Superman Returns...but why?
"Superman never made any money
Saving the world from Solomon Grundy"
WARNING: The following contains spoilers for the movie Superman Returns
Superman Returns...but why?
Superman: The Movie by Richard Donner was the first movie I ever saw. I was barely months old, do not remember it, but it was the first movie I attended. As a child I thoroughly enjoyed all the Superman flicks, my love of III and IV should be forgive because of being but a wee one. As an adult that enjoyment has faded. They are well done, but not enough to go goo-goo gaga over. It's the reverse of Rocky. Hated it as a kid, love it as an adult.
Being a movie fiend, the thought of Bryan Singer taking on a new Supes film made me giddy like a kid on Christmas. Then the casting started. Routh as Superman; maybe. Bosworth as Lois; erm...no. Spacey as Luthor; Can I get a "Awww hell naw!" The youthfulness of the two main characters bothered me then, and still plagues me today.
Reports started coming out that this would not be a reinvention, but a sequel to parts I and II. Whasat? Come again? Batman Begins showed brilliantly that a reworking of the film saga could be achieved. Why make a new part III, forsaking the original parts III and IV? So I was disappointed, not caring too much for the new take on the adventures of Kal El.
The teaser trailer made me rethink my position. Maybe Singer could do it. The trailers and commercials that followed made my outlook dip, big time. Spacey looked to be hamming it up, as expected. Whoever crowned him as the greatest actor of his generation needs to rethink that. He has a tendency to overact in the majority of his roles. Kate looked too young to be the mother of a five year old, looking more like his big sister or baby-sitter. Routh looked the part, but his lack of acting experience was troubling.
Superman Returns has it's highs, and it's lows. Visually it was stunning. The use of the original John Williams themes was brilliant. Everything else was so-so. Don't get me wrong, the entire plane sequence was enthralling. When he ended up on the diamond, I thought about cheering too. What a way to really show off that he was back. But there are far to many negatives to have thoroughly have enjoyed this film. Questions also. What was that meteorite in the beginning? Why did the one dog eat the other dog? Why when Supes and Lois take their first flight did it take them a few seconds to reach their destination, but minutes to return? Why would anyone want to live on Luthor's barren wasteland of a new continent? How the hell could Superman take an island made of kryptonite so far? That must have been some recharge from the sun. Did anyone really not know that that was Superman's kid? That was handled poorly by the constant shoving down our throats that the kid was so fragile. We now live in the world of M. Night Shyamalan. Major twists like that need to be handled a little more thoughtfully.
Part of the problem seems to be that there have not been that many good Superman stories. With characters like Spider-man, Batman, and the X-men there have been loads of truly great stories written. The list of phenomenal Superman stories is almost nil. There is one storyline that maybe Singer and Co. should have taken a longer look at. Superman: For All Seasons takes the mythos of the last son of Krypton, and does what the movie doesn't, makes you feel for him. It's a strong character study on top of the mind numbing visuals. Since Smallville was such a hit maybe the filmmakers thought that no one wanted to see the retelling of his origin. It would have been nice for Singer to have taken a page out of the Robert Rodrigez school o' filmmaking, and just filmed For All Seasons That would have been nice, and would have hit the audience on the same level that the first Spider-man film did. Make you feel for the hero, and the flaws fade away.
Like most comic books films, I walked away sad. Superman Returns felt like a waste of effort and money. Why do it if you're not going to do it right? If you're spending upwards of $300 mil on a pic, you might as well swing for the fences.
At least Superman didn't fight a giant spider in the third act.
Do you know anything about spiders? They're the fiercest killers in the insect kingdom.
Until next time:
"Superman stands alone. Superman did not become Superman, Superman was born Superman. When Superman wakes up in the morning, he is Superman. His alter ego is Clark Kent. His outfit with the big red S is the blanket he was wrapped in as a baby when the Kents found him. Those are his clothes. What Kent wears, the glasses the business suit, that's the costume. That's the costume Superman wears to blend in with us. Clark Kent is how Superman views us. And what are the characteristics of Clark Kent? He's weak, unsure of himself... he's a coward. Clark Kent is Superman's critique on the whole human race, sort of like Beatrix Kiddo and Mrs. Tommy Plumpton." - Bill, Kill Bill Vol. 2
Saving the world from Solomon Grundy"
WARNING: The following contains spoilers for the movie Superman Returns
Superman Returns...but why?
Superman: The Movie by Richard Donner was the first movie I ever saw. I was barely months old, do not remember it, but it was the first movie I attended. As a child I thoroughly enjoyed all the Superman flicks, my love of III and IV should be forgive because of being but a wee one. As an adult that enjoyment has faded. They are well done, but not enough to go goo-goo gaga over. It's the reverse of Rocky. Hated it as a kid, love it as an adult.
Being a movie fiend, the thought of Bryan Singer taking on a new Supes film made me giddy like a kid on Christmas. Then the casting started. Routh as Superman; maybe. Bosworth as Lois; erm...no. Spacey as Luthor; Can I get a "Awww hell naw!" The youthfulness of the two main characters bothered me then, and still plagues me today.
Reports started coming out that this would not be a reinvention, but a sequel to parts I and II. Whasat? Come again? Batman Begins showed brilliantly that a reworking of the film saga could be achieved. Why make a new part III, forsaking the original parts III and IV? So I was disappointed, not caring too much for the new take on the adventures of Kal El.
The teaser trailer made me rethink my position. Maybe Singer could do it. The trailers and commercials that followed made my outlook dip, big time. Spacey looked to be hamming it up, as expected. Whoever crowned him as the greatest actor of his generation needs to rethink that. He has a tendency to overact in the majority of his roles. Kate looked too young to be the mother of a five year old, looking more like his big sister or baby-sitter. Routh looked the part, but his lack of acting experience was troubling.
Superman Returns has it's highs, and it's lows. Visually it was stunning. The use of the original John Williams themes was brilliant. Everything else was so-so. Don't get me wrong, the entire plane sequence was enthralling. When he ended up on the diamond, I thought about cheering too. What a way to really show off that he was back. But there are far to many negatives to have thoroughly have enjoyed this film. Questions also. What was that meteorite in the beginning? Why did the one dog eat the other dog? Why when Supes and Lois take their first flight did it take them a few seconds to reach their destination, but minutes to return? Why would anyone want to live on Luthor's barren wasteland of a new continent? How the hell could Superman take an island made of kryptonite so far? That must have been some recharge from the sun. Did anyone really not know that that was Superman's kid? That was handled poorly by the constant shoving down our throats that the kid was so fragile. We now live in the world of M. Night Shyamalan. Major twists like that need to be handled a little more thoughtfully.
Part of the problem seems to be that there have not been that many good Superman stories. With characters like Spider-man, Batman, and the X-men there have been loads of truly great stories written. The list of phenomenal Superman stories is almost nil. There is one storyline that maybe Singer and Co. should have taken a longer look at. Superman: For All Seasons takes the mythos of the last son of Krypton, and does what the movie doesn't, makes you feel for him. It's a strong character study on top of the mind numbing visuals. Since Smallville was such a hit maybe the filmmakers thought that no one wanted to see the retelling of his origin. It would have been nice for Singer to have taken a page out of the Robert Rodrigez school o' filmmaking, and just filmed For All Seasons That would have been nice, and would have hit the audience on the same level that the first Spider-man film did. Make you feel for the hero, and the flaws fade away.
Like most comic books films, I walked away sad. Superman Returns felt like a waste of effort and money. Why do it if you're not going to do it right? If you're spending upwards of $300 mil on a pic, you might as well swing for the fences.
At least Superman didn't fight a giant spider in the third act.
Do you know anything about spiders? They're the fiercest killers in the insect kingdom.
Until next time:
"Superman stands alone. Superman did not become Superman, Superman was born Superman. When Superman wakes up in the morning, he is Superman. His alter ego is Clark Kent. His outfit with the big red S is the blanket he was wrapped in as a baby when the Kents found him. Those are his clothes. What Kent wears, the glasses the business suit, that's the costume. That's the costume Superman wears to blend in with us. Clark Kent is how Superman views us. And what are the characteristics of Clark Kent? He's weak, unsure of himself... he's a coward. Clark Kent is Superman's critique on the whole human race, sort of like Beatrix Kiddo and Mrs. Tommy Plumpton." - Bill, Kill Bill Vol. 2
posted by The Big Man | 7/05/2006 08:24:00 AM
|
0 comments
