. If not, I can't really say that my ultimate verdict on the movie would be favorable.

[SportsTop]

Re: Superman Returns

They didn't even mention anything significant about how the world changed after Superman's departure. There was no dynamic in terms of how the world progresses into its re-embracing of Superman. He's just automatically embraced, there is no backlash, nothing whatsoever (save for Lois, and that was more of a personal issue than anything ideological). It's ultimately meaningless.

Interesting. I took Singer's presentation of Lois' feelings as that of the general public as well. So what she was saying and her resulting feelings were supposed to be a direct reflection of humanity.

I also took from Clark/Kal-el/Superman sitting at home changing through channels as him seeing what had become of the world while he was gone (war in Iraq, terrorism, etc).

Again, all in all it is a comic book movie and probably not meant to cover the wide spectrum of issues you are addressing.

[CaptainZombie]

Re: Superman Returns

IMHO, they really should have approached the Superman movie with a global perspective. Address questions like how the world has changed, how Superman is a detriment to the world these days, how he is a benefit, etc.

Instead we get more of a romance between Lois and Superman and these ideas only superficially addressed (mostly through Lois, while on the other hand the whole world is GLAD he's back with only a passing remark on that, and no explanation for it at all). It's neither deep nor as entertaining as it should be, IMHO.

I think if they had gone into some ideological stance, addressed why Superman is there in the first place, instead of broaching it and then dropping it, Superman Returns would have been a lot more focused, a lot more heartfelt, and just a whole lot better.

Batman Begins succeeded because they focused on the growth of Batman and his ideology. Superman Returns just barely grazes the topic, and that was a major disappointment overall for me. I couldn't care less for Lex Luthor as the villain. I hated the way he got his money back, and his overall scheme was really contrived and irrelevant to defining Superman and his relation to the world.

I enjoyed the movie based on the fact it was a Superman movie, but it really could have been a lot better than it was.

That's why they needed to take the Batman Begins route with Superman imo and start all over again. It's over now, this is what we were given.

[CaptainZombie]

Re: Superman Returns

Superman left the world for 5 years. I wanted to see how the world changed as a result. Show why the world needs or doesn't need Superman. After all, they mentioned it several times, that should have been the central thesis of the movie. If it was, it wasn't done well at all. And if it wasn't, they really shouldn't have even addressed that topic. I'm not expecting a dark rendition of the movie, I'm just expecting something more than I got, which was really unfocused, and meandering seemingly without a central theme.

They didn't even mention anything significant about how the world changed after Superman's departure. There was no dynamic in terms of how the world progresses into its re-embracing of Superman. He's just automatically embraced, there is no backlash, nothing whatsoever (save for Lois, and that was more of a personal issue than anything ideological). It's ultimately meaningless. We don't even see Superman's affect on the people. His heroism isn't demonstrated as an ideal that people seek to strive for. We see a few instances of heroism in the film (well, one that I can remember, really, and that involved Richard flying to rescue Lois even though he had no superpowers, and that too wasn't really selfless). We see Superman being selfless by turning back to rescue everyone else while Lois is in danger, showing he can put aside his personal feelings for the greater good. But we don't see how he inspires others or anything of that sort. We don't see the greater good of humanity really, just the greater good in Superman, and that was a given. I wish there were more uplifting moments in the movie, but there didn't seem to be many.

Given that he's practically invincible, he's selfless, and almost divine in terms of his qualities, there has to be another place for a sense of conflict other than an internal one or the superficial enemy of the week conflict. Lex Luthor's ridiculous machinations isn't where it should be coming from. It should be about the world and Superman's relation to it, his place among the people. And the movie failed to do that. I honestly didn't feel much of anything throughout the movie. There was not one moment where I was in awe of him or anyone around him, and that to me is a failure to make Superman relevant.

They should have spent the first 35 minutes with the world in turmoil without Superman imo .

[CaptainZombie]

Re: Superman Returns

http://filmforce.ign.com/articles/716/716385p1.html

Weekend Box Office
Superman flies into first place.
by IGN FilmForce
July 3, 2006 - After a 19-year absence, the Man of Steel returned to the silver screen this weekend in Warners' highly anticipated Superman Returns. According to studio estimates, the Bryan Singer-directed film, starring newcomer Brandon Routh as the title character, earned $52.15 million over its opening weekend; it has raked in $84.2 million since its late Tuesday night debut. The film earned $21 million on Wednesday alone.

Although solid numbers, industry expectations had pegged Superman Returns as opening far higher. As it stands, the movie fell far short of Spider-Man 2's record-breaking $152.4 million five-day opening in 2004. Superman did open better than last year's Batman Begins but that DC Comics screen adaptation did not carry a $250 million price tag.
Superman Returns had a record opening in its IMAX run, earning close to $5 million. The previous IMAX record was held by Batman Begins. The Last Son of Krypton also made about $19.8 million internationally during its opening weekend.

[Lintyfresh85]

Re: Superman Returns

saw it today... with my dislike for the Superman character aside I thought the movie was pretty decent. Could have done without the saving of every person in sight deal that Superman does but that's his thing I guess... A little cheesy in parts but overall I give it a 3 1/2 out of 5.

[SPTO]

Re: Superman Returns

http://filmforce.ign.com/articles/716/716385p1.html

Weekend Box Office
Superman flies into first place.
by IGN FilmForce
July 3, 2006 - After a 19-year absence, the Man of Steel returned to the silver screen this weekend in Warners' highly anticipated Superman Returns. According to studio estimates, the Bryan Singer-directed film, starring newcomer Brandon Routh as the title character, earned $52.15 million over its opening weekend; it has raked in $84.2 million since its late Tuesday night debut. The film earned $21 million on Wednesday alone.

Although solid numbers, industry expectations had pegged Superman Returns as opening far higher. As it stands, the movie fell far short of Spider-Man 2's record-breaking $152.4 million five-day opening in 2004. Superman did open better than last year's Batman Begins but that DC Comics screen adaptation did not carry a $250 million price tag.
Superman Returns had a record opening in its IMAX run, earning close to $5 million. The previous IMAX record was held by Batman Begins. The Last Son of Krypton also made about $19.8 million internationally during its opening weekend.

I expected stronger numbers. I guess the length of the movie and some of the fans' blase view of the movie may have affected word of mouth a bit.

[NovaStar]

Re: Superman Returns

But that's the thing, she had no idea the kid was Superman's. She had no idea she even slept with him. He made her forget it all at the end of part 2. When she slept with Superman, he had no powers if you remember. He then got his powers back and made her forget it all and left. She didn't realize the kid was Supe's until the piano throwing incident. It all may have started to click at that point. Her boyfriend mentioned the article "I Spent a Night with Superman" and she said it was an interview, nothing more. But if you looked at her face, it was like she was trying to remember it and couldn't, as she seemed to have no clue about it.

This is all my assumption, and we'd need a Bryan Singer commentary track to get 100% clarification though.

I saw it last night, it was o.k. The one thing that confused me was the whole child thing. Superman had sex with lois I guess when he became human in part 2. Well, we all know that superman is super not because of his genetic make up, but because the Yellow sun reacts with his DNA which makes him super. If his power is derived from the sun and how it reacts to him, once he becomes human how does he pass any super powers to a son? He fathered the child as a human not as a Kryptonian (superman). I just thought the whole child thing between he and lois could have been left out.

Also, the reason Superman was both able to land on the Krypto land and toss it at the end was due to a switch in philosophy on the part of the director. It seems that this version of Superman reacts to Kryptonite ("K") differently than prior versions. This version, the K saps his strength slowly, like a battery drain, which would make better sense. At the end when he tossed the K land, prior to doing so he flies up to the sun and gets re-energized to full strength so that the energy drain would effect him later rather than sooner, it was consistent. It was kind of like Spiderman having his webbing being part of his body rather than contained in web fluid packets, that change made more sense to me as well.

[neovsmatrix]

Re: Superman Returns

I saw it last night, it was o.k. The one thing that confused me was the whole child thing. Superman had sex with lois I guess when he became human in part 2. Well, we all know that superman is super not because of his genetic make up, but because the Yellow sun reacts with his DNA which makes him super. If his power is derived from the sun and how it reacts to him, once he becomes human how does he pass any super powers to a son? He fathered the child as a human not as a Kryptonian (superman). I just thought the whole child thing between he and lois could have been left out.

Also, the reason Superman was both able to land on the Krypto land and toss it at the end was due to a switch in philosophy on the part of the director. It seems that this version of Superman reacts to Kryptonite ("K") differently than prior versions. This version, the K saps his strength slowly, like a battery drain, which would make better sense. At the end when he tossed the K land, prior to doing so he flies up to the sun and gets re-energized to full strength so that the energy drain would effect him later rather than sooner, it was consistent. It was kind of like Spiderman having his webbing being part of his body rather than contained in web fluid packets, that change made more sense to me as well.

I think the main question should be how Superman is deprived of his powers in Superman 2 to begin with? I don't think his genetic makeup changes (that, as far as I know, is impossible), it's that certain genes are able to be turned on or off. Perhaps a gene that makes him receptive to the yellow Sun is turned off so that he can become "human". That doesn't mean the kid won't have the gene in its active form or whatever since Superman is his father. The kid will have a similar genetic makeup to Superman, possibly with the gene making him receptive to the yellow Sun in its active form. Thus, the kid has superpowers too.

[neovsmatrix]

Re: Superman Returns

Interesting. I took Singer's presentation of Lois' feelings as that of the general public as well. So what she was saying and her resulting feelings were supposed to be a direct reflection of humanity.

I also took from Clark/Kal-el/Superman sitting at home changing through channels as him seeing what had become of the world while he was gone (war in Iraq, terrorism, etc).

Again, all in all it is a comic book movie and probably not meant to cover the wide spectrum of issues you are addressing.

They never indicate that the general public's feelings are in line with Lois's to begin with though. There's no backlash, and you never see it. Lois's feelings don't seem to come from any ideological viewpoint, they come from personal feelings of desertion. So her own feelings cannot reflect those of the general public, since there's a personal element involved. If the director tried to express the general public's feelings toward Superman through Lois, it was a bad move on his part, and it was ineffective.

As for Clark sifting through the channels on the TV to see how the world has changed, it's only a passing reference, one that should have been made more out of, especially to establish the NEED for Superman. As it is, Superman's presence is pretty much a non-factor to the audience. It doesn't seem like his departure and return was anything of significance, and so his return feels ultimately empty.

There are quite a few superhero movies that address these issues and do it far more effectively, IMHO. Batman Begins for one, is a comic book movie, yet it is a movie that uses these ideas as the narrative focus. So the excuse that Superman Returns is just a comic book movie, so it can't be expected to address these topics, is a poor one at that.

[NovaStar]

Re: Superman Returns

I think the main question should be how Superman is deprived of his powers in Superman 2 to begin with? I don't think his genetic makeup changes (that, as far as I know, is impossible), it's that certain genes are able to be turned on or off. Perhaps a gene that makes him receptive to the yellow Sun is turned off so that he can become "human". That doesn't mean the kid won't have the gene in its active form or whatever since Superman is his father. The kid will have a similar genetic makeup to Superman, possibly with the gene making him receptive to the yellow Sun in its active form. Thus, the kid has superpowers too.

What's up Neo, good to hear from you. I haven't chatted with you since our Matrix discussion. Remember my question.."Trinity ressurrected Neo, Neo resurrected Trinity, what resurrected Mr. Smith?" I know off topic, but I just recently saw the Matrix and I thought about you. At anyrate, When superman went into the chamber (in the second movie) he was warned by his father that he would be human, suffer like them, die like them etc...and that the process was irrereversible. It would have been after that, that he and lois produced the child. I am saying that the Sun gives superman his power, once he went throught the human processing he would have had no power to pass. In effect both he and lois were human at the time of the conception of the child, he would have had no powers to pass. It would seem almost impossible for his DNA to not have been the medium for his change from Kryptonian to Human. And what was up with the kid having asthma? Was that psychosymatic?