Superman Returns

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I liked the guy who played Superman - thought he filled the part really well. Just didn't think it was much of a "Return".

Kevin Spacey never ceases to irritate me.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I liked the guy who played Superman - thought he filled the part really well. Just didn't think it was much of a "Return".

Kevin Spacey never ceases to irritate me.

Yes! I watched it over the weekend and thought it was well done - better than any of the Christopher Reeve's versions. Kevin Spacey played a much more sinister and believable Lex Luther than Gene Hackman. I understand what you mean about being irritating - he has a sort of smooth, indifferent tone in his voice - you see it in all his films (His best performance was in American Beauty because that tone fit the character perfectly - total indifference). However, he did show tension and distress with this character.

Bryan Singer who I believe wrote the screenplay and directed this movie was the director of, "The Usual Suspects" and the first two X-Men films.

[Gatorfan 0]

I was a bit disappointed because it seemed much of the movie a repeat of the other movies. Also, the whole time I felt like Bryan Singer was using this movie as a stepping stone for the sequel in 2009.

The preview for Spiderman looked really good.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

The criticism I had is that the story never really addresses Superman's return, just that he goes off for an apparently pointless 5-year jaunt and bizarrely seems to be surprised that everything has moved on in his absence.

There was no confrontation with his past, which was kind of what I was expecting - it looked like they were trying to create that, but as it was never really established to begin with I found it ultimately lacked catharsis.

Batman Begins for instance, did that very well - as did Spiderman 2.

Edited July 4, 2006 by Fishdude

[luvaLimey 0]

I saw it with my kids.

Thing that impressed me most was that it wasn't all about the graphics and special effects. Yeah, they were there, but they were so well done you almost didn't even think about them.

I remember watching some of the superman movies in the theater when I was a little girl, and I honestly went into this hoping they hadn't ruined the franchise. I was very pleased that they hadn't, and that right from the start it "felt" like a Superman movie to me.

Kevin Spacey was a much more believabe Lex Luthor than Gene Hackman was. I was never afraid of Gene Hackman, but Kevin Spacey had some pretty scary moments in that flick.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Anything was better than "Terence Stamp and his band of Blakes 7 cast offs"

Kneel to Zod!

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I saw it with my kids.

Thing that impressed me most was that it wasn't all about the graphics and special effects. Yeah, they were there, but they were so well done you almost didn't even think about them.

I remember watching some of the superman movies in the theater when I was a little girl, and I honestly went into this hoping they hadn't ruined the franchise. I was very pleased that they hadn't, and that right from the start it "felt" like a Superman movie to me.

Kevin Spacey was a much more believabe Lex Luthor than Gene Hackman was. I was never afraid of Gene Hackman, but Kevin Spacey had some pretty scary moments in that flick.

I love the part when Lois Lane's son starts playing the piano and the crook joins in, meanwhile peaking around the piano to keep an eye on Lois. For any parent, that was a creepy moment and I really felt Lois' desperation and then the big payoff when the piano crushes the guy to death....hehehe.

The criticism I had is that the story never really addresses Superman's return, just that he goes off for an apparently pointless 5-year jaunt and bizarrely seems to be surprised that everything has moved on in his absence.

There was no confrontation with his past, which was kind of what I was expecting - it looked like they were trying to create that, but as it was never really established to begin with I found it ultimately lacked catharsis.

Batman Begins for instance, did that very well - as did Spiderman 2.

I think you have to go into a movie like that without any preconceived ideas of what it should be and then just let it be what it is. You make some valid points but in the end, it's a stand alone movie with it's own story. Comic books are very much that same way - not much explanation as to what happened before - it's a segue (sp) into the real story - Lex Luther's fascination with crystals and volatility of Superman's own planet. I thought it was really well told.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I think you have to go into a movie like that without any preconceived ideas of what it should be and then just let it be what it is. You make some valid points but in the end, it's a stand alone movie with it's own story. Comic books are very much that same way - not much explanation as to what happened before - it's a segue (sp) into the real story - Lex Luther's fascination with crystals and volatility of Superman's own planet. I thought it was really well told.

I don't think I had preconceivved ideas about it - it just seems to me that the story was lacking in one regard and that the character wasn't all that invested in the action.

Superman has a huge mythology dating back to the comics and I think it was handled very respectfully. That said, from a story telling point of view you can tell when something doesn't quite fit.

I don't think I had preconceived ideas about it - it just seems to me that the story was lacking in one regard and that the character wasn't all that invested in what was going on. I didn't think that (dramatically) Superman's disappearance did anything for the character - you didn't find out anything more about him, it didn't change him so much as it changed others - but realistically speaking Lois Lane was the only real character who changed.

Superman has a huge mythology dating back to the comics and I think it was handled very respectfully. That said, from a story telling point of view you can tell when something doesn't quite fit.

That's why I mentioned Spiderman 2 - Peter Parker's difficulty in dealing with his superhero identity leads to him giving up his powers. At the point in the story where that happens, you are familiar enough with the character and his problems to empathise with his decision.

The same with Batman - its cathartic that the villain turns out to be Bruce Wayne's substitute father figure, and him destroying his past is symbolic of the character's central struggle.

Edited July 4, 2006 by Fishdude

[Anyta Holland 1]

Somebody recommended not to go and see it... He said it was rubbish...

[BelwinMills 0]

I enjoyed it but you have to go in with an open mind!

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I don't think I had preconceived ideas about it - it just seems to me that the story was lacking in one regard and that the character wasn't all that invested in what was going on. I didn't think that (dramatically) Superman's disappearance did anything for the character - you didn't find out anything more about him, it didn't change him so much as it changed others - but realistically speaking Lois Lane was the only real character who changed.

Superman has a huge mythology dating back to the comics and I think it was handled very respectfully. That said, from a story telling point of view you can tell when something doesn't quite fit.

That's why I mentioned Spiderman 2 - Peter Parker's difficulty in dealing with his superhero identity leads to him giving up his powers. At the point in the story where that happens, you are familiar enough with the character and his problems to empathise with his decision.

The same with Batman - its cathartic that the villain turns out to be Bruce Wayne's substitute father figure, and him destroying his past is symbolic of the character's central struggle.

Don't hate me, but I didn't like Spiderman 2 or Batman Begins that much - but for different reasons. The L Train sequence was just too over-the-top that it broke any suspended disbelief for me. The first Batman movie directed by Tim Burton I believe was the best by far - stylistically and Jack Nicholson was impeccable as the Joker.

But back to Superman - yes I kind of wondered in the beginning why he left, but he explains it in his conversation with his mother. There was the theme of him not fitting in that sold that part of the story for me. Something happened where he felt so alienated and isolated from humans that he was willing to search the universe for any possible survivors from Krypton like himself. I've seen this with adopted children as adults - sometimes they will abandon everything to go find out some kernel of their past. And the reprecussions were obvious in the tension between Lois, her fiance and Superman - love lost and love gained.

[dalegg 143]

Okay, so how come nobody put it together that Clark disappeared at the same time as Superman and returned the exact same day 5 years later??? And who the hell is going to buy land with all those rocks sticking straight up out of the ground?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Okay, so how come nobody put it together that Clark disappeared at the same time as Superman and returned the exact same day 5 years later??? And who the hell is going to buy land with all those rocks sticking straight up out of the ground?

hehehe...you just pointed out the weakest parts of the story. It was clever when he was sitting down with his mouth full of food right after taking Lois for a flight.

[tomica52 0]

I liked the guy who played Superman - thought he filled the part really well. Just didn't think it was much of a "Return".

Kevin Spacey never ceases to irritate me.

Agreed. Not sure why they made it a "return"

And BTW Clark was away on business...

[Marilyn. 340]

My hubby and I liked the movie

That seems to be the whole point of the movies... it is so obvious to us the Clark and Superman are one and the same but everyone in the movie doesn't seem to be able to see it

Edited July 5, 2006 by MarilynP