What's new

Superman ... ZZZzzzzzzzz (1 Viewer)

Paul_Scott

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2002
Messages
6,545
in this post Michael Bay / Matrix/bullet-time cinematic landscape, the first Superman has just as much if not more fascination for me.
i love to see actors perform in a scene where the camera holds
for longer than just a reaction shot.
i love to see several characters in the same scene playing off of each other and truly inhabiting their environment.

i love the 'old school' effects, as rickety as they can be sometimes, because when they get too precise, as seems to happen so often with cgi, they lose a little soul and personality.

i love the delicious amorality and supreme vanity of Hackmans Luthor.
i love the earnestness and sincerity of Reeves Kent.
i still adore Kidders portrayal of Lois, and as photographed and lit by Unsworth, she looks just fine.
neither Kidder or even Reeves make for the genetically perfect comic book incarnations, imo, but the play the roles here with so much heart and conviction, that i'm always sold.
toss in one of Williams greatest film scores (and thats saying something) and its still smashing entertainment to me.

there was once a time when i never expected any film other comic-book based film to overtake this one, which has enormous nostalgic appeal for me (my step-father succumbed to cancer a few weeks before this was released so the film had an enormous resonance for me at an early age) , yet i have to admit, what Singer has done with the first two X-men movies is just as comparable.
in fact, i think they work far better as a 1-2 punch than Superman I & II do (i was always let down by tackiness of II).
 

Patrick McCart

Premium
Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 16, 2001
Messages
8,196
Location
Georgia (the state)
Real Name
Patrick McCart
Superman is one of my favorites and likely, IMO, the best comic book movie ever made.

I think the 8 minutes added a lot to the film in terms of development. Krypton seemed a bit rushed and abrupt. The additions of the council and the shadow zone passing make the first part of the film run smoother. The additional Jor-El scene makes a lot of sense...why would Superman only talk once? I mean...if he was able to communicate with a copy of his father...why not do it more than once?

Sure, it may be redundant, but the whole "gauntlet of doom" scene is cool. Luthor knew Superman wouldn't even be touched... but since he's the "diseased maniac" that he is, why wouldn't he use his toys for a little bit of fun?

Extended edition or theatrical cut, Superman is a fun and well made superhero movie.
 

Gary->dee

Screenwriter
Joined
Feb 14, 2003
Messages
1,923
For a long time I thought Superman II was my favorite movie in the series. But then I became intimate with Rhino's superb classic 2 disc Superman soundtrack and it all changed, making the first movie definitely my favorite now. Love the isolated track on the DVD. Probably Williams' best score(tough choice though between Close Encounters/Star Wars/Jaws/E.T. the list goes on) and even he was so proud of his work on Superman that he allowed an isolated track to be available. For me the entire movie is a classic.

Superman is one of my favorites and likely, IMO, the best comic book movie ever made.
I agree, although I think X2 gives it a helluva run for its money. For me Superman gets it though on the basis of it coming out first in 1978 and having the Williams score.
 

Matthew_Millheiser

Supporting Actor
Joined
May 1, 2000
Messages
657
Superman is not only the finest comic-book movie ever made, it is the only movie that, in the winter of 1978/79, made my seven year old brain forget all about Star Wars.

Is it flawed? Sure. But it's wonderful in too many ways.

And the "Earth spinning backwards" is thematic of Superman's time travel. He isn't "spinning the Earth backwards to go back in time." He is going back in time, period. The Earth is spinning backwards because that's what the Earth does when you fly past the light barrier. That's their story and they're sticking to it!
 

Luis S

Supporting Actor
Joined
May 7, 2000
Messages
637
:eek: There are people who dont like Superman?!?!? What?!? A mod should close this thread for blasphemy! :D Best super hero film EVER.

Luis S
 

Christopher P

Supporting Actor
Joined
Dec 28, 1998
Messages
564
I remember early on liking 2 alot better than 1, though I'm not sure why now. I think the Krypton vilains were more appealing to me, and I didn't fully appreciate Hackman's Luthor, nor did I see him as the threat that he really was, if not to Superman, then to the rest of humanity. I thought 2 also had better pacing, but again, my more youthful attention span was likely much shorter then.

I still enjoy both, but wouldn't be able to rank 1 much higher than 2. I enjoyed Reeve as both Kent and Supe, the way he looks at Otis when Lex tells him to take his cape, that is priceless, don't tell me the guy's a wuss. I didn't buy in to Miss tessmacher much, she seemed a little superfluous to me, but not a big issue. Kidder, same story, but not enough to detract from the story. And I did like the look of Krypton, and the fortress. Should probably catch part 1 again now that I think about it.

Chris
 

Brian W.

Screenwriter
Joined
Jul 29, 1999
Messages
1,972
Real Name
Brian
Well, I'm certainly not in the "snooze" group. I think the original Superman is far and away the best comic book movie ever.
 

Jack Shappa

Second Unit
Joined
Jan 24, 2003
Messages
411
A few problems I had with the movie...

Lois Lane : Margot Kidder looks like a homeless bag lady hag with no teeth

Time Travel : This is fine, but he turns time back to just before Lois gets killed. Won't the aftershock still happen and won't he need to save the dam etc etc all over again? He just says hi to her and Jimmy then flies off to capture Luthor.

Flying Poetry : That Lois Lane voiceover makes one cringe in one's seat. And she would be absolutely freezing her ass off up there...

Other than that I can live with it.

- Cryo
 

Joshua_Y

Screenwriter
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
1,241
in this post Michael Bay / Matrix/bullet-time cinematic landscape, the first Superman has just as much if not more fascination for me.
i love to see actors perform in a scene where the camera holds
for longer than just a reaction shot.
i love to see several characters in the same scene playing off of each other and truly inhabiting their environment.

i love the 'old school' effects, as rickety as they can be sometimes, because when they get too precise, as seems to happen so often with cgi, they lose a little soul and personality.
AMEN! I am seriously growing tired of films that just simply can not hold onto a shot for more than 2 seconds...I dont think Matrix is a part of this though...since they are well edited and have quite a lot of "still" shots...but anything from Michael Bay or for that matter Peter Jackson...man...just hold a shot for 5 seconds and stop moving the camera...its even more irritating in LOTR...cause its something I love...but the camera movement really just pisses me off...it makes it feel less epic...this is more so in TTT...cause I didnt notice it has much in FOTR...
But anyway...I prefer the way older films like Superman and Star Wars OT and newer films like Star Wars PT or Matrix are shot...camera moves when necessary and not just for show...
And I still feel that the flying FX in Superman are still the best out there...Reloaded got awlful close and I really believed Neo was flying and boy do I love the end when he rescues Trinity...but something about the Superman flying scenes just brings it to life...probably because its the real actor...and your seeing him...and he just moves like he's flying...its quite amazing...they say in the first scene when Supes flies out of the Fortress that Chris actually banked his body and flew around instead of straight on...wow!
 

Paul_Scott

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2002
Messages
6,545
i finally got in a second viewing of FOTR recently, and while i enjoyed it much, much more this second time around, i have to agree that the camera work was disappointing.

it's so aggressive in its attempt to sell the 'sweeping' shots that it draws attention to itself at the expense of whats being photographed.

i feel like the filmmaker is being very condescending and treating me like a retarded child whose attention would drift on a static shot.
the reality is quite the contrary, of course.
 

Joshua_Y

Screenwriter
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
1,241
I guess there doing it for the people who have attention spans that of 5 seconds...for instance a friend of mine who enjoys films but is by no means a film buff...went to see Matrix Reloaded...he was a fan of the first...and I had already seen it at an employee showing and asked him how he enjoyed it...he said he didnt like it...that there was too much "talking" I was dumbfounded...this guy actually liked Pearl Harbor...PEARL HARBOR! A 3-hour borefest with about 45min worth of some decent battle footage...and I couldnt understand how he could really like something like Pearl Harbor...or hell he loves LOTR...and about 2/3 of the movie is dialogue scenes! Then it suddenly hit me...he didnt like it because the camera wasnt moving all the time...Reloaded is shot very static a lot of the time...more old fashioned I guess you'd say...sadly theres people out there who always want the camera moving and never to stop...they have the attention span that can only be measured in nano-seconds...

Give me old school camera work anyday! :)
 

TheLongshot

Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 12, 2000
Messages
4,118
Real Name
Jason
While I do think Superman is probably the best comic book movie, it is not by leaps and bounds. There is too much cheese in the film, with the bumbling Otis, and the ill-advised "song" by Lois. I also don't care much for Lex's plan, and Hackman feels off a little bit.

That being said, there are magical moments in the film, and Chris Reeves was probably the best casting ever.

As for Margot Kidder, you need to watch the screen tests they did for Lois. None of those actresses did nearly as good of a job as Margot.

Point is, tho, there are chinks in this film's armor, and there is room to do a better comic book film. Spiderman probably came the closest, but doesn't quite have the magic down.

Jason
 

Joshua_Y

Screenwriter
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
1,241
IMO...the films that have gotten the closest to Superman in terms of comic movies are:

The Crow
Blade 1&2
DareDevil
Batman Returns
X2
Ghost World
From Hell
Road to Perdition
 

Gruson

Second Unit
Joined
Sep 20, 2000
Messages
494
CLassic.

I do not get bored at all. It is one of the few films that gives me chills when I watch it.
 

Kevin M

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2000
Messages
5,172
Real Name
Kevin Ray
As for Margot Kidder, you need to watch the screen tests they did for Lois. None of those actresses did nearly as good of a job as Margot.
Absolutely. Oddly enough the only other woman I thought captured the spunky, wise ass New York spirit of Lois Lane was Stockard Channing...with Ann Archer as the best looking Lois...however looks ain't everything. ;)
 

Mikel_Cooperman

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jan 16, 2001
Messages
4,183
Real Name
Mikey
Jack, whats your idea of a good movie thats not boring?
Fast and the Furious????!!??

I think Superman is a great movie. Shocked to see all the people that think this movie is boring. Maybe not enough Jump cuts and explosions for the average viewer of today but still very well done and a good flick.
 

Mark Zimmer

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 30, 1997
Messages
4,318
Count me in the snoozing group. Superman I is duller than dishwater. :thumbsdown: Dull, dull, dull, and just burdened by Marlon Brando, who is frankly there only for the publicity factor. The story is weak and Hackman must have been on drugs because he's terrible. Superman II at least has some lame comedy going for it, which I credit to Lester. But yes, this is a blasphemous opinion on HTF, where the Donner Superman is the Holy Grail. This makes zero sense to me. On the positive side, Reeve definitely looks the part. But then I think Margot Kidder was kind of a hottie too. :b
 

RobertR

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 19, 1998
Messages
10,675
She's not supposed to be sexy, she's brainy and spunky. That gets a rise out of a lot of men.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I agree with that assessment totally, Lois was never truly about being sexy, she was always supposed to be the spunky, clever, stubborn, every-girl who had lot's o' "Moxie" so to speak.

quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As for Margot Kidder, you need to watch the screen tests they did for Lois. None of those actresses did nearly as good of a job as Margot.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Absolutely. Oddly enough the only other woman I thought captured the spunky, wise ass New York spirit of Lois Lane was Stockard Channing...with Ann Archer as the best looking Lois...however looks ain't everything.
There was more to it than the spunky, brainy wise ass. Kidder was the only one who was able to convey that she truly loved Superman. Now I understand that there are people who have a "yechh!! enough with the corny love stuff! give me the explosions and FX and ass kicking!" reaction, but that was considered important to the makers of the film.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest Articles

Forum statistics

Threads
356,814
Messages
5,123,697
Members
144,184
Latest member
H-508
Recent bookmarks
0
Top