Superman Returns Reviews Thread

[TheShadow]

The film is out! Discuss what you thought here!

I myself am seeing it on Friday.

[TheShadow]

Okay, well, I've seen it twice now in IMAX (The 3D thing is okay, but I honestly didn't find much of a difference in terms of viewing. And it kinda takes you out of the film when they give you the visual cues of when to wear the 3D glasses).

It's quite an enjoyable and entertaining film.

But my basic problem with it was how derivative it seemed to be from the 1978 film. Don't get me wrong; when I saw that Singer was basically making a loose sequel to Superman II, I knew what to expect. The 3D credits sequence. The John Williams themes. Brandon Routh doing the "fly across the Earth and look into the camera and smile before we go to the end credits" that Reeve did. Even characters referring to the events of those films ("If your father was still alive..." "You act like you've been here before." "I forgot how warm you are.").

I liked Spacey's Lex and he is far from a rehash of Hackman performance-wise, but scriptwise?
We have a Lex Luthor with yet another plan to destroy U.S. property so that he can profit from the real estate all thanks to his father (Lionel? jk) always telling him about land when he was young (not to mention that they lifted Lex's explanation from STM complete with the exchange: "Get out" "Before that.")
He has no problems with killing billions of innocent lives and gets a hedonistic pleasure out of saying so.
He has a girlfriend who dresses in glamorous clothes, puts on a disguise at one point, provides a distraction as Lex and his goons make progress with their plans, has a crush on Superman, and ultimately betrays Lex.
Lest we forget, he steals Kryptonite imported from Abbis Ababa in a museum, uses it on Superman as an example of "mind over muscle," and leaves Superman to drown with it in water.
I'm sorry but the many similar plot points are almost bordering on absurd. It's one thing to pay tribute, it's another thing to simply take the barebones outline of Luthor's plot from 1978, twist it around a bit, and pass it off as original.

In contrast, it had a lot of potential for new, unexplored material. Lex, for example, has some great moments that stray from the Donner films. "Gods are selfish beings who fly around in little red capes and don't share their power with mankind." Or Lex describing New Krypton as "alien" and lacking "that human touch." It's Lex seeing himself as the supreme human keeping the alien Superman in check. I find that much more interesting than a Lex who wants to sell land while killing his potential customers. Yet we only got two lines of that perspective of Lex.

Why couldn't we have gotten a Lex who used Gertrude Vanderworth's money to start up LexCorp (I know that the Donner films' Luthor was way before LexCorp's time, but I wouldn't mind a fusion of the two)?
Even in the old films, Luthor is an arrogant narcisstic bastard and a genius. I could see him pretending to the public that he's cleaned up his act during Superman's five year absence while secretly preparing for the Man of Steel's return. Imagine Superman coming back to Metropolis to find that the people's hero there is none other than...Lex Luthor. That would be twisted.
Plus, at LexCorp, Lex could easily hatch new original plans (unrelated to real estate) that he thinks he could profit from. It would still have Superman saving people and stopping disasters, yet it would be original.

It also could've gone more in depth with Superman's return.
Lois says in the film, "I moved on. So did the rest of us. The world doesn't need a savior. And neither do I." In the context of the film, she may as well have said, "I moved on. I don't need a savior" without mentioning anyone else. Why?
She's the only one in the film questioning why Superman "abandoned" them. She's the only one resentful of it. She's the only one who seems to have attempted to move on in a world without Superman. Aren't there other people who wondered where exactly he went (besides Lois and Perry)? Why he left Earth? I just think that they could've gone much more in depth with "a world that has moved on from Superman" than just changing Lois's lifestyle.

There was a cut scene in which Clark discovers that Martha and Ben Hubbard have been dating. He's shocked by the fact that his mother would even be involved with a man who isn't his father (let's also remember from STM that he hooked them up in the first place by having Ben help Martha on the farm!). I would rather have seen that than the pointless Smallville flashback (it was cool and all but...what was the point? It had no relevance to the plot. It's not like we need a demonstration of his powers before seeing him in the suit. This isn't an origin film like Begins in which we need to see how he came to be. And if they were going to do a flashback in Smallville, they should've put in Jonathan Kent since the father-son dynamic was a big theme in this film)

How about other people resenting Superman for leaving? Not necessarily major characters. Maybe Clark overhears a conversation or watches something on the news. Anything! The film made it way too easy for people to accept him; it's as if the world only needs Superman if something outlandish happens (Lex Luthor's plans, a bank robbery with a supermonstrous gatling gun) or to prevent smaller disasters (people falling off buildings, houses on fire). Let's see the perspectives of people that Superman wasn't there to save. The people who took it for granted that he'd be there, but he wasn't. What are their stories?

And after we see that the WORLD has moved on, then the filmmakers could make Superman's "death" his ultimate redemption is the eyes of the world. He saves all their lives and appears to have sacrificed his life for them. I know that sounds all Passion-of-the-Christ, but it would've made for a far more satisfying conclusion.

And Jason White....how does he have powers if Clark was human when he and Lois had sex in Superman II? How come Lois never questions Superman on this since she doesn't remember? Does she suddenly remember those events? I liked the kid. The scene with Superman saying the Brando speech was touching to me. But Jason certainly complicates things. Does Richard know who his son's real father is? Is Superman ever going to be with Lois? If so, how would Richard be out of the equation? And if they took out Richard, could they do it without making it seem that Superman has just broken apart a family? We'll see how the sequels pan out, but I think Superman Returns could've been done well without Richard & Jason.

As for the positives...Routh is an awesome successor to Reeve. Not just in the look (which I found to be a given), but in his protrayal as well. He doesn't have to speak in some parts, you can just sympathize with his Clark and root for his Superman from his expressions.
Spacey, again, gives a good performance despite given the rehashed material.
There was some rather original ideas that I liked a lot. Superman saving Perry White for a change worked quite well. A brute thug playing the piano was delightful humor. Superman saving the plane and landing it in the middle of a baseball field. Jimmy getting pwned by a twelve year old with a cell phone. Lois getting the Pulitzer.
The cinematography is gorgeous. That and Ottman's score work hand and hand and give us some great scenes that send chills down your spine. The best example is Superman gaining his strength back from the sun. It's beautiful.

All in all, it's worth watching. It's exciting, fun, and enjoyable. But it could've been much deeper in exploring the world's view of Superman and more original as well, putting it up to par with Batman Begins and the other great superhero films of today.

[ROBOTRON]

Great synopsis...thank you. I have not yet seen the film, I'm still afraid of it. The storyline is so contrary to any Superman we've known, it seems absurd.

However, I'm getting courage now...I think I'll check it out soon.