Sci-Fi News and Reviews

I'm glad I ran across your post. To me, Superman Returns gets better each time I watch it. It's visually stunning, for one thing. I also believe that it is appealing to women. The love story - Superman as a tortured soul - resonated with a lot of women.

Here's portions of a review I wrote on it back in 2006:

Kevin Spacey - Despite reviews to the contrary, I believe Spacey's Luthor had the most to work with but did the least with it. I'd read that he didn't try to model his character after Gene Hackman's portrayal, but IMO, he wasn't even as good in the role as Michael Rosenbaum from "Smallville." I'm not saying his portrayal was bad, but I just expected more from Kevin Spacey. When I saw Superman, I didn't miss Chris Reeve. When I saw Lois, I didn't miss Margot Kidder. When I saw Spacey, I did miss Hackman.

Kate Bosworth - Again, I'm going to disagree with most critics. I think she gave a solid performance. I mean, what were we expecting from Lois Lane? Did we think she would swoon for Superman the second she saw him? Did we hope she'd become an emotional wreck in Superman's absence? Lois Lane, since the 60s, has always been a strong, modern, independent woman. Of course she has moved on. Of course she's going to treat Superman with cool, even cold, indifference. Of course she hasn't waited for him.

Interesting that some critics are, well, critical of her performance because she isn't enough like Margot Kidder. Yet they are critical of new Superman Brandon Routh because (they say) he is too much like Christopher Reeve... but he isn't. Not really.

Brandon Routh - Routh is Superman. Period. But a modern Superman. An emotional one. He feels pain - both physical and emotional. He does what WE do when we've lost the love of our life. He broods. He schemes. He flies by her house hoping to catch a glimpse. He does good deeds, not only because he feels compelled to, but because he wants to be accepted. He hasn't forgotten that his Kryptonian mother told his father that he would be odd and different. An outcast.

And he gets his ass kicked. Oh yes he does. If you've ever thought the overgrown boyscout needed a good ass kicking, you'll be happy. I don't believe you've ever seen a superhero taken down like this before. Watching him being kicked to the ground and dragged across the rocks with is arms flailing was shocking.

I honestly don't believe Routh borrowed much from Reeve in his portrayal of Superman. Even as Clark, Routh is a little less nerdy. He's more like the kind of guy no one ever notices, as opposed to the bumbling and clumsy oaf everyone laughs at.

----------------

Now, what to do with the kid? Easy - and here's my idea. We now know Kryptonians and Humans can reproduce. What we don't know - and here's the plot - is that their offspring have a deadly genetic flaw. In the sequel, Superman battles to find the cure, one that will save his son but leave him only human.

In response to your criticism of Lois Lane's spelling ability, this was not introduced in Superman Returns, but dates at least as far back as the Donner movies.

I think you had the same experience I had. When I saw the film in the theater, I remember saying, "I like this. . .but it's not great." However, ever since that first showing, whenever I happen to watch it. . .I like it more and more. Two the point where it's now one of my favorite superhero movies.

I continued to wonder why it took me several viewings to like it, and what I eventually came up with is that because there was such a long time between Superman 4 and Returns, and so many start up and failures. . .that I had way to much time to create my own superman movie in my head (things I would like to see, things I'd want to happen) and it became so good in my head, that Superman Returns could not live up to my pre-conceived ideas. Now that it's come and gone from the theaters. . .and I've had time to forget about what I wanted. . .I've been able to appreciate the move for what it is. A good setup for a kick but sequel.

Now, as far as I'm concerned, the only option for the sequel. . .is to have a super villan kill the kid, and then we get to watch the most powerful super hero completely loose control. How great would that be. The trick is to do it in such a way so that sup's can't just turn the world back again.

Oops. . .there I go again. . .trying to make a movie in my head. . .

For good or ill, "Superman Returns" was very much a direct descendant of "Superman: The Movie". As Stuart mentioned, they maintained Lois's unashamed inability to spell ("How many T's in bloodletting?"). Superman's reassurance that, statistically speaking, flying is the safest way to travel. And, Lex's desire for money and power all wrapped up in land (that, was, after all, the scheme from "Superman: The Movie").

The audience, no doubt, wanted big action, and instead received a very expensive movie about family relationships, and the responsibility of passing down from father to son. The kid, after all, means Superman isn't alone in the universe anymore.

In many ways, this was an echo of the first movie as well. And if you don't think the 70's-era Superman dealt with pathos, I highly suggest returning to those movies.

Anyway, it wasn't an over the top action flick in the same way as X3 was the same summer. But at the heart of it, there's just a lot more to "Superman Returns".

And, yes, I've seen all of the Superman movies far, far too many times.

I confess, I'm a big fan of Superman as a character/ franchise/ etc... and I've seen all of the movies more often than is probably good for me.

"Superman Returns" tried to find ground between the first two Superman movies and updating the franchise. In a lot of ways the filmmakers may have been too concerned with maintaining the world of the first Superman movies, from Lex's obsession with land, to Lois's inability to spell. And without knowing the first Superman movies frontward and backward, lines like "I hope this little incident won't put you off flying..." might not have resonated terribly well with the audience.

Like "Superman: The Movie", "Superman Returns" has action sequences, but its not an action movie in the same manner as X3, which came out the same summer and did better initial box office. But I think, ten years from now, few are going to be looking at X3, and Superman Returns is going to get a better shake.

Its great to read that others are giving the movie a second chance.

All that said, the first two Superman movies and Superman Returns are about that sense of alienation and legacy of father to son. In many ways, the introduction of Jason to the movies is a logical next step. I'll be curious to see how the next team deals with the Jason factor, as I think that story thread barely registered with viewers.

Also, check out that last scene again. He's totally wearing Aquaman pajamas.

I watched this again the other night and I still feel that it is a great movie. I loved it when I saw it at the cinema and my opinion hasn't changed. Singer had a great vision for the movie which was lavishly realised with care and attention. There are occasional technical missteps (close ups of a CGI Routh in the flying sequences) but I thought the movie was beautifully done, and had heart and soul in abundance. Give me this over meaningless action blockbusters (e.g. 'The Incredible Hulk') anyday.

Get it in HD for the full affect.