Rating:  -
I wanted to love this movie, I really, really did. But I can't say that I do. First I'll examine the plot. Okay, Superman leaves Earth for 5 years searching for Krypton...hold on...why would he be searching for Krypton in the first place? He KNOWS it was destroyed thus this aspect of the plot makes zero sense. Next, Lois Lane has a child that is seemingly his yet she doesn't seem to know that Superman is Clark Kent. This totally destroys Superman's character as the all american boy scout and once again leaves me scratching my head wondering why. Next, Lex has a plot to make himself rich that sounds suprizingly like what happened in the first Superman movie when Luthor caused half of California to drop into the ocean.
Now, on to the cast. Who are these people? They cast not one role correctly in this entire movie. I'm sure Tom Welling and the rest of the Smallville cast had contractual obligations that prevented them from starring in this movie but that doesn't excuse the poor choices made for all these iconic characters. Where is Christopher Reeve, may he rest in peace, when you need him? Or Tom Welling for that matter. I say go buy the original Superman movie and the Richard Donner cut of Superman 2 if you want to see some good Superman movies. Don't waste your time on this one. The only reason I own it is because I bought the Ultimate Superman collection which includes all the Superman movies.
Rating:  -
When I saw Superman Returns in the theaters, I had hopes that it would be Superman with a more realistic edge to it (to reflect the darker Superman suit), basically a character driven drama with action in it kind of like Batman Begins. What we got was more of the same campy, unrealistic, nonsensical approach that produced Superman III, IV, & V and the last 2 Schumaker Batman movies that almost killed the franchise. I actually heard people groan several times DURING the movie and afterwards there was DEAD SILENCE. I haven't heard that kind of lack of response from a packed theater for a Super hero movie since I saw the last Hulk movie. To put it bluntly, IT STUNK!!! AND now I'm hearing that there is another one in the works? I would tell anyone who is interested in this not to waste their money, unless, that is if you like campy movies and a good laugh. Buy either the first TWO Superman movies (both are on blu-ray), or better yet, buy BATMAN BEGINS (coming to Blu-ray in July) and see how a REAL super hero movie SHOULD be.
Rating:  -
Finally, a return not only of the man of steel, but of movie makers who know what makes a superman movie great. No more billionaire Luthor wannabes. No more lame solar-powered superman clones. No more women getting inexplicably assimilated with silver circuit boards all over their faces. This is just a good-old-fashioned Superman adventure with a little humor, a little sexual tension and a whole lot of Superman doing what he does best.
Admittedly, it is a bit heavy on the soap opera at times, but that is mainly because they have to be sure to re-introduce the characters to a movie-going audience that hasn't seen them on the big screen in 19 years. And not in a *good* movie for 26. But even with the soap-opera aspects present, this is a great follow-up to the first two movies, conveniently pretending that Supermans III and IV never happened. (As do many of the fans.)
Spacey is wonderful as Lex Luthor. Gene Hackman played up Luthor's charisma and self-importance superbly. Spacey, however, creates a Luthor that can truly scare you with a glance.
Superb movie, and I can't wait for the follow-up.
Rating: -
You gotta wonder what went through director Bryan Singer's head. After pretty much re-inventing the comic book movie wheel with the first two X-Men movies, he wisely stepped away from the franchise (resulting in the bloated dross that was X-Men: Last Stand), deciding to concentrate on a new superhero film, starring the world's best known hero.
And guess what? It's even WORSE than the film he walked away from.
For starters, Singer (along with seemingly the rest of the world) seems to think that the 1970s Superman movie, and in particular Christopher Reeve, are the only representations of the DC comic book. What's the first thing you read about new Supes Brandon Routh, what's the first thing people had to say about him? "Oh, he looks JUST like Christopher Reeve!" SO WHAT? Why is it so essential to stay fixated on those movies? Why do we never hear references made to the Kirk Alyn Superman? Or George Reeves, who (arguably) made an even bigger impact in the tights than his similarly named counterpart?
But I digress. So, Superman Returns, then. Taken five years after Superman II (with Superman 3 and 4 being nixed from continuity - hmmm, messing around with continuity and carelessly discarding what's come before it? Yup, it's based on a DC comic, alright), we find that, for no real reason, Superman flew away for five years and let Lois Lane grow both more attractive and several years younger. That was nice of him. And wouldn't you know it, he's not back five minutes and already Lois is in dire peril - how did she survive all this time without him?
While we're on the subject of Superman III and IV being wiped out because they were, well, crap, let's get one thing straight; the entire Superman FRANCHISE, including those holier than thou first two movies, aren't exactly perfect either. There are dozens of howlers in those movies, from Superman flying around the world so fast he turns back time (um, why not just do that for EVERYTHING bad that happens?), to Superman kissing Lois and WIPING HER MEMORY (it's Rohypnol Man!). Are we to pretend those things didn't happen as well?
Anyway, in this one, what follows is a plot so ludicrous and half-baked you often wonder whether you should laugh or feel insulted. True, Superman is the most boring, two-dimensional character in comics, but even he deserves a better story than this. Spacey, a great actor, thinks hamming it up and yelling is all you need to be a great villain (if we're going to be obsessed with the 70s films, Gene Hackman was a much, much better Luthor), the chemistry between Lois and Clark is non-existent, and let's get to the REAL one-fingered salute to the fans, the franchise and the comic books themselves. If you want to avoid spoilers, look away now..
Lois has a son from "another guy." Who, after playing piano with the nicest kidnapper in the world, suddenly reveals he has SUPER POWERS TOO. That's right - it's actually Superman's son! Not only would this be a biological impossibility, (wouldn't Clark's Super Sperm, just, you know, blast right through Lois?) but it also kills the entire series STONE DEAD. So, what, are we going to have SuperBoy in the next film (and make no mistake about it, Superman Returns is an obvious attempt at a franchise starter)? So we're basically going to ignore decades of continuity and just make stuff up for no reason?
And then there's the fact that Superman isn't exactly, well, Super in this film to begin with. Yeah, he does some (nice looking) stuff like catching airplanes and having bullets bounce off his eyeballs, but when it really comes down to it, all he does it sulk, pick things up, and then get the snot beaten out of him by Luthor. Um.. awesome.
It's a mess. A boring, pretentious, worthy mess. Which, in the days of spot-on comic book adaptations like Spider-Man 2 (and most recently Iron Man) is simply unacceptable.
Send it to the Phantom Zone.
Rating: -
It is a shame that with all the resources at his command this is the best that Bryan Singer could do.
While the movie is obviously and heavy handedly about faith and the place it has in our cynical lives with Superman as a misplaced messiah, the choice of inserting it into the original Superman movie continuity did not benefit anyone. Because as the audience has changed, so have the characters and their circumstances.
And therein lies the movie's main weakness. It feels old and silly. If I pay good money to watch Superman, I want to see him save the world. Beat unsurmountable odds and defeat a gigantic horde that threatens Earth, or a formidable foe bent on terminating our very existence.
I don't want to see a ridiculous real-estate obsessed Lex Luthor. I want to see a man whose very intellect signifies the height of human potential, and yet he selfishly chooses to use it for personal gain.
I don't care for an apocryphal super baby. Don't they know that marrying Spiderman is widely accepted as one of the main barriers between the character and his readers? Why get responsibility in the way of wish fulfillment?
I don't want to see Superman fight an Evil Continent. I want to see him trade blows with Darkseid, outwit Brainiac or Luthor, heck, I'd even take Mongul. Fighting an evil land mass managed to sink below the Hulk fighting a poodle in terms of sheer boredom.
And most of all: Don't EVER hire a young actor to impersonate an old actor. There is a reason Reeves was loved as Superman; he brought his own charisma into the character.
Things they got right:
Action sequences.
Special effects.
Photography.
Discreet and well paced story telling.
Kumar (Kal Penn) kicked Superman.
Kate Bosworth. Gotta thank her parents sometime.
|
