Brandon Routh. Did a great job. Even sounded EXACTLY like Chris Reeve in a few scenes.
Kevin Spacey. Star of the show. Gene Hackman's comic bullying with truely terrifying moments of malice.
Plenty of nods to the Christopher Reeve movies, including the opening credits and the final shot as Superman flies off camera.
John Williams' score revisited. Blaine likey.
Special effects. Good, but not great. The flying was spectacular, but some shots were pretty bad. Like Smallville bad.
And now, SPOILERS: . . . . . . . . . After Superman lifts the landmass into space, he falls in, yup, a crucified position. And the beating scene felt like The Passion all over again.
Haha, SUPERBOY. Interesting idea to make Superman a father, but I'm not so sure I'm going to like where it leads.
Now I'm going to sleep. I'll probably (hopefully?) make more sense in the morning.
Posted by Bean Counter (Member # 6001) on :
I thought it was kind of strange that Superman had never killed anyone before, but in this movie his child does. Then of course while lifting the growing land mass the three thugs who beat him are crushed, so he is still up on Jr.
So, did Lois put Krypotinte in the inhaler to keep Sup Jr under wraps? The Smallville arc is not cannon, but I believe little Super tyke lifting a car is, what exactly is going on there?
One hopes Superman has a way to find and recover his chrystals, I think that is the assumption at the end as he goes off to space.
It was interesting that Superman became a "Deadbeat Dad" off finding himself while his kid was growing up, and that his X wrote a bitter story about it, very Springer...
I did like the fact that things that Superman grabed buckle and bend, and people get tossed around inside, though Lois took some jolts that looked leathal to me on the way down in the plane. There is a Comic Book Canon that Superman has a personal Telekinetec field that he extends by contact to objects he touches, but it is not common knowlege so the other looks better.
Last of all, How bout that Spiderman Trailer Teaser? Nice and dark, lots of tears and angst with Sandman and Venom figured in, pretty cool...
BC
Posted by Chris Bridges (Member # 1138) on :
OK, the thrill has worn off and I can look more critically at the movie now. When I left the theater it was with a strong sense of "ohboyohboyohboy" yammering in my brain while the quiet voice of the armchair director kept trying to say, "Hey, wait a minute..."
First, let me stress that I did like the movie. I liked the actors and I liked the feel and I liked the effects and I liked the acknowledgement of physics and I liked the new look to Metropolis (no longer NYC with some Metropolis signs tacked on, this city had a feel of its own) and I got the same chills down my spine I remember from decades ago. This was undoubtedly a Superman movie, and I'm very glad it got made. I'll see it again and buy it on DVD and hope for a sequel.
But a couple of the things in it bother me, quite a bit. Not the piddly things, like why no one connected Clark's reappearance after five years with Superman's coincidental return. For one thing, that was addressed in the movie; note how virtually everyone (except possibly for Jimmy) ignores or dismisses Clark right away. You might notice his resemblance to Superman but only if you actually looked, and no one ever does. This isn't the "Lois and Clark" Clark who's a star reporter and part of the Lane and Kent writing team. This Clark is a solid but unremarkable reporter who only got his job back because someone died. Also, from what I understand there was a scene shot of Martha Kent addressing postcards from Clark to be postmarked from Tibet or wherever to help maintain the illusion, but it was never used. And Clark's little spaceship must have a damn good drive in it if he can make a roundtrip in half a decade even though Jor-El, in his own words, has been dead for "many thousands of your years."
No, those are details that I'm willing to swallow for a bigger story. It's that bigger story that bothers me.
First, the movie's believability hinges on three things: that I believe that Superman is incredibly irresponsible, that Luthor is incredibly stupid, and that Lois hopped in bed with some new guy the instant Superman left the atmosphere.
I do not accept Superman abandoning the Earth, Lois, and humanity without some sort of mention. I just don't. It's irresponsible. And, since for other plot points to work he would have had to leave pretty much immediately after the events of Superman II, that would mean that within days of saying to the President, "Good afternoon, Mr. President, sorry I've been away so long, I won't let you down again," he bailed. I don't think so. It's failing his duty, not to mention he had to know what it would do to Lois. Didn't work for me.
There's no way Luthor could have thought his plan would work. I didn't see that he'd made any plans for dealing with anything besides Superman, but he would have had to know that he'd be attacked by every other country in the world. Long before the United States went under the waves they'd have launched everything they had at him. And who would buy land from him after he committed genocide? Who would want to live on a barren rock? Unless he can jigger some of those crystals to produce crop-bearing land, it simply wasn't workable. It would have made more sense for him to whip a crystal into the middle of the Pacific Ocean. He would have proven his father wrong (you can make more land), it wouldn't have immediately caused a world war, and he'd be emperor of his own, brand-new, Superman-proof continent. There still would have been massive loss of life due to coastal flooding, but it might not have affected Metropolis, which I guess was a design spec.
And if Lois thought Jason was Richard's son, it must be because she celebrated Superman's disappearance by jumping in the sack with some new guy immediately. Mr. Singer? Most women and all OB-GYN doctors can do the math. I'm willing to accept the kid, however, if and only if they don't shy away from the repurcussions in future movies. How would Lois react to finding out Superman wiped her memories? How would Lois react to finding out she'd discovered his identity, had sex with him, and then Superman wiped her memories? From her current point of view, she's been date-raped. Even if he convinced her it was for the best, how could she trust him again?
And one big problem: why isn't Superman American anymore? Not to be jingoist or even nationalist, but a big part of who Superman is came from his identification with American ideals as personified by Jonathan and Martha Kent. Here Perry White asked, "Does he still stand for truth, justice, and... all that stuff?" Reportedly Singer didn't want to alienate foreign markets with the phrase "American Way," but I think it was a bad call.
But what really bothered me is that clearly Superman is the main character here and Clark Kent is the disguise, whereas in my favorite stories of the character it's exactly the other way around. He's human, no matter where he came from, and the simple, bedrock-solid moral compass of the Kents defined Superman's values. In the first movie, when he's anguishing over Lois, he wavers between Jor-El's commandment and Pa Kent's teaching and he goes with Pa. In the second he chooses humanity and love over power, and then sacrifices his own happiness to save others. In this movie he is Jor-El's only begotten son and that's the end of it. He makes no moral choices in this movie, other than ducking responsibilities, and that's just not Superman to me.
I really did love the movie, despite the disappointments, the false notes, and the almost complete lack of good quotable lines that the first two movies were crammed full of. But I hope Singer and Co. address these issues in the next one.
[ June 28, 2006, 04:56 PM: Message edited by: Chris Bridges ]
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by Chris Bridges: OK, the thrill has worn off and I can look more critically at the movie now. When I left the theater it was with a strong sense of "ohboyohboyohboy" yammering in my brain while the quiet voice of the armchair director kept trying to say, "Hey, wait a minute..."
First, let me stress that I did like the movie. I liked the actors and I liked the feel and I liked the effects and I liked the acknowledgement of physics and I liked the new look to Metropolis (no longer NYC with some Metropolis signs tacked on, this city had a feel of its own) and I got the same chills down my spine I remember from decades ago. This was undoubtedly a Superman movie, and I'm very glad it got made. I'll see it again and buy it on DVD and hope for a sequel.
But a couple of the things in it bother me, quite a bit. Not the piddly things, like why no one connected Clark's reappearance after five years with Superman's coincidental return. For one thing, that was addressed in the movie; note how virtually everyone (except possibly for Jimmy) ignores or dismisses Clark right away. You might notice his resemblance to Superman but only if you actually looked, and no one ever does. This isn't the "Lois and Clark" Clark who's a star reporter and part of the Lane and Kent writing team. This Clark is a solid but unremarkable reporter who only got his job back because someone died. Also, from what I understand there was a scene shot of Martha Kent addressing postcards from Clark to be postmarked from Tibet or wherever to help maintain the illusion, but it was never used. And Clark's little spaceship must have a damn good drive in it if he can make a roundtrip in half a decade even though Jor-El, in his own words, has been dead for "many thousands of your years."
No, those are details that I'm willing to swallow for a bigger story. It's that bigger story that bothers me.
First, the movie's believability hinges on two things: that I believe that Superman is incredibly irresponsible, and that Luthor is incredibly stupid.
I do not accept Superman abandoning the Earth, Lois, and humanity without some sort of mention. I just don't. It's irresponsible. And, since for other plot points to work he would have had to leave pretty much immediately after the events of Superman II, that would mean that within days of saying to the President, "Good afternoon, Mr. President, sorry I've been away so long, I won't let you down again," he bailed. I don't think so. It's failing his duty, not to mention he had to know what it would do to Lois. Didn't work for me.
There's no way Luthor could have thought his plan would work. I didn't see that he'd made any plans for dealing with anything besides Superman, but he would have had to know that he'd be attacked by every other country in the world. Long before the United States went under the waves they'd have launched everything they had at him. And who would buy land from him after he committed genocide? Who would want to live on a barren rock? Unless he can jigger some of those crystals to produce crop-bearing land, it simply wasn't workable. It would have made more sense for him to whip a crystal into the middle of the Pacific Ocean. He would have proven his father wrong (you can make more land), it wouldn't have immediately caused a world war, and he'd be emperor of his own, brand-new, Superman-proof continent. There still would have been massive loss of life due to coastal flooding, but it might not have affected Metropolis, which I guess was a design spec.
More problems. Since Lois apparently had no doubts that Jason was Richard's son, she must have celebrated Superman's disappearance by jumping in the sack with some new guy immediately. Mr. Singer? Most women and all OB-GYN doctors can do the math. I'm willing to accept the kid, however, if and only if they don't shy away from the repurcussions in future movies. How would Lois react to finding out Superman wiped her memories? How would Lois react to finding out she'd discovered his identity, had sex with him, and then Superman wiped her memories? From her current point of view, she's been date-raped. Even if he convinced her it was for the best, how could she trust him again?
And one big problem: why isn't Superman American anymore? Not to be jingoist or even nationalist, but a big part of who Superman is came from his identification with American ideals as personified by Jonathan and Martha Kent. Here Perry White asked, "Does he still stand for truth, justice, and... all that stuff?" Reportedly Singer didn't want to alienate foreign markets with the phrase "American Way," but I think it was a bad call.
But what really bothered me is that clearly Superman is the main character here and Clark Kent is the disguise, whereas in my favorite stories of the character it's exactly the other way around. He's human, no matter where he came from, and the simple, bedrock-solid moral compass of the Kents defined Superman's values. In the first movie, when he's anguishing over Lois, he wavers between Jor-El's commandment and Pa Kent's teaching and he goes with Pa. In the second he chooses humanity and love over power, and then sacrifices his own happiness to save others. He makes no moral choices in this movie, other than ducking responsibilities, and that's just not Superman to me.
I really did love the movie, despite the disappointments, the false notes, and the almost complete lack of good quotable lines that the first two movies were crammed full of. But I hope Singer and Co. address these issues in the next one.
You have quite the wait ahead of you unfortunately
DENIED! Well at least as long as Singer feels he needs for his vacation.
Posted by Puffy Treat (Member # 7210) on :
According to the novelization, Chris, Clark didn't think he'd be gone for five years. He was planning on being gone for a couple of months, at most, until he was knocked off course and years got added to his travel time.
I take it that scene was not in the movie?
Posted by Chris Bridges (Member # 1138) on :
Nope. Would've helped a lot. Even a quick line added to the scene were Clark is comforting Martha after returning. "I thought I'd only be gone for a couple of months, Ma, but I got thrown off course. I'm sorry." One of the biggest complaints about the movie, gone in one line of dialogue.
A quick googling found this quote from Singer: "I don't know about the first release of the DVD, but there's a sequence I cut from the movie, a pretty significant sequence, and that sequence will appear at some point on (a DVD edition of the movie). It's kind of a fun look into Superman's journey off the Earth (into space that) I didn't use it in the movie. It might be on the DVD. I haven't decided yet."
[ June 28, 2006, 05:05 PM: Message edited by: Chris Bridges ]
Posted by Lord Solar Macharius (Member # 7775) on :
Like you Chris, for me there were a couple of things that logically didn’t click but I was just too damn entertained to care. I’m going to have a shot at trying to combat some of your points – sit back, and struggle through the ride.
While I agree that it is pretty irresponsible just upping and leaving, there are a couple of thoughts that soften the blow. First of all, I remember reading that part of the cut beginning scenes you quoted involved Lex getting Stanford to put out a false story that there were signs of life in order to draw Supes away from Earth before Lex’s trial. Also, I felt Clark’s conversation with Lois about it being too hard to say goodbye showed an attempt to turn Superman into an actual person who, while physically and morally strong, is not a robot. I’ve also read a review from someone who was adopted and they commented that for some there is just a consuming need to discover who you are; if there is really anything more. Maybe Brian Singer’s life experiences (Jewish, adopted, openly gay) have given him a different perspective. In the end, I feel it’s all just an extended metaphor for how Superman has left the public conscience, and so I didn’t consider it that important. Still, you can’t mark a movie on what ifs, so logic points have to be docked.
On your second point, it was touched upon in Luthor’s “interview” with Lois. “Bring it on!” He has advanced alien technology – from the twenty eight known galaxies no less – and amongst that is weaponry. I’m guessing also amongst that is everything else he needs. New Krypton will sink the States, send the world spiralling into chaos. Lex is untouchable: he will sell all who can afford it a safe haven. He will sell a better world. That fact doesn’t change because he’s the one who wrecked the old one. Let the savages fight over the rest of Earth, he’s the ruler of his own little happy uber-kingdom, and he’s killed Superman to boot. “I just want to bring fire to the people. And I want my cut.”
The bed jumping is a huge hole; I’ve got nothing. Still, at least the writers made her jump for a good guy. Plus: “I did Superman.” *giggle* “I covered Superman.”
About the American Way. As a child of the global community with much love for that ideal it hurts me to say that to most of the world, the word America no longer means that. America is the land of cutthroats and slander. While this exists everywhere – humanity isn’t restricted by borders – the position the United States of America finds itself in puts it on that pedestal for others to pick apart, and all the good gets overwhelmed. I can see why Singer changed it. Personally, I wouldn’t have. The only way for the American Way to return is for it to be put to use, and I can think of no better way to promote it then placing it up there in the sky. Singer chickened out.
Finally, my favourite Superman is like the one in Birthright, which I thought this fit in well enough with. Just because Clark Kent is used as a disguise doesn’t mean that he’s not the Clark Kent that was raised on that farm. He just changed his name to Superman to avoid the paper work, the lazy sod.
So, despite some of the stuff, to me, “It’s like freaking Gone With the Wind.”
And, I want to come out clearly and state that the soundtrack was absolutely amazing. “Memories” is just as good a theme as the original march or the Krypton theme (which wasn’t loud enough at the beginning but I guess they wanted you to be able to hear zombie-Brando).
Also, on the good quotes front, besides the ones I’ve already mentioned, I’m thinking: “Come on, let me hear you say it. Just once.” “You're insane.” “No, not that! No, the other thing. I know it’s just on the tip of your tongue.” “Superman will never...” “WRONG!”
“You wrote that the world doesn't need a saviour, but every day I hear people crying for one.”
“Gods are selfish beings who fly around in little red capes and don't share their power with mankind.”
“I’m always around.”
PS. Did anyone else here catch that the one dog had eaten the other when they were first shown? I started laughing hysterically. EVERYONE else was silent. My friend looked at me like I was an idiot. Then, “Weren’t there two dogs?” and all of a sudden everyone was like “Oh, he’s not insane” and let out this huge laugh.
Posted by Chris Bridges (Member # 1138) on :
Oh, I can explain everything I complained about. I just don't think I should have to, especially when it wouldn't have taken that much to address. And that's really what bothers me so much, that the glaring problems with the movie could have been fixed very easily and weren't.
He could have mentioned to his mom that he was gone longer than he expected. One line, and I'm happy. Or, better yet, he could have asked his mom how long he'd been gone and then found out, with us, that it's been 5 years. Then we could have seen the horror on his face as he realized what everyone must have been going through. He becomes a much more sympathetic character because it's not his fault. We would have felt sorry for him when he found out Lois had moved on, instead of thinking "Dude, you totally deserved that. What did you expect?" As it is, he comes across like "I was gone and couldn't hurt you by telling you. Get over it." Didn't apologize once, that I noticed.
I'm not gay or Jewish, but I am adopted, so I reserve the right to bust on Singer for missing an easy fix.
It may be simply that he has a different vision of Superman than I do. He sees (I believe) Superman as the lonely, outsider, Christ figure, who's birth father guides him still, with a nod to his adopted parents. I prefer to focus on how the Kents took him in and made him their own, and the strength he draws from that. Both parts of the mythos, agreed, just a slightly different emphasis. And my Superman wouldn't have gone without saying goodbye, even for just a few months.
"I’m always around." I laughed when he said that, because the obvious answer is, "Really? For how long this time?"
Posted by Lord Solar Macharius (Member # 7775) on :
quote:Didn't apologize once, that I noticed.
"I'm sorry I left you."
But yeah, it seems so easy to fix. You've just got to realise that not everyone has the writing talent you do. I've decided that all future movies have to be passed by you first before they're made. Hollywood's already been informed.
Seriously, why aren't you employed in making my entertainment better? There's one thing I know for sure Chris, and that is you are here for a reason. I don't know what it is exactly, but I do know this much: it's not to arm-chair direct.
Posted by Chris Bridges (Member # 1138) on :
Cuz I'm lazy. And live on the opposite coast from LA. Personally I want to jump right to the part where they just Fed-Ex scripts to me to fix and then send me money. Easier all around.
Again: I really did like the movie. I probably wouldn't be as bothered by this stuff if I didn't.
Posted by Lord Solar Macharius (Member # 7775) on :
I've got some time tomorrow, I'll write a letter to Joss Whedon about you. How do you feel about Wonder Woman? It probably won't come to anything, but your looking at a guy who sent a Papal application to the vatican.
Edit: Thought I'd share this (beware: bad language).
Posted by Phanto (Member # 5897) on :
I, for one, found this movie long and at times boring, predictable, cliche.
First complaint. The opening. Extravegant and dull. Waste of money.
The airplane scene. Firstly, I didn't quite get why the crystal would take all that energy. Nor did I really "get" how. The PR woman on the flight was great. The actual sequence of events was predictable completely.
We all know that superman will just barely come in time. We all know no one would be hurt. Let's ignore the moments spent outside the atmosphere, let's ignore the wild thrashing on the plane that would, realistictly, be fatal.
I didn't enjoy the visual aspect of that scene, which might be its redeeming grace.
The whole superman love story was disturbing in its utter stupidity and the fairly predictable love arc. I was just surprised that she didn't marry him/have Richard die convinentally, but I guess that would be too happy.
The lack of a mask of superman is an inherent flaw to the comic, but I couldn't help but make such lines as "Oh no! Superman's on the ground! Now they can take his --his mask off and find out who he is! ... oh, wait...never mind."
I didn't like the utter stupidity of Lex Luther. I didn't like the VERY predicatble story of Kitty betraying him at a critical moment. I spent the whole movie trying to figure out when it would be exactly.
The way Superman deals with the new stuff is silly. Wait, so when he stands on top of it, it drains him. But when he pushes it from under, it doesn't? What?!?!
Posted by docmagik (Member # 1131) on :
I'm pissed. Pure and simple.
Singer ripped Superman's still beating heart out of his chest and left it along side the road somewhere as he made this movie.
The Superman I grew up with and loved was decidedly not the deadbeat dad of steel.
To take the Boy Scout of comicdom and make him the most sexually irresponsible superhero ever is a betrayal I will never forgive Singer for.
It's a good thing he wasn't standing outside the theatre when I left, or I'd have popped him in the mouth.
It's probably a good idea if I never go to a comic convention, ever, because I'll probably still want to pop him in the mouth.
Words cannot describe how upset I am with this "new direction" for the character.
Posted by Puffy Treat (Member # 7210) on :
So...where in the film did it indicate Clark knew Lois was pregnant after the events of Superman II? He seemed to be surprised and saddened.
Plus (at least judging by the novelization's version of the original opening) he didn't plan to be gone for years.
Posted by docmagik (Member # 1131) on :
Puffy, are you talking to me?
The whole point of the movie was that Superman didn't know.
At some point (and count me in the camp that believes it COULDN'T have been in Superman II. Lois's reaction to the piano was more like, "Oh." than like, "It's an immaculate conception!") Superman and Lois conceived this kid. A guy with X-ray and microscopic vision would have to have at least been curious enough, let alone responsible enough to see if a child had been conceieved.
To me, this is altering Superman's underlying morality in a way that even Frank Miller would never have dreamed of.
Because Frank Miller alters charcacters in ways that, even when disturbing, are still true to the underlying core of the character. You might not like that Superman becomes a patsy for the feds, or that Batman becomes a "Dark Knight," but at least they seem true to what that character is about. They even seem to challenge the underlying assumptions about the character.
Here, they just took Superman in some direction that makes no sense. It would be like the Ender's Game movie having a subplot where Ender kills a Jeesh in their sleep because they stole some game stragey. It would be impossible to do that without fundimentally altering the story or the character.
As for him not planning to be gone for years--novelization not withstanding, in this movie, he knew it was going to be a while. He would have not thought it was SOOO hard to say good-bye to everybody if it had been for a couple of months. It wasn't, "I didn't mean for it to be this long." It was, "My pain was more important than being considerate to you."
Which, when you add in that he ditched Lois after having slept with her, puts a whole new spin on her anger with him, kid notwithstanding.
But none of that is as important to me as the fact that, in a world where family and morality is in decline, adding Superman, the most wholesome of all heros, to the list of those who want to make fathering children at random seem more cool than tragic, is destruction of an icon.
Gah. This isn't my Superman. If this seeps into the comic books and the rest of the Superman mythos, I will consider something close to my heart ruined.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
I just saw it and whiile I enjoyed it, I too think it would have been immeasurably improved by including that one line you and others have mentioned, Chris.
Hell, the best way would be for him to have some reason to believe he was going to look for something other than a wreck and graveyard. Like, maybe when he reports the astronomer's findings to his Crys-Dad, Jor-El is shocked and thinks it's possible that if there are large chunks of Kyrpton left, there might be survivors. Sure, it'd be millenia later, but that would be something he could conceivably leave Right The Hell Now for and Drop Everything.
And then for some reason it takes an extra, say, four years and eleven months and three weeks than expected.
Posted by Bean Counter (Member # 6001) on :
It would be nice to know what led to the pregnancy, I also wonder what kind of protection would be adequet against super sperm? It could be that they got pregnant over drinks...
BC
Posted by Puffy Treat (Member # 7210) on :
Bryan Signer has indicated Michael Lane was the result of the romance Clark and Lois had in Superman II. During the brief period when he was mortal, and felt like he could have a legitimate life with Lois. Which (in the Superman Returns timeline) happened shortly before Clark left to explore the mysterious "Kryptonian" transmissions.
Remember, Superman II ended with Clark erasing Lois' momemory of their time together...-not- because he wanted to play around responsibility-free...but because the recording of his mother and father specifically told him "You can only love as a mortal if you ARE a mortal yourself".
He considered (right or wrong) removing the knowledge of what Lois and he could never have to be merciful.
Posted by akhockey (Member # 8394) on :
I saw it tonight, and I loved it. I agree that making Superman a dead-beat dad is really lame, though. Like it's been said, that goes against everything we know and love about the guy.
Also, Phanto, what did you expect? I think 100% of the movie-going audience also observed everything you did but there was a crucial difference: they knew they were watching a SUPERMAN movie! How do you have beef with any of those elements of the movie? That's what the Superman universe *is*. And your beef with his "lack of a mask"...maybe you, personally, have some sort of problem with that, and have for some time, but that also is a defining feature of Superman. I don't get the point in bitching about it. And finally, I guess you were too fuming to notice the end of the movie. He flies around the island, he saves the family, he goes to find Luther, the whole time he uses his powers. Then, finally, his powers fail and Luther gets his kicks in. Okay. So, after, he flies under the island and takes it into space. Then, finally, his powers fail and he falls to Earth. How is that silly, barring the fact that it "could never happen" (surprise, surprise)?
Posted by Mig (Member # 9284) on :
Saw the movie and loved it and now for the picking of some really bothersome nits:
Although supes mind-wiped Lois in Superman II, I think he would have used his supervision at some point to confirm whether she had concieved. I agree that a simple line of dialogue, which is apparently in the novelization, that he only intended to be gone for a few months would have solved some of the problem.
The script should have made it clear that when Clark first sees the kid that he has some attachement, curiousity, or concern to the child. As it is it is not clear to me when Supes figuers out the kid is his or on what evidence he basis he figures out that the kid is his. Did someone tell him about the piano?
To me the big problem with the kid (is it too early to start calling him Superboy?) is Lois' reaction. She may have been suprised by the piano, but she hardly seemed curious about where the kid gets his strength. It like she always knew that Supes was the father. How does she know if Supes mind-wiped her in II?
I don't see any problem with Supes lifting the island. The closer to the sun he gets the stronger he gets. As I see it, he went into outer space first, charged up his cellular batteries, then he lifted the island. And he suffered a physical consequence.
As for those of you who criticize the story because noone can caonnect the dots between Supes and Clark Kent, this is a Superman story so get over it. That is part of the given elements of any Superman story. Its part of the general suspension of disbelieve that goes with the story, along with the flying, the superstrength, speed, etc. Why should the not seeing the connection be any less a part of the fantasy that the flying.
Overall though, a fun movie to watch. Hoping my local Imax get the 3D version.
Posted by Phanto (Member # 5897) on :
The problem is that while ON the island, Superman seems to need a matter of seconds to become weak and human. He lands, he walks to Lex, he get's beaten up. All within the span of say 20 seconds? On the other hand, it's only while he's lifting it from below, that his endurance seems to skyrocket.
Meh.
Posted by Phanto (Member # 5897) on :
And, to be honest, the fact that you have to have the "oh, wow, this is superman" mindset to enjoy the movie is not in any way a plus, akhockey.
Posted by Bean Counter (Member # 6001) on :
I saw the success in lifting the Island as dependant on the non Island rock underneath, as that rock shield fell away Superman was weakened, as the Kryptonite grew near to him so too did he rise into direct solar energy. It seemed very realistic to me, Superman actually pushing himself beyond his limits to finish his task. Much more Heroic then just walking into blazing gunfire. It made sense, from that point of view.
BC
Posted by Ron Lambert (Member # 2872) on :
Anybody notice the similarity to Dead Zone in having Superman have a son, who is being raised by another man, who is a very good man, a hero in his own right? Let's see, Superman was gone for five years. Johnny Smith was in a coma for five years.
About the "American Way" thing. That line was spoken by Perry White, who is a cynical editor-in-chief, and everyone knows the media is hopelessly liberal. It would have been out of character for Perry White to say it any other way.
Posted by docmagik (Member # 1131) on :
The international market is now a huge part of movie making. People are VERY aware of international implications of their dialogue.
If you noticed in Titanic, Cameron was careful to sprinkle international "moments" throughout the film.
Same thing here. Lots of international extras, international moments, and no American flag in sight.
It's not a message, or a statement on the politics of the media. It's a way for the studio to try to get thier couple hundred million back.
Posted by Lord Solar Macharius (Member # 7775) on :
quote:The lack of a mask of superman is an inherent flaw to the comic...
In Birthright the author talks about how Superman needs to appear the way he does. He's an alien, he's got all these crazy powers. It would be very easy not to trust him. Those primary colours insure that everyone can see him; that lack of a mask gives him a personal touch. You trust him because he appears so... childish. He doesn't look like he's hiding some dark secret. Would you trust Batman? (Of course, Batman doesn't want your trust.)
Posted by akhockey (Member # 8394) on :
quote:Originally posted by Phanto: And, to be honest, the fact that you have to have the "oh, wow, this is superman" mindset to enjoy the movie is not in any way a plus, akhockey.
Why? It's a Superman movie, and I'm a random audience member. I'm not a critic, I'm not judging it for Oscar-potential...I'm just watching it. And it was good.
Now if we're talking Fantastic Four, then yes, I can understand how that mindset would stop me from recognizing million-dollar-crap when I saw it.
Posted by Mig (Member # 9284) on :
quote:Originally posted by Bean Counter: I saw the success in lifting the Island as dependant on the non Island rock underneath, as that rock shield fell away Superman was weakened, as the Kryptonite grew near to him so too did he rise into direct solar energy. It seemed very realistic to me, Superman actually pushing himself beyond his limits to finish his task. Much more Heroic then just walking into blazing gunfire. It made sense, from that point of view.
Good point. He did burrow beneath the Krypton Island. I hadn't though of that. In the movie he appears to weaken as the Krytonite tentacles work their way through the bottom of the island, and it is the Krytonite tentacles that break through the earth that weaken him as he struggles to lift the island. It is not the Kryptonite Island that weakens him so much as it is the tentacles of Kryptonite breaking through the earth.
Posted by Chris Bridges (Member # 1138) on :
You knew it was coming, you knew it had to happen... The Armchair Director takes on Superman Returns.
Plenty of missed opportunities here, with fairly easy fixes. That's the goal of the Armchair Director. I don't tear apart, I offer only minor tweaks. I may have the scenes slightly out of order, this is from memory. Here's what I would have changed. If a scene is not mentioned, assume I thought it was perfect.
The opening stays, although I was unclear whether the burned out planets were in our solar system or Krypton's or something in the middle.
In the beginning Martha Kent is seen at home, but not doing dishes. Instead she is sitting at the kitchen table, carefully writing another postcard. In front of her is a file folder which apparently contains information and pictures of Tibet. We don't see all of what's she's writing, but words like "home soon" are visible, as is her hand signing the card with Clark's name. The address is Lois Lane, c/o The Daily Planet. Clearly she's been doing these for awhile. Her hand shakes, we see her face, which is upset. On to Clark's arrival as before.
When he wakes up Clark scans the news as before to catch up, a bit puzzled at how much has changed. When he sees Martha he's a bit surprised at the additional lines, then finds out that rather than the few months he thought he was gone, it's been five years (he didn't have a way to judge time distortion during the trip). Shock, dismay, despair at what everyone must have thought, the realization that he screwed up. He tells Martha about being alone, same as the movie.
Clark shows up at the Planet. No problems here. Finds out about Lois, still stunned and upset, but not shocked or surprised. Of course she'd move on. Still goes drinking with Jimmy.
Rescue of the shuttle/plane. Not as much time spent on the buildup, not as much time launching the shuttle to orbit. Rescue the plane as before, same landing, same public adoration. Little more reaction from Superman would be good - it's been five years since he's been adored, let him smile and wave a bit. Same blowoff to Lois, she still faints.
All the Lex scenes up til now, all the Superman rescues, no worries.
Superman's rooftop talk with Lois. He starts out confident, as before, but breaks a little when he admits he only expected to be away for a few months and everything's changed. Now she's still mad at him for not saying goodbye but she (and we) also feel a little sorry for him that he's going through this. More talk about her article and the thought behind it, let's see that she didn't write "Why the World Doesn't Need Superman" out of spite but because she really thought his presence was retarding humanity's growth, or whatever. I assume there was enough reason in the piece to earn the Pulitzer, let's hear it. Even better, let's see Superman recognize the validity of what's she's saying, making him even more of an outsider. I'd want to work this out a bit -- it may be unworkable -- but it would be nice to see Lois a bit awkward here about her life. "When you left... I thought you were... you'd been... I didn't handle it well." Superman: "Lois... I..." Lois: "Richard was there for me." More confident, a little challenging. "Always." Implication being that a) Superman wasn't, and b) she jumped into an intimate relationship with Richard faster than she might have ordinarily because she was so upset about Superman being gone. Superman: "I'm here for you, Lois." Lois: "Yeah. But will you be here tomorrow? You didn't tell me you were going, even for a few months. What else aren't you telling me?" He has no answer, and flies off. Continue with the scene as before.
All is good until Lois is trapped on Lex's ship. Lex's plan is to create a new continent in the Atlantic Ocean ("See, dad? Someone is making more land!"). It won't destroy North America per se, although there will be a lot of coastal flooding. Say, Metropolis is on the coast, isn't it? I dunno how Lois happened to know the nautical location (she keeps a GPS in her purse?) and I doubt Lex would leave her alone with a FAX machine handy, so dump all that. Instead let her focus on getting free. Ultimately Jason saves her by hitting the guy with a piano (but not killing him). Lex launches the kryptonite crystal.
Clark, Richard, and Jimmy are trying to find Lois. They see the maps on her desk with an address circled, they start to head out for it when the power blows. Out in the ocean, the crystals start to form. When the power comes back up, Richard, Clark, and Jimmy talk about whatever's happening, Lois will be right in the middle of it. News reports come on about a strange thing in the Atlantic, and MiGs have been scrambled to investigate. Richard and Clark: "Lois!" and they run off in different directions. Superman heads out over the water but, like before, he has to go back and save Metropolis. This gives us time for:
Lex is looking around his new island. There is no Kryptonite visible, just black outcroppings. The girl and his henchmen bitch about the barrenness but he promises the next ones will be fertile, paradise on Earth. This first one is for a specific purpose. He goes to an area in the middle and, holding his breath, he waves his hand over the ground in front of him. After a pause, a control panel very like the one in the Fortress of Solitude appears. Black, like the rest of the place (in fact, by now it should be apparent that he's created an evil version of Superman's home). He starts hooking up one of the laptops to the control panel. He places a crystal in the panel; Jor-El's face appears, looking concerned. "Kal-El, what are you..." Lex: "Back off, old man. There's a new kid in town."
Richard rescues Lois and Jason, Superman rescues them all.
The MiGs show up. Lex types furiously on the laptop. Beams of force erupt from the base of the control panel and take out the aircraft without a second's hesitation (there's a colorful streak across them just as they explode). Jor-El is alarmed. Lex loves it. "Bring it on! I can take out your ships, your nukes, anything you've got!" Superman lets the pilots go to parachute safely down before he flies back to land directly in front of Lex, a look of disgust on his face when he sees the automatic Jor-El image running off to the side. Lex is not only threatening the world, he's screwing around with Superman's heritage. Superman: Anything? Lex smiles and punches him. This happens fast, so we don't have time to register that there's Kryptonite here (and neither does Superman, who let the punch land without fear and was thus completely taken by surprise when it knocked his ass down). The thugs beat him up and he lands in a crevice, splashing the water out so now we can all see just how much Kryptonite is under the rocky surface (answer: a lot). Maybe not so much "Passion of the Superman," this time, though. Lex pontificates that Superman could have ended world hunger, provided housing for all, but never did. Now Lex will, and the world will truly understand who was the greater hero. Superman tries to explain, using some of the same reasons Lois gave for the world not needing him, but Lex stabs him.
The world's militia is mobilizing. More aircraft and a missile or two show up and Lex swats them down like he's playing a video game. He tells the thugs to ready the next crystal. Lots of destruction, clearly Lex is unstoppable.
Same rescue by Richard and Lois, same recovery. This time Superman pauses before flying off and tells Lois, "This time I'm saying goodbye." He leaves.
Lex shoots at him and Superman takes it full in the chest. It doesn't kill him, but it does blow a big hole in his shirt and knock him back aways. Lex is frustrated. How many times does he have to kill this guy. Superman is hurt, he can't get close, so he flies up and does the sun thing before zooming down and heatbeaming the base of the island. He hits the surface of the water spread-eagled so the wake smashes across the island washing the henchmen over the side into the ocean. Lex and Kitty manage to avoid being swept away. Lex hands Kitty the crystals; she starts to toss them but he grabs them away from her. Lex: Why do women always foil me and help him? Is it the hair? He has better hair? But he stumbles and loses them in a crevice when the island shakes and the place falling apart convinces him to get to the copter as the island begins to rise.
Superman pushes the island up. As chunks fall off and more Kryptonite is exposed, he cries out, obviously in pain, but doesn't stop. Finally, with his last burst of strength, he shoves the thing towards the sun. He has time for one last "Goodbye, father," before he falls. The island hurtles towards the sun. Superman falls. We see the surface of the island heating, the water boiling away, the crystals starting to explode. The control panel melts and sparks, Jor-El's face vanishes (is he smiling?). Superman hits the ground.
He's rushed into the hospital. Same as before, except his uniform does not get ripped like an old T-shirt (although they're welcome to try). We see doctors carefully removing the hundreds of tiny Kryptonite shards stuck in his bleeding hands. He flatlines, they revive him as before.
Lois visits. Same deal, but shows up before they leave -- he gave them their privacy -- and on the way out he mentions "I thought he got strength from sunlight." Lois: He does. Richard: So why were the blinds shut? Don't you guys have a solarium or something? The doctors stop, stunned. Then things happen very quickly. Superman revives, waves to the docs, and flies away to the cheers of the crowds. He spots Martha and flies off to reappear as Clark in the crowd. She nods at the teeming mob. "Still think you're alone?" He hugs her. The message is clear: he has a parent who loves him, right here.
Closing scene. Still peeks in on Jason, but not so much with the father-son stuff. Does he know? For that matter, do we know? Leave it unclear. Same close with Lois, and he flies off into the sunset.
Posted by Rico (Member # 7533) on :
The movie was ok but I don't think I'd spend money watching it again.
The movie was just "blah" for me. I'm a big fan of DC and I like superman as much as the next guy but from the very beginning I came with low expectations. The trailers gave me the impression that the movie would be all about using superman's popularity and a metric ton of special effects. In those respects the movie was exactly as I thought it would be.
I liked Kevin Spacey's portrayal of Lex, and his acting was great. However, every time I saw him on-screen I wished Lex would be a mix of Smallville's Lex and Spacey's Lex. While on the topic of Luthor, I absolutely hated what they did to him as a character. So he gets his money from an old widow? Ok, let's overlook that and focus on something else. His master plan was to create a big chunk of rock in the ocean and sell the land off to people? Last time I checked there was still plenty of unused land on the planet, why would people pay for radioactive, spiky, barren land when they could just settle somewhere else?
Not only that, but his plot to deal with superman was ridiculous. It would have been better if he'd made some kryptonite bullets, heck, anything but what he did in the movie. So his big evil plan is to deliberatly attract superman to his "evil island" and then when he's on the ground, powerless, have his thugs beat him up? Then, Luthor goes and stabs him with a kryptonite shard and then doesn't even make sure he's dead?! Who is this person, Lex Luthor or freaking Dr. Evil?!
Seriously. I was so completely and utterly dissapointed with this Lex that any saving points the movie might have had were gone. Lex Luthor isn't stupid, Superman doesn't consider him one of his most dangerous enemies because he might poke him with some kryptonite! Lex is a ruthless genius who comes up with clever plots. He is not just a thug wearing a suit, he's an evil mastermind!
And don't get me started on the whole Superman and Lois thing. Mr. I-stand-for-truth-and-justice guy, goes out and flies to the rooftop to flirt with a woman who has a kid and a fiancee?
* Is severely dissapointed by the movie and Singer*
[ June 29, 2006, 10:16 PM: Message edited by: Rico ]
Posted by Phanto (Member # 5897) on :
But it's Superman!
...
Posted by kwsni (Member # 1831) on :
I liked it, but I want Chris to direct all new comic-book movies.
Ni!
Posted by Enigmatic (Member # 7785) on :
As always, Chris needs to be the final script doctor to yet another film. My own thoughts can be summed up with the following bastardization of an old rhyme:
There was a super man Who had a super curl Right in the middle of his forehead. When the film was good, it was very very good But when it was bad, it was horrid.
--Enigmatic
Posted by EKR (Member # 9545) on :
Chris Bridges.... You gotta realize, the movie was 2 1/2 hours. In different ways, you have to appeal to both true fans of the comics, as well as the general public. With your little Armchair directing, you're adding waaayyy too many... well, useless details. There are times when you have to just sit back and enjoy the movie. Not criticise it frame by frame.
quote:In the beginning Martha Kent is seen at home, but not doing dishes. Instead she is sitting at the kitchen table, carefully writing another postcard. In front of her is a file folder which apparently contains information and pictures of Tibet. We don't see all of what's she's writing, but words like "home soon" are visible, as is her hand signing the card with Clark's name. The address is Lois Lane, c/o The Daily Planet. Clearly she's been doing these for awhile.
This whole scene, is unnecessary. With brief mentions by Jimmy Olsen of Clark being in Tibet and seeing llamas... It sums up 4 or 5 minutes in as little as 15 seconds. And the scene with Clark and his mother is enough to know how deeply she missed her son.
quote:When he wakes up Clark scans the news as before to catch up, a bit puzzled at how much has changed. When he sees Martha he's a bit surprised at the additional lines, then finds out that rather than the few months he thought he was gone, it's been five years (he didn't have a way to judge time distortion during the trip). Shock, dismay, despair at what everyone must have thought, the realization that he screwed up. He tells Martha about being alone, same as the movie.
Now this would have actually been a nice touch. Much like the Tibet ordeal, it sums up the explanation of Clark being gone so long without a single word. His reactions to the changing times would be all that one would need to put the puzzle together.
quote:Rescue of the shuttle/plane. Not as much time spent on the buildup, not as much time launching the shuttle to orbit. Rescue the plane as before, same landing, same public adoration. Little more reaction from Superman would be good - it's been five years since he's been adored, let him smile and wave a bit. Same blowoff to Lois, she still faints.
Superman is a modest individual. He's not going to gloat in front of the cameras. Lane's reaction when she saw the streak of blue out of the airplane window... It needed no words. Was she seeing a ghost? Superman has ALWAYS been there when she TRULY needed him. If you think about it, he really has always been there for her when the time really counted.
quote:Superman's rooftop talk with Lois. He starts out confident, as before, but breaks a little when he admits he only expected to be away for a few months and everything's changed. Now she's still mad at him for not saying goodbye but she (and we) also feel a little sorry for him that he's going through this. More talk about her article and the thought behind it, let's see that she didn't write "Why the World Doesn't Need Superman" out of spite but because she really thought his presence was retarding humanity's growth, or whatever. I assume there was enough reason in the piece to earn the Pulitzer, let's hear it. Even better, let's see Superman recognize the validity of what's she's saying, making him even more of an outsider. I'd want to work this out a bit -- it may be unworkable -- but it would be nice to see Lois a bit awkward here about her life. "When you left... I thought you were... you'd been... I didn't handle it well." Superman: "Lois... I..." Lois: "Richard was there for me." More confident, a little challenging. "Always." Implication being that a) Superman wasn't, and b) she jumped into an intimate relationship with Richard faster than she might have ordinarily because she was so upset about Superman being gone. Superman: "I'm here for you, Lois." Lois: "Yeah. But will you be here tomorrow? You didn't tell me you were going, even for a few months. What else aren't you telling me?" He has no answer, and flies off. Continue with the scene as before.
Lois and Superman are not a squabbling high school couple. That whole conversation between them sounds like one I had with a paranoid girlfriend. Lois is strong and confident, not catty and paranoid. And Lois doesn't get awkward. She tries her best not to show weakness.
quote:All is good until Lois is trapped on Lex's ship. Lex's plan is to create a new continent in the Atlantic Ocean ("See, dad? Someone is making more land!"). It won't destroy North America per se, although there will be a lot of coastal flooding. Say, Metropolis is on the coast, isn't it? I dunno how Lois happened to know the nautical location (she keeps a GPS in her purse?) and I doubt Lex would leave her alone with a FAX machine handy, so dump all that. Instead let her focus on getting free. Ultimately Jason saves her by hitting the guy with a piano (but not killing him). Lex launches the kryptonite crystal.
Lois knew the location of the ship because of the following conversation. Lex: "Who is his father?" Lane: I forgot what she said. But something about Richard. (In background)"Lex, we've reached the position." (Or something of that nature.) Lex: "Are you sure?" (responding to Lois) (In background) "Yeah, (gives coordinates) just like you said."
There, that simple. No GPS. Just something simple and easily missed if not paying attention to the movie.
quote: Clark, Richard, and Jimmy are trying to find Lois. They see the maps on her desk with an address circled, they start to head out for it when the power blows. Out in the ocean, the crystals start to form. When the power comes back up, Richard, Clark, and Jimmy talk about whatever's happening, Lois will be right in the middle of it. News reports come on about a strange thing in the Atlantic, and MiGs have been scrambled to investigate. Richard and Clark: "Lois!" and they run off in different directions. Superman heads out over the water but, like before, he has to go back and save Metropolis. This gives us time for
Wasting screen time!! And this isn't the Hardy Brothers... We're not solving a mystery with scooby doo.
quote:Lex is looking around his new island. There is no Kryptonite visible, just black outcroppings. The girl and his henchmen bitch about the barrenness but he promises the next ones will be fertile, paradise on Earth. This first one is for a specific purpose. He goes to an area in the middle and, holding his breath, he waves his hand over the ground in front of him. After a pause, a control panel very like the one in the Fortress of Solitude appears. Black, like the rest of the place (in fact, by now it should be apparent that he's created an evil version of Superman's home). He starts hooking up one of the laptops to the control panel. He places a crystal in the panel; Jor-El's face appears, looking concerned. "Kal-El, what are you..." Lex: "Back off, old man. There's a new kid in town."
Jor-El isn't a conscious being. He can't react to the doings of who he thinks is Kal-El. And this whole scene would be pointless. Also!! Lex... that line. Is just not Lex Luthor. He's not a mindless thug.
quote:The MiGs show up. Lex types furiously on the laptop. Beams of force erupt from the base of the control panel and take out the aircraft without a second's hesitation (there's a colorful streak across them just as they explode). Jor-El is alarmed. Lex loves it. "Bring it on! I can take out your ships, your nukes, anything you've got!" Superman lets the pilots go to parachute safely down before he flies back to land directly in front of Lex, a look of disgust on his face when he sees the automatic Jor-El image running off to the side. Lex is not only threatening the world, he's screwing around with Superman's heritage. Superman: Anything? Lex smiles and punches him. This happens fast, so we don't have time to register that there's Kryptonite here (and neither does Superman, who let the punch land without fear and was thus completely taken by surprise when it knocked his ass down). The thugs beat him up and he lands in a crevice, splashing the water out so now we can all see just how much Kryptonite is under the rocky surface (answer: a lot). Maybe not so much "Passion of the Superman," this time, though. Lex pontificates that Superman could have ended world hunger, provided housing for all, but never did. Now Lex will, and the world will truly understand who was the greater hero. Superman tries to explain, using some of the same reasons Lois gave for the world not needing him, but Lex stabs him.
More useless screen time. We're not watching Independence Day. Will Smith and Jeff Goldblum are nowhere to be found. And like Superman, Lex is "modest." He's not going to waste his time proclaiming "I'm king of the world!" He doesn't gloat in his victory. He takes it as it comes and plans his next step. He's a smart man.
That's all I have time for at this moment.
Thank you.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:With your little Armchair directing, you're adding waaayyy too many... well, useless details.
One man's "useless detail" is another man's depth.
Posted by Puffy Treat (Member # 7210) on :
I'd like to add: My younger brothers told me that the "Jason White" character was actually named "Michael Lane". Last time I ask them to help with my terrible memory for such details. Posted by Bean Counter (Member # 6001) on :
quote: and MiGs have been scrambled to investigate
All the way from Russia? All the US planes busy in the Gulf?
BC
Posted by Telperion the Silver (Member # 6074) on :
I can't wait to see how they did Krypton. Those were always my favorite scenes...the Kryptonian society and their crystals.
Posted by Chris Bridges (Member # 1138) on :
With your little Armchair directing, you're adding waaayyy too many... well, useless details. There are times when you have to just sit back and enjoy the movie. Not criticise it frame by frame.
Actually I criticized three major plot points that not only prevented me from fully enjoying the movie but actually hurt the franchise. In my opinion, obviously. Your mileage may vary.
This whole scene, is unnecessary. With brief mentions by Jimmy Olsen of Clark being in Tibet and seeing llamas... It sums up 4 or 5 minutes in as little as 15 seconds. And the scene with Clark and his mother is enough to know how deeply she missed her son.
The scene with Jimmy explains where he said he was, but not why they wouldn't have thought it odd he was gone the same time as Superman. Postcards from Tibet would have helped. Also, this was mentioned specifically in one of the prequel Superman Returns comics that DC has been putting out the last few weeks. I just borrowed it. The mention of Martha's worry is because I was replacing the existing scene and didn't want to lose that aspect of it. But my real addition was the notion that Clark didn't realize he'd been gone so long, which would have gone a long way towards ameliorating what I saw as his callous attitude in the movie.
Superman is a modest individual. He's not going to gloat in front of the cameras.
Not waving to the cameras. Waving to the people. But not a really necessary change, just a tweak on my part.
Lois is strong and confident, not catty and paranoid. And Lois doesn't get awkward. She tries her best not to show weakness.
I said in the post that what I wanted would be tough to write. The rooftop scene bugged me because they didn't seem to connect. Maybe that was intentional, maybe that was Singer playing up the "I'm alone" aspect. But I had no sympathy for this Superman and a bit of hostility that he was flirting with an afianced singlle mom. Had he been away for so long by accident, his confusion and desire to make things the way they were would have been understandable. Being gone for 5 years without warning on purpose, I got no sympathy for him at all that he lost his one true love. Wah. As mentioned, this was in the original script but not in the movie and it really, really should have been.
There, that simple. No GPS. Just something simple and easily missed if not paying attention to the movie.
Good catch, and I did indeed miss that. Thanks. I'll leave that alone, then.
Wasting screen time!! (on the Jimmy and Clark and Richard scene)
I can bend on how they find her. But I absolutely insist on someone besides Superman noticing a new island forming off the coast. Even before the current political climate it would have been noticed -- especially with shock waves hitting Metropolis -- and these days there would have been immediate and definite response. Although not, admittedly, by MiGs. My bad, I don't know military stuff. Please insert whatever funky aircraft we would have sent.
Jor-El isn't a conscious being. He can't react to the doings of who he thinks is Kal-El. And this whole scene would be pointless. Also!! Lex... that line. Is just not Lex Luthor. He's not a mindless thug.
Jor-El certainly responds to Clark when he asks questions. And Lara had a whole conversation with him in Supes II. But I'm willing to drop the Jor-El part (probably cost to much to CG new Brando lines anyway). The control panel stays, though.
Lex brags to Lois about the awesome weaponry available to him from the crystals, but that's it. On his new island, he's sitting waiting and the thugs are playing cards. That's it. Lex is not that stupid. He'd be ready. And remember, this is the Lex from the movies, not the comics. "Lex Luthor? The greatest criminal mind of our time?" Of course he would say stuff like that.
We're not watching Independence Day. Will Smith and Jeff Goldblum are nowhere to be found.
And neither is the United States military. Apparently all of this is happening in a vacuum and everyone's just going to wait around and hope Superman saves the day. I don't buy it. We would mobilize, fast, at least with something to do a fly over and get a visual. This would have allowed us to see how Lex was using the crystals to defend his new country and acknowledged that this was a threat we couldn't handle on our own. I also think it's important that Superman not wander around on the surface before Lex hits him. No way he wouldn't have noticed Kryptonite unless he hadn't had time yet.
My suggestions won't work for everybody. I'd like to see the movie again, for fun and to see what else I missed. And I'd like to read the novelization to see if there were already answers to these problems that were left out for some reason.
Posted by Ron Lambert (Member # 2872) on :
I like the dimension Smallville gave to the Jor-El identity programmed into the crystals in the Fortress of Solitude. That Jor-El construct can interact. It is clearly an Artificial Intelligence, not just a recording.
Posted by Bean Counter (Member # 6001) on :
I was disappointed in the fact that for all thier technical expertise on Krypton they have pretty poor security on the old database, I mean, not even a password? No DNA scan? Superman just figured it was impossible for mere mortals to get that far into the arctic, I am surprised it was not siezed by the Military.
BC
Posted by Launchywiggin (Member # 9116) on :
Chris, I really like your additions to the movie. Gives it more realism.
Question: wouldn't the huge crack in the ocean floor and the sudden appearance of a giant island cause...not just a shockwave, but a tidal wave? I expected more water.
I also would have cared a lot less about the return of superman than a huge blackout across the East coast. That kind of thing would be terrifying.
Posted by Ron Lambert (Member # 2872) on :
I wonder if the screenwriters realize that the Arctic is open ocean during a couple of months every summer, when the ice melts?
Posted by neo-dragon (Member # 7168) on :
I gotta say, I'm not bothered by the idea of Superman leaving in spite of what he said at the end of Superman II. Somehow it makes him seem more... well, 'human'. He actually gave in to a selfish desire and put what he wanted above what the world needed. Is it irresponsible? Only if you believe that the entire world is Superman's responsibility. But the fact is that he really isn't a god. He's really just a man with incredible abilities.
What I'm more curious about is when did he and Lois do the deed? I thought at first that it might have been during the time when he lost his powers in Superman II, but the problem with that is Lois lost her memories of that time, so you'd figure she'd be a tad confused as to how she was impregnated... If it was any other time, it raises the issue of can Superman have sex with a woman without killing her, and would Superman get that intimate with Lois and STILL not tell her who he is...?
Posted by docmagik (Member # 1131) on :
If we're taking the novelization as canon, then I certainly hope this is true.
Posted by docmagik (Member # 1131) on :
And while I'm back on the topic, the whole Superman II thing is such a cop-out.
If you asked your typical moviegoer where that kid came from--I'm not talking about us, I'm talking about Joe Six-pack catching a movie on his first day off in three months--if you ask him where the kid came from, he's not going to say, "Well you see, there was a brief period during which they had an affair after Superman gave up his powers. However, after General Zod and two other Kryptonians escaped from the Phantom Zone, Superman had to reclaim his powers to fight them, and gave Lois a kiss of sufficent emotional impact as to erase all memory of the affair."
He'd look at you like you'd just landed from Mars and say, "Don't you know anything? Lois Lane's Superman's girlfriend!"
Posted by neo-dragon (Member # 7168) on :
What exactly is your point?
Posted by Chris Bridges (Member # 1138) on :
I dunno. I think the average moviegoer would be more likely to remember Superman getting together with Lois because the average moviegoer saw Superman I and II. Now, if you asked them about Superman dying, or who Brainiac was, or Superman Blue and Superman Red, they'd look at you like you were insane.
Posted by neo-dragon (Member # 7168) on :
That's true. The average movie-goer tends to watch movies (gasp). It's the comics that they're more likely to be unfamiliar with.
Posted by docmagik (Member # 1131) on :
This isn't just movies vs. comics. This is Superman. There have been movies, TV shows, cartoons, comic books, comic strips, novels--there are probably as many people in the audience for Superman that know him through Smallville or the Bruce Timm cartoon or even Lois & Clark than through the second Donner film.
Posted by neo-dragon (Member # 7168) on :
Sorry, what does this have to do with the kid's origin again?
Posted by sarfa (Member # 579) on :
I think that Doc's point is that your average movie-goer will just assume that Lois and Supes got busy at some point, because their minor knowledge of the Superman universe is that Lois Lane is Superman's girlfriend. This knowledge comes from a multitude of sources beyond the Christopher Reeve's movies and they won't remember the specific events of the first 2 Superman movies well enough to try fit this movie into that continuity. In that context, there is not the "super roofie" date rape issue that treating this movie as a sequel to Superman II creates.
I'm not saying that I agree with Doc, just restating his point (and if I screwed it up Doc, I apologize).
I think the ties to the first 2 Reeves movies are admitted (by Singer) and undeniable. Whether the average movie-goer realizes this or not is irrelevant. There is a large population of Superman fans that will remember this, and catch all of the obvious allusions to the original 2 films that are included in this one. If Singer wanted us to treat this as a stand-alone movie, he would not have treated the opening credits the way he did, or include referrences to events that occurred in the first 2 movies. This being the case, Lois Lane should either have been furious, or at the very least, baffled upon learning of her son's powers. It was a fairly major oversight/mistake in the script. That being said, I still think this movie was much better than any of the previous Superman movies, it just had some flaws.
Posted by neo-dragon (Member # 7168) on :
But we have to accept what we're given, and that means that the simple fact that Lois isn't baffled or angry means that she does remember having sex with Superman, and thus they must have done it some time when he still had his powers. I just find this surprising for 2 reasons: I thought that the jury was still out on if Superman could be intimate with a woman without killing her, and I can't believe that he would get that intimate with her and not mention that he's Clark Kent... Or maybe she really was baffled but just never had the opportunity to show it. After all, for most of the movie after she sees Jason's powers she's too busy trying to survive a life threatening crisis to sit down and comtemplate the matter.
Posted by AvidReader (Member # 6007) on :
Not having seen the original movies, I was totally confused by the kid. After all, Lois really acted like she thought he was Richard's. But the timing of him being Superman's meant she'd hopped in bed with Richard the moment Sup left town. It just didn't add up for me.
Some mention of her sleeping with Superman but not knowing it would have helped a lot.
Posted by Chris Bridges (Member # 1138) on :
Personally, I thought the reason she wasn't baffled or angry meant that the script was poorly written...
So we have a choice. We can believe that Superman was intimate with Lois, apparently without adequate protection, and then left her for 5 years without warning. Or we can believe that they did just the once, as seen in the second movie, and that either Kryptonians gestate longer than human babies or Lois and Richard went at it right away and Lois isn't really careful about keeping track of her calendar (this is what I assume we're supposed to believe, as evidenced by the prequel comic that shows us Lois' abrupt romance with Richard). And that Superman left for 5 years without warning.
Reading the novelization now, didn't see where he thought it would be months and got blown off course. This says it took him 2 1/2 years to get there and he knew that. On the other hand, it also has Martha dating again by the time he gets back
I could, grudgingly, accept that Superman was so caught up in searching for his birthland that he abanded everything to go look for it. But he should have been a lot more torn up over the life he lost because he left. A beer with Jimmy and some stalking just ain't enough.
Posted by AvidReader (Member # 6007) on :
Yeah, Chris, the stalking was officially creepy. I mean, who stands outside their crush's window and hopes to find out what they think about them without having to speak to them? Middle schoolers, that's who. Seeing a grown man doing it was just sad.
I maintain that Richard is the better man in the movie. He knows his wife (After all, when you live with someone for five years and raise a child together, you're as good as married even if you don't have the offical piece of paper.) his wife was in love with Superman even if she won't admit it. And no one can compete with Superman. But when push comes to shove, Richard sucks it up and goes back into danger to save a man who is a rival for his wife's affection. Now that's doing what's right when you don't want to.
The only thing Marsden could have done to improve that part was to comment on everyone opening the plane door when he was trying to fly. That had to get old fast.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Yes, the spying was very disturbing to me too. I can just see Batman checking that off on a pro-con list of 'Devise scheme to destroy superhumans if they go berserk' list Posted by docmagik (Member # 1131) on :
The novelizations are probably many and varied. The Junior novelization, the children's storybook, the regular novelization. I'll bet a bunch have different versions of the backstory, and choose to leave out different elements of the film.
Of course, the fact that there are this many versions aimed at children that make a hero out of a C grade soap opera ignorant daddy underscores why I'm upset.
The fact that it's Superman . . .
Look, aside from the betrayl of the character's morality that has me pissed, there's also the ridiculous direction this would have to take the series.
If they persue this, we're stuck with another origin story. In this case, the kid's. We're going to be forced to sit through another movie of a kid going, "Wheee!" while he jumps really high and then stares at his hands in amazement. I'm tired of that. Even in this movie, the flashbacks to Clark as a kid jumping around the cornfield were lifted straight out of Spiderman. It's nothing we haven't seen before. For heaven's sake, don't make me sit through it again.
When I go to see a Superman movie, I don't want to see the movie this one set us up for. In fact, I don't even really want to see this movie, where the last twenty minutes takes place in and around a hospital bed.
I want to see the super-tough, morally unambigous superhero put into situations where he has to overcome situations that seem even too tough for him, and having to make the right choice even when all the choices seem just too hard.
The only moment where this movie came close to that was during the scene where Superman flew back into the city that was being destroyed. The anticipation I was feeling as I saw that was incredible. Here was their chance--what does Superman do when he can't save everyone? When the whole world is collapsing around him? Does he save the old? The young? How guilty does he feel about those he cannot save?
Instead, they had him catch a guy, melt some glass, then symbolically save everybody by catching the "whole world" and setting it down. They went for the poster pose, the iconic image, rather than the thrilling, difficult scenes that would demonstrate real heroism.
I want a man who can seemingly do the impossible be given opponents and problems that seem beyond impossible. In some cases, because of the power of his opponent. In some cases, because of the lack of any good way to go. And I want to see him rise above it all to be a hero anyway.
Instead, the sequel's going to be awkward revelations to the kid about who his father is, awkward revelations to Cyclops about who the kid's father is, slow revelations about the nature of the kid's powers, with a bad guy or two thrown in between the overlong soap opera pining.
Somebody save me.
Posted by Chris Bridges (Member # 1138) on :
OK, read the novelization by Marv Wolfman.
It's better. Not perfect, but much, much better. Here's some of the highlights.
Superman did, in fact, know he'd be gone that long. We get a scene of his ship flying over the shattered remains of Krypton, seeing destroyed landmarks Jor-El had told him about, and being saddened by the total loss of his original home. Then he starts feeling terrible and realizes that kryptonite is everywhere, he hasd to leave immediately. Important to note here that he almost doesn't realize what's happening in time to save himself, more on that later.
More backstory on Lex and how he met Kitty.
Supes gets back home to find that Martha is dating again and is thinking of moving. More on Superman feeling lost, alone, and homeless.
He gets to Metropolis to find everyone has moved on without him. No real questions about CLark being gone and coming back, no one pays that much attention to him. Also, he doesn't step back into his old job, he's doing obituaries.
Mention is made of the kid being sickly, Lois thinks because he was born prematurely (!) Her thinking that helped a lot with me wondering about her math skills.
A LOT more about Superman feeling like he has no home and doesn't belong anywhere, including his reaction to Lois' prize-winning article. Maybe the world would be better off without him. When he's drinking with Jimmy there's a strong sense that he may not put the suit back on.
The EMP, the plane disaster. He hesitates for a split second, knowing that once he goes the genie's out of the bottle. He still goes, of course.
Clark's explanation to Lois about why someone would leave without saying goodbye is longer, and more touching.
Superman's rooftop visit to Lois is also more wrenching. He is clearly anguished, he knows he shouldn't be doing this, and the offer to fly her around came out of nowhere without him really knowing why he was doing it.
Throughout the book Superman sees how good Richard is for her, and what a good man he is. It doesn't help.
We get more backstory on just about everybody, including more on Jimmy being upset that he hasn't shot a good photo in months (alluded to with the "it's a bird" scene) and that his job is in danger if he doesn't get one, which makes his Superman-holding-the-Planet shot more satisfying.
There is no, repeat no indication, hint, allusion, or wink that Jason might be Superman's child. No flying piano (Lois drops a bookcase on the bad guy instead), no late night visit from Superman. Nothing. I dunno if this is because it was added later, or because Bryan Singer didn't want the secret to get out so he didn't provide the real screenplay to the author. But I like this version better.
It's not just a shockwave that hits Metropolis, it's an earthquake, and a big one. More savings from the caped guy.
Lex does, in fact, create his own Fortress of Solitude on his island (yay, me). Superman even recognizes some of the Kryptonian landmarks forming, making this a weird juxtaposition for him of his old life invading his new one. This allows for more distraction for Superman, who isn't paying attention like he should be. It's also mentioned that he just spent five years in a small capsule, he's still getting his legs back.
He lands on the island, feels weak, and doesn't make the connection. And here I want to point out something that wasn't mentioned but that occurred to me: this Superman, the movie Superman has seen Kryptonite exactly once, when Lex hung it around his neck in the first movie. Before that he had no concept of it, and after it was gone there was no more. Granted that, I could believe that he could encounter it again and not know what was going on.
This time it's not the thugs that beat up Superman, it's Lex, over and over, and that rings more true to me. Lex would want to do it himself.
Superman flying the island out of the atmosphere is more dramatic here. It's mentioned that there are tons of dirt and bedrock underneath, blocking the Kryptonite until chunks of it start falling away and Superman reacts violently. He makes it anyway, but not as apparently calmly as he did in the movie.
The rest is pretty much the same. It's mentioned that the island, dubbed New Krypton, is currently in orbit between Mars and Jupiter and is still growing. Interesting plot point, as that would mean a) our solar system's orbital dynamics have changed, and b) there's a freaking planetsize chunk of Kryptonite out there.
There are more references to Pa Kent, places where Superman realizes that the great destiny heaped on him by Jor-El has to be changed so he can have a life (notice Jor-El's the one that named the place a Fortress of Solitude), and the realization that he's much more human than Kryptonian.
I still have trouble believing he'd vanish without saying goodbye, and there still isn't any military response to Lex's plan, but other than that the book answered a lot of my questions. I dunno how much was in the script and how much Wolfman added -- have to see the DVD's extra scenes -- but this was a superior story in many ways. Too bad it didn't make it to the screen.
Posted by sarfa (Member # 579) on :
If the piano scene (and subsequent "superdaddy" related scenes) were last minute additions, that might explain (though not excuse) the problems pointed out earlier.
Posted by docmagik (Member # 1131) on :
Well, looks like the movie has made just $163 million so far, putting it way behind the $258 million POTC2 has made so far, and even behind Cars' $200+ million.
So what are everybody's theories as to why it's underperforming?
Posted by Phanto (Member # 5897) on :
Because it sucks, and everyone who sees it tells their friends not to go.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Because the superhero movie it most resembles is The Hulk.
Posted by Omega M. (Member # 7924) on :
I just saw this, and to me the biggest problem was that Lex Luthor tossed Superman off his crystal island instead of cutting his head off while he had the chance. I know villains always mess up when they have the superhero, but there seemed less of a rationale than usual here. Also, I thought that Lex Luthor's plot was foiled too soon after it started; I thought Superman was going to go back to Metropolis and have to figure out what to do as Luthor's continent started wiping out coastal regions.
None of the quieter, "serious" scenes between Superman/Clark and Lois did much for me. Also, Kate Bosworth seemed too perky for how I always imagined Lois (though my conception of the Superman story comes entirely from random mentions of it in the culture, so I may be off).
Posted by Giant-Size Man-Thing (Member # 9546) on :
Lex Luthor in Superman Returns is the dumbest super villain ever. Yeah, Lex. Destroy most of the valuable industry and crop production of the U.S. and Mexico and replace it with bare rock that is going to be valuable to exactly whom?
And where is the advanced alien technology he was going to use to fight the rest of the world off with? Maybe they were hiding under Kitty's hats. Hell, this didn't need to be a job for Superman. It could have been a job for a company of Marines. What was going to stop them?
The movie was fun, but the internal logic of the movie was just ridiculous and predictable. I was also annoyed that they didn't develop the god versus mortal aspect more and make it intergral to the movie, rather than just a kind of amusing thought the director tossed in there.
Posted by PUNJABEE (Member # 7359) on :
I just didn't like how Superman was able to lift an entire island made of kryptonite, all the while having a sliver of the stuff in his side.
I liked this movie a lot. But then I saw it a couple more times, and started re-playing it in my head. The more I notice about the movie, the more I think it failed as a Superman film.
Posted by JennaDean (Member # 8816) on :
quote:The movie was fun, but the internal logic of the movie was just ridiculous
Yes, this is how I felt. Really enjoyed seeing it, but aspects bothered me afterward. Like Lois never questioning how the baby could be his.
And there wasn't enough Clark in it ... in this one, Superman was his real persona, and Clark was who he hid behind. I always liked it better when Clark was his real personality and Superman was the character he hid behind when he had to show his powers. Because he was raised on Earth, among humans, as Clark; that's would've been the real him, IMO. The "super" aspects would've identified him as "other" and would've been the parts of his identity he would've wanted to develop an alternate personality to "hide".
About Lex Luthor: the part may have been written "dumb", but Kevin Spacey played it SO well. I loved him in that part.
![[No No]](graemlins/nono.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)