*** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread - Page 10

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

You know, this is already starting to sound like the Batman Begins thread from last year, as, if I recall correctly, it didn't make a whole lot on Wednesday and Thursday, but ended up making a good amount of money. We'll just have to wait and see. Edit: I just checked Box Office Mojo, and SR actually made MORE money than BB did on its opening, so again, let's just wait and see.

Anyway, I just got back from seeing this a second time, and everything still works for me. The kid angle, everything. Although, as others have mentioned, it does concern me how they'll treat it in the sequels. I wouldn't have any problem if the kid had no powers at all. It just seems sort of hokey, really. One of those ideas that work in comics, but wouldn't translate to the screen very well. Maybe Supes will just take his kid to the FOS and put him in the molecule chamber to depower him.

Performance wise, I will say that Spacey's take on Luthor is an improvement over Hackman's. To be fair, however, Hackman only had the Silver Age Luthor to go on, while Spacey's Luthor seems to be much more influenced by the moder, darker Luthor, which I prefer. Bosworth's Lane is a bit more cold than I'd like her to be, but it really works within the context of what's going on around her. Would like to have seen more interaction between her and Clark.

Speaking of the latter, I think Routh's Clark Kent may actually be superior to Christopher Reeve's. I can't believe I even typed that sentence, really. One of my favorite CK moments was the face he made after Lois tells him that Richard enjoys horror movies. Just a really small moment, but everyone in the theater burst out laughing. Classic Clark Kent. Routh's Superman was at least on par with Reeve's, maybe a notch lower, as I find Reeve's Superman to carry more authority.

Storywise, this movie is much more personal than any other superhero movie, outside of Batman Begins, maybe. In the end, we see that Superman is much more a common everyday man in respect to his emotions. It's the one thing that keeps him on our level. I really wish the Smallville scenes were left in after hearing about them, because it further plays up this angle. A story of Superman finding his place in the world and figuring out who he's supposed to be is very fascinating, and Singer played it off well, despite the cut scenes. He has no problem returning and being Superman to the world; however, he does struggle with his more personal, more human side. In the end, I think this is why Superman having a kid doesn't bother me, because thematically it makes sense because Superman finds the connection he's been looking for in his own son. When he repeats Jor El's lines from the original film, I found it quite fitting, as it's really a completely different context than Brando's original lines were in. I took the "you will be different," etc. lines to mean that Jason's fate will be different in that he will be different from Superman himself, rather than the rest of humanity. At this point, Superman doesn't know the kid will have powers, so maybe he means that Jason will live the normal life that Kal El never could on Earth (although this really carries little weight because we know Jason does have powers).

This isn't to say that Singer couldn't handle the epic elements as well though. In fact, he did a MUCH better job in showing the world's awe and wonder towards Superman. The news reports, the cheering crowd at the ballgame, the vigil, everything. Someone else in this thread put it best that Donner's world seemed too familiar with Superman. This played up Superman's godlike stature, and is much more realistic, in my opinion. I really loved all the news reports, as it shows how Superman belongs to the world, not just Metropolis.

Oh, and my first thought when the TV reports mentioned Gotham: "Man, Batman's gonna be pissed!"

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

A few things. Someone asked where Metropolis is. Its supposed to be in NJ. Which when you see the map of the landmass growing is off of the NJ coastline...Right where I live. By the way...Gotham is supposed to be somewhere between Baltimore & Washington DC.

Lois must have been some disgruntled woman. To write that article. I can count at least a 1/2 a dozen times in the first 2 movies where if it weren't for Supes..She would be pushing up daisy's. So while the world may not need him...She sure did.

Finally, with regards to the length of the movie. Cut that whole Lois has a kid angle and you could easily chop 45 minutes from the movie. If they wanted to have a kid. Make it Richard's from a previous relationship.

While some have been talking about Batman. I thought I read that on one of the newspapers on the wall in the Daily Planet had the headline "Mysterious Bat-creature terrorizes Gotham" or something like that. Can anyone confirm this?

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

Todd, I didn't see that, but I think you're referring to something Bryan Singer said. If I recall, I think he had someone in props make a headline kind of like that, but I think he also said it wouldn't be seen. I could be wrong though. At least we did get mention of Gotham.

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

Thanks Brett. Just once I would like to some kind of real mention in any of these comic movies about other heroes in their world. A perfect example which could have worked well was in a scene that was cut. The scene where Clark finds all of the newspaper clippings of events while he was gone. And he could have seen something where other heroes have picked up the slack. I know the whole point was that the human race survived without him....It still could have made a quick mention or visual.

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

Yeah, someone brought up this same point in the pre-release discussion. Maybe as the Batman and Superman franchises move ahead, they'll start nodding at each other more. I'd like it alot myself. And it's already been mentioned alot in this thread, but Nolan's vision of Batman syncs well with Singer's vision of Superman. They could totally coexist without clashing stylistically.

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

It may be true in the new cut of II we'll see, but it is definitley true of Lesters approach. However I don't think there was a blaise familiarity of Superman anywhere in the first film (save maybe for the wardens reaction). Every other scene you see people rushing to windows, stopping in traffic, mouths agape.
I loved that quality to the first film, and I loved seeing it return here.

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

This article sums up everything I thought was wrong with the movie, except for the part about Routh not doing a good job. The "Man of Stalk" has a nice ring to it.

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

I wish both DC & Marvel would appoint a censor to tell the Directors No you can't do that! Instead they let them do whatever they want.

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

Lex says that bit about the Roman Empire had roads, the British had ships; where have I heard that before?

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

Does the box office take include IMAX? I saw it on an IMAX screen today, and the show was sold out. In fact, every show today was sold out.

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

I saw it today in IMAX 3-D. I thought the 3-D was really cool.

Enjoyed the movie thoroughly. The score made me want to get up and fly everytime the main Superman theme came on.

My only quibble is that I have no idea what they are going to do with the kid for future films. Family adventures don't cut it for me.

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

"Lex says that bit about the Roman Empire had roads, the British had ships; where have I heard that before?"

In The Right Stuff, Lyndon Johnson says something very similar to this, ending with the "Russians dropping rocks on us from a highway overpass..."

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

I would include the Spidey movies and Unbreakable in that group as well.

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

Yeah, that aspect definately isn't absent, but I felt SR did it better. Perhaps because we see a worldwide reaction. It just seemed like Superman was truly a spectacle. However, it's too bad that no one uttered the greatest reaction line from the original: "That is a bad outfit!"

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

Regarding the box office totals, I'm utterly shocked that X3's three day weekend gross will probably end up being higher than Superman's 5 day take. I really thought this movie was going to be THE big moneymaker of the summer, but it looks like I was dead wrong. I think with "Pirates" opening next weekend SR could quickly fall by the wayside and not even reach $200 million. I'm sure WB is having a very unhappy 4th of July weekend watching these numbers come in.

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

With respect to referencing other films, Metropolis is mentioned in the Val Kilmer Batman film ("they should be halfway to Metropolis by now").

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

Thanks Chuck and Bryan!

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

Bryan Singer might love the original 1978 film, but unlike some of the pre-advance buzz would have you believe, he's actually not slavish towards it. Yeah, sure, on a surface level he seems to be mimicking the narrative beats, inserting vintage dialogue/in-jokes/music, etc... But with regards to the pivotal characterization of Superman himself, this is definitely not Donner's Superman.

This film really only works on a thematic/lyrical level. That's the priority of Singer. Every aspect of the storyline proper is only there to push those thematics to their ultimate confrontations and conclusions. If you're looking for a satisfying and coherent dialogue-driven narrative, you will be sorely disappointed. The stoyline will not stand up to analysis or scrutiny.

Superman will come off as an ass (how the hell could he leave earth for 5 years without saying anything...).

Superman will come off as a creep (peeping Tom)

Lex Luthor's scheming is thin and boring (It is!).

Lois Lane comes off really young and inexperienced...

Super-baby!??

etc....

The story is too clunky and extremely limited due it's complete and utter subordination to the extremes and acuteness of one major theme:

THE OUTSIDER.

Although Donner's Superman emphasized in (Brando) dialogue that Kal-El was not 'one of us', that's really not how Christopher Reeve played the character back in the 70s. He came off as very down-to-earth, warm, folksy.......human. Brandon Routh's Superman is very much 'the outsider', and the emphasis at all times is on his alien-ess and godliness. This is expertly achieved by having Routh say very little dialogue and allowing incredibly lyrical images of him (wonderful close-ups!) profoundly evoke his otherworldly loneliness and melancholic psyche.

Bryan Singer as a gay-adopted-jew, knows all too well about the feelings of an outsider in society, so it doesn't surprise that he salvages the flick by evoking such powerfully lyrical images expressing that theme. But the narrative does come off as extremely weak when not taking into account that on emotional terms, Singer DOES succeed by the end credits(very powerfully, I add again), expressing the reason he wanted to make a Superman film in the first place. It comes through despite the clunky, quirky and derivative narrative.

So Wells and Poland were both correct about this film!

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

BTW, This will definitely struggle to make 200 million domestic. This isn't the Hulk, but it's much closer to that film than the Spider-man franchise.

Consider it "mid-point" between those two Marvel films.

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

I think that's it. (I wonder if that was intentional.) Thanks!

One problem with casting Kate Bosworth is that five years ago, she was graduating from high school. I'd think Lois Lane would be ten years older.

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

Went to a 10 oclock showing at a big theatre on a saturday night, only 10 people there. Ouch.

First impressions, the film looked great, and the sound was incredible!

I'm not a big superman fan and can barely remember the first movie, and don't think I even watched the 2nd. So if SR is supposed to take place after the 2nd, I'm sure there was stuff that I missed storywise.

The plane rescue rocked. It did make me want to cheer with the rest of that stadium. Awesome sequence. But after that, it went downhill. Lois just came off as a bitter bitch. I just didn't buy her as a "Lois." Plus what was the whole motivation to sneaking onto the yaught anyway? Is that normal reporter practice, to trespass onto someone's nice yaught because you hear classical music?

I didn't mind the Kevin Spacey stuff. Only weak link in that group was Parker Posey. Can't stand her anyway, she just drains any scene she is in.

The movie felt long, with not a lot going on. There were some good sections and it will definitely be demo material for our theatres, but I'm just not feeling it overall. It's even more mind boggling when you consider how much money was spent to get this back on the screen.

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

Mike- you serious? just a surface level?

let's tick off the incredible similarities

- Lex brings his bimbo to the fortress and gets a crystal education (from SII)
-Clark arrives at the planet, gets a job (from SI)
-Clark saves Lois from malfunctioning/air related disaster (from SI) which leads into
-Perry rallying the troops down to a mimicking of the original films dialouge beats " Who is? Where did he come from?, etc) which leads to
- Superman startling Lois on another balcony, interupting her smoking, and basically saying similar general things to what he said in the earlier film (" I figure people must have a lot of questions") which culminates in
- the two getting physically close as they prepare to go for a flight, Lois apearing awestruck and at a loss for words until she manages to work Clark into the conversation, to which Superman replies quizzically "Clark?..." to which Lois dismisses the thought, and then they take off ( a beat for beat swipe of the original) which leads to
- immediately after the flight seeing clark (although the original accomplished this in a wonderful uncut shot)

skip ahead to Lois on the yacht and we get a replay of the scene between Superman and Lex in the original where he elucidates his grand scheme (this complete with an actual verbatim dialouge exchange swipe from another area of the first film ( "when I was 10 years old my father said to me..."), we also get the alternating maps that illustrate his point with the continental changes etc etc.
- we get the missle being fired that will bring about the chain reaction
- we get the earth quake that superman has to attend to , rather than immediately saving Lois
- we get the scene where he travels thru a tunnel inferno
- we get the scene where he confronts Luthor and the dialouge here is partly modified from the originals confrontation scene ("sick joke..." "is that how a warped brain like yours gets its kicks...") which leads to
- Superman being incapacitated by Kyrptonite he didn't see coming which leads to
- him falling into a body of water.
- while this is going on Miss Teschmacher/Kitty Kowalski reaches a moral epiphany and decides to do the right thing

I agree with you that the character of Superman is different from where he was in the first film, but that makes the rest of it all the more depressing that it is so unimaginiative. what is the story in this movie and what is the connective tissue?
is the plotline rip off of the original the actual story here, or is it just the ligaments? if it is just material to get us from point a to point b of Supermans 'emotional journey', why the hell does this 2.5 hour film waste so much time on it. I enjoyed the new stuff- the material with the kid and Richard, and the other parts that bridge all the retreading- but its an amazing shame the film couldn't have been entirely original with just a line here or a frame composition there to harken back to the first movie rather than so much full out plagerism.

Was this film actually made to be watched as in a series? or was it supposed to supplant the original (since it contains the entirely same villan/scheme/ along with attendant expository dialouge)? What was the purpose of not coming up with something more original? Would you guys have accepted so many beat for beat swipes in one of the Star Wars prequels, or the next Indiana Jones movie, or Batman?

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

I completely agree about the narrative swipes/structural similarites, etc... Nice comprehensive list, Paul.

But the extreme difference in the characterization of Kal-El twists EVERYTHING on an emotional level for me. This only felt like a retread of Donner's on the most superficial narrative levels - despite how blatant some of the cribs are. I didn't think this would be my overall impression of the film until the end credits.

In some ways, this plays better for me as a contrasting companion to the Donner original, than as a vague sequel.


Which movie am I describing below -- ANH or TPM?
The story starts out with two characters who escape danger aboard a starship. Meanwhile, a girl of high planetary nobility is captured by the bad guys. The two fugitives wind up stranded on a desert planet and through a series of events meet a talented boy who is a native of the planet, along with others who help them with their mission. Together the group eludes the enemy sent to find them and they escape the planet. The girl of nobility is rescued by the protagonists and eventually leads a plan to launch a counterattack against the enemy. The Jedi master of the group is killed by a Sith lord, though not before introducing the boy from the desert planet to the Force. In the climatic end battle sequence, the boy from the desert planet blows up the enemy space station, and we end with a celebration of all the characters looking into the camera.

And which movie am I describing below -- ESB or AOTC?
In the middle episode, a flying hunter droid, sent by the enemy, sets the plot into motion. As a result, the two main heroes get split up early on. One flies his personal fighter on a mission to a mysterious waterlogged planet, accompanied only by his astromech droid, while the other gets to protect the girl, and he and the girl fall in love. There is an asteroid chase, a cool armored bounty hunter, and a big ground battle involving giant walking vehicles. A hero is tormented by troubling visions of someone dear to him being in pain, leading him to travel to another planet to attempt a rescue. The villain reveals a big secret and tries to tempt a hero with a "join me and together we can bring order to the galaxy" speech. The villain also lops off a hero's limb with a lightsaber. And there's a pivotal scene where a tiny old Jedi master demonstrates his amazing command of the Force. It ends with a shot of a hero (his lost limb now replaced with a mechanical one), the girl, and the droids gazing off into an uncertain future.

And again, which movie am I describing below -- ROTJ or ROTS?
The final chapter will open with an elaborate mission led by the heroes to rescue a prominent character. In the process, one of the heroes will show that he is now a very powerful and full-fledged Jedi. After the rescue is successful, the heroes regroup to discuss a multi-fold plan to defeat the enemy, though they are unaware that all of this is proceeding according the design of an evil mastermind. This dastardly scheme, which will give the evil mastermind undisputed control of the galaxy, involves luring his enemies' (the heroes) forces into carefully-laid death traps, and tempting their most powerful member to the dark side of the Force. There follows a battle on a forest planet involving heroes allied with furry natives of the planet, fighting against a technologically superior enemy. Somewhere in the film there is also a massive, awe-inspiring space battle. The evil mastermind's plan unfolds and culminates in a furious and tragic lightsaber battle between two central characters that should instead care greatly for each other. The good character prevails, while the loser's life is profoundly altered in a way that also alters the very course of the galaxy.

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

Paul, just to make my post clearer:

In a film like this where THEME IS KING, those narrative details/cribs you listed do come off as superficial to me, due to the fact the overall 'package' in the long run (ie: by end credits) evokes a strong and different emotionality/thematic through-line than the original Donner film. That's mostly due to the different characterization of the title character, but it really changes everything for me. It makes Singer's appropriation of the Donner film, an almost fascinating excercise (from a post-modern perspective). Half way through the film I wouldn't have said that, but the last hour pulled it off for me.


I also want to go against the growing vibe that states the last hour of SR was weaker than the first hour. I disagree completely (although I agree Lex's evil plan is kinda silly when you analyze it - on a logistical level)

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

nice job on those Mike (I doff my hairpiece to you) there is a little reaching going on in spots, but I still applaud the effort

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

though I have to admit I'm a bit confused as to what exactly the theme of this film was, and more importantly, how the conflict with antagonist and his agenda fit into it. To me it seemed like the theme gets lip service here and there before being absent mindedly dropped for much of the middle (or third act), until after the resolution of the Luthor plotline, and we start the fourth act (!?) where its picked up again.

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

-theme of loneliness

-theme of belonging

-theme of outsiders

-theme of family


They played loud and clear for me - on a very emotional/cinematic/visual level. So despite 'problems' with the narrative, I give the film a thumbs up.


Well, Lex wants the world to "love him" (ie:value him) on his own terms. He's gonna violently force them to do so with his twisted scenario he concocted. He's definitely an outsider in society as well.

I freely admit the Lex scenario is more a cog in the plotting than a big chunk of the thematic meat (as opposed to Magneto in X-Men)

Sidenote: I got to tip my hat off to Routh (and Singer's direction of him). Some excellent non-verbal acting.

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

Mike,
Only the first one is hard. You had to not mention the Death Star (the biggest point of ANH to make it work).

The second is easy: AOTC. ESB has THREE heroes...Leia is the third.

The third is a trick question: neither of them are a full-fledged Jedi. One hasn't met his destiny again, and the other is violating everything they stand for

Though I agree that SR is theme-driven. Unfortunately, little time is spent on what drove the theme early on. We come into it in media res...good with narrative, bad with theme.

Re: *** Official SUPERMAN RETURNS Discussion Thread

The theme of loneliness is really all that's missing. It's implied in a few places but it isn't driven as hard as the rest of the themes that Mike posted.

Loneliness was essentially cut down at the beginning of the film. Any of the scenes within the Smallville sequences would've cleared that up. As it stands, it's only implied.

Still, after a third viewing, I still think this film is quite good.