*** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread - Page 8

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

Cory, you may be a liar, but Lois Lane sure doesn't seem like a very insightful or surprising writer.

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

In the junior novel, they have some of it.

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

Travis,

It's the same in the novelization. I just didn't do the opening paragraph.

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

I was writing the post as you were editing yours. Oh well. It won the Pulitzer, it deserves to be read twice!

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

Travis,

Absolutely.

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

well, all I can say is the only time the score registered for me (that I was consicious of it which may or may not be a good thing) was in the incessant incorporation of the Superman theme, and maybe once or twice durning an action passage where it underscored the activity on the screen in a way that I wasn't expecting- i.e subtle or not obvious. when I was 12 I used to fall asleep at night with the Willams score playing frequently, and the version of the love theme that fades in lightly after the March over the end credits ends, still sends a shiver down my spine. It may be favorite piece of movie music ever (and I still remember the screening I was at in 79 where I lingered longer in the theater daydreaming, and first encountered it) Iirc it was left off of many earlier video versions, which was yet another huge reason I treasured the widescreen LD when it came out.
but I'm rambling.

I get the feeling a lot of you have listened to the score many times before actually seeing the film. I haven't and this may be what is coloring my view.

when I go back and see it I'll be interested to see how various aspects of the film play differently without the distraction of trying to anticipate how good/bad it can get.


on the subject of the Jor-el speech at the end of the film.
there are several reasons I don't like and don't find it resonant to the situation.
-primarily because it never registered before as the Kyrptonian equivilent of a bedtime prayer or something was commonly said. If it was that would have destroyed the moment in the original film, if Jor-el were merely parroting something that was said over and over again. I took them as words from the heart that were given concrete meaning later when you see what kind of infrastructure Jor-el had the foresight to build into ship.
-they are the words of a father who knows he won'/can't watch his son grow up- This simply doesn not apply to Peeping Tom Kent, who will no doubt come into contact with the boy many times throughout his adolescance, and can always just zip over and peep in on him whenever he chooses.
-also, the words and phrasing are simply not the vernacular of this character. He doesn't go around speaking using florid Kryptonian phrasology.
Thats not who he is. Its like taking Willis and Arnold out of the projects, raising them in park avenue, sending them off to a London prep school, giving them a job on wall street and then seeing them in a private moment of deep feeling, revert to homeboy colloquialisms that they heard on tv...because after all, they are black you know. It just rings wholly false to me.
I would have been MUCH more receptive to this had they actually just subtley sampled the Brando dialouge over the score at that point. that would probably be the one spot where I wouldn't have minded the overt sampling- as long as the Clark/Kal-el offered some brief rejoinder to it in his own words.
Have him looking at the child- hearing his fathers words- have those words fade out and have him express something out loud that indicates how HE is processing the situation. Just merely parrotting the dialouge from the earlier doesn't sell the depth of what is actually happening here to me. In fact, it just trivializes it.
On paper, I get it...It could have been massaged in in such a way that wouldn't have offended my ears like it did, but the inclusion here is artless to me- Also it may have suffered coming at the tail end of all the other slavish references of dialouge that didn't work.
I dunno. I'll see if it plays any differently a second ( or third) time.

I may sound like I'm really ripping on this film, and maybe I am. But often thru the showing I was able to touch base with feelings I haven't felt since seeing the first film in 78/79. In several ways, the reverence for the situations and the characters was something I have been craving since then (and why I never liked the second film). But the cost of that reverence here in having to take it in the form of a nearly beat for beat remake, which is extremely exasperating. Especially in the reference above where I find the beats are more sentimental than sensible.

I promise in future posts to start waxing more positive...eventually (and it won't be hard- like others have said even with their criticisms, there is an awful lot to like/love here)

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

"I took them as words from the heart"

They were,which is the importance of it being said from Kal-El. As Jor-El said,The father becomes the son and the son the father. I sort of cringed when I heard about that scene, but seeing it liked it. I wouldnt have minded the way you described it either.

I agree with the sentiment where he looks at it as hes not alone anymore.The things he could always count on - Smallville life and Lois have changed, but its a new chapter thats been opened. When something ends, another begins.

Thats what I like about the scene where hes pretty much rejected by Lois and goes into space and hears everyone crying for help. He isnt alone, and people need him.

Because of the idiots in the theater I was in, I missed quite a bit of dialogue in spots. Is the dialague there when Superman goes to the fortress and says "Father.. Ive never felt so alone" before noticing the crystal is gone??

I am hoping some of the sccenes described earlier do make a DVD cut becuase this story does take the the alienation themes and do more with it than the original film which touched upon it but didnt really examine it. I think the 2 films compliment each other pretty well.

And I look foward to the story continuing in future installments.

I have nitpicks but dont express myself in writing as well as some here, so Ill just say I have a few problems but nothing that comes close to taking away the enjoyment i had watching this.

Congradulations to those involved, because they made it work for me.

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

I'd give a 10 to both of 'em!

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

I don't remember hearing that.

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

JonZ,

He doesn't speak at all. He lands and quickly sees that the crystals are gone. But, you do get the hint that he wanted to speak to his father....

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

I read the novelization, and I also feel that the movie would be even better if some of the deleted scenes were restored, especially the Smallville stuff, Clark in the mirror, and the explanation that Lex cooked up the "Krypton still exists" bit. But so many seem to have a problem now with the films length. Even some of the rave reviews comment on the running time. Singer probably had a really hard time deciding on what should stay and what should go, and could have used a little more time to really shape the film. Similiar to what happened to Jackson with KONG.

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

The editing is really the only major flaw I have with the film. But I didn't feel that it was too long, just that too much time was spent on certain aspects, while others were neglected.

Singer is a great storyteller who had plenty of time to tell this one. We shouldn't have to read the novelization, follow the production diaries, and hang out on message boards to get the full picture.

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

I dont have any problems with the running time. I cant think of any part that dragged and to me it flew by.

"Similiar to what happened to Jackson with KONG".

Speaking of Jackson,you want to hear some real blasphemy?

This thing exceeds LOTR and SW: PT in epicness I cant even remember the last film I saw with such huge scope.

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

I dunno--the movie might have a longer running time, but it might FEEL faster. Some things were kept in that didn't need to be kept in, and the things at the beginning that were cut out just weakens the movie. It still works, it just feels thinner than it should be. Which makes the movie feel longer, because then all the time, all that weight, all that length, is being supported by a theme that seems a little too mundane for Superman, especially in comparison to Superman doubting whether he should ever BE Superman and where he stands in this world.

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

Larry,

In the novelization, it was Lex who came up with the Krypton theory? If so, I wonder why they never referred to that in the movie.

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

well said, I agree.

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

I was a little surprised at how deep the red was on the "S" crest as well as the cape. I think it was brilliant, and added a depth to Superman's look. I think the brighter blue and red, give him a sort of cheesey appearance.

Can anyone out there help me out: Was this Singer's idea? To my knowledge I don't recall the comic book Superman having those deep shades. Someone clear this up for me

JC

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

a little more on why I so disliked this conception of Luthor-

it's Luthor by way of The Joker.
This scheme would have been perfect for a movie using the Joker as the villan-

Just imagine that the antagonist has a *bizarre* general scheme (to create a new land mass and subvert the old one in the process killing billions of people) and throughout the story he continually tells others his plans to profit by it- and yet the punchline to the joke is- when the land mass is created it is actually harsh and uninhabitable. And as this punchline is revealed I have no problem seeing the Joker laughing his ass off.

problem is, Luthor isn't the Joker and this is all a lot of sound and fury signifying nothing more than the antagonist here is just an empty husk being utilized as a plot device.
even worse, it's a re-used plot device.

which again makes me wonder how this film thinks it can function as a sequel to a film it is hell bent on remaking at the same time.

there was a good line by luthor earlier in the film that set-up how he viewed Superman in relation to himself and its a shame the film didn't follow that rather mining the original for material.

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

Had they shown Krypton and included a smidge of the origin, and HAD a powerhouse villain, I would agree.

Let Darkseid come to Earth...then we'll see epic

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

I agree, and that is my big nitpick (along with the "Where was Clark for five years?" question) If this was supposed to be a sequel of sorts, they should have maintained continuity with the fortress from S:TM and SII. The control panel was much different, the "Theater" was different and even the crystals were different. I suppose it could be justified that somehow the fortress was "remodeled" after the events of SII (especially in extended cuts where Superman "destroys" the fortress).



Of course, I'm sure we all realize that this was a necessary plot point. By retaining footage of Brando as Jor-El, Singer painted himself into a corner. It is quite impossible for Superman to ever have a new conversation with his father. I would say this is a likely reason why the crystals were never recovered.

As for the credits. It was great to see that style again. I can't, for the life of me, figure out why the hell they didn't do them in 3-D for IMAX. If anything screamed for 3-D it would have been that. Although, I do kind of think Singer overdid it with the "CG Roller coaster ride through space" instead of a more subtle "smooth flight" as in S:TM. But a small gripe nonetheless.

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

Robert,

After reading your post on the page before and at CHUD's, you do make some excellent points, no matter how I feel about the film.

Essentially, you don't need the flashback sequences of him when he was young, but you do need all the scenes back in between him and Martha and him reading the stack of newspapers. And I even think you do really need to see the return to Krypton as well.

The question is, that probably adds 8 minutes to the beginning. What else do you cut from the rest of the film in order for this theme that it played more than half way to be played all the way?

The only thing I can think of is Luthor's coda at the end and the doctors trying to revive Superman. The rest of the film, I'd leave in tact.

Essentially, what we have is a film that it probably great in its long version instead of its theatrical version. But, will we ever see this long version?

Again, I still think this film is one of the better comic adaptations to date but the missing pieces (for whatever reasons) does hamper the film a bit...as you said "easily from pretty damn good to quite great."

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

"But, will we ever see this long version?"

Wasnt it reported that when the Kyrpton scenes were cut that they would appear on the DVD? Or is that unconfirmed?

A Dir Cut for this film wouldnt suprise me at all since WB supports Dir Cuts and we have a Dir Cut of the original.

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

JonZ,

There will be deleted scenes but from what Singer said, the Krypton sequence might not make THIS DVD release. Singer made it clear that it might show up in another DVD release.

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

Loved 'Superman Returns'! Brandon Routh looked and sounded like Christoper Reeve, I was totally blown away! Ebert is a Grinch, will no longer take his expert advise in movies. Bryan Singer did a tremendous job, nobody could have done it better. Cannot wait for the DVD!

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

I don't believe anyone has mentioned the fine job the two ferrets did of playing the pomeranians either

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

One question I constantly had while watching the movie was does Superman breathe? He can fly up into the atmosphere and considering he went to Krypton, I'm gonna assume he went further than that. Does he need oxygen or any form of air? Does the cold of space get to him?

Also, one way the TV show "Smallville" played with my mind was that it had Metropolis in Kansas. I forgot that in the movies it's on the East Coast. Actually, come to think of it, is Metropolis supposed to be New York City? I was watching the first two movies on Tuesday, and when Superman took Lois flying for the first time, I assumed he took her all the way to NYC for some reason. Then, they're actually fighting in Times Square in Superman II. I assumed Superman took off in hopes that they'd stop destroying Metropolis or something (), but then they cut to a shot of Lois looking out of a window.

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

Wow! Is he directing these days? I'd always wondered what happened to the "Beastmaster".

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

Did I say Marc Singer? Talk about your bad misprint!

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

That's why they call him "Superman".

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

His lung capacity allows him to go without air for an extended period of time, but not indefinitely. This is why he can fly into space, but needs a ship for the long voyage to Krypton. (At least, that's the impression I always had.)