Superman Returns




Posted by Vampiro V. Empire

Anyone seen it yet?

I just got back from a ten o'clock showing... and holy ****, it's amazing. Easily one of my favourite movies ever, while also being the best superhero movie yet (which, is saying quite a bit). I recommend you all go out and see it as soon as possible, because I can't imagine seeing it on a smaller screen. It's made for a theater and that's where you need to see it.


Oh, and some guy dressed up as Superman. I got a picture with him and the audience applauded when he entered and exited the theater. Which made the experience that much better.

Go see it.




Posted by Xenos

Hmm ... I wasn't sure whether I want to see it, but looking at your response, I probably will go off now.




Posted by brownoystercult

OOOH, i heard from my friends also who gotthe advanced screening that, this **** was absolutely amazing.




Posted by Sapphire Rose

Going to see it in a week actually. Was not to excited for it because the preview I saw looked lame. But every report I see ends up like Vampiro's. I'm actually getting pumped for it.




Posted by Vampiro V. Empire

Yeah, I wasn't expecting too much from the trailers. I even thought the CG looked alittle lame. But even that was really fantastic.




Posted by Axis

I'm going to go see it with a bunch of friends this weekend. I've heard from countless people that it's the best superhero movie to date.




Posted by Crazy K

I'm definitally going to see it now, But sadly I'll have to wait till next week or something.




Posted by Arcadios

With Vampiro's second sentence as a refrence, I'm gonna see it this friday along with Click.




Posted by Dog

I'm definetly going to see it somtime. Hopefully soon.




Posted by Grave Wisdom

Hoping to see it tommorow afternoon. Glad to hear people like it.




Posted by Fei-on Castor

I saw a sneak preview of it on Tuesday, and I have NO IDEA what all the hype is about.

Sure, the movie was okay. It was very well made, too. The actors were efficient in portraying the roles set before them, and the special effects were top notch.

But the freaking concept of Superman is so f*cking stupid that it just took me right out of the film. Think of it this way. If there is a conflict and Superman gets involved and takes a side, that side WILL win unless someone on the other side has some Kryptonite. And that stuff is hard to come by, you know. No matter what he is up against, he CAN NOT lose unless there is kryptonite involved. Even when he is working with time constraints (like the first problem he encounters in the film) he still can not lose because he can fly faster than anything on earth can fly/fall/run/drive. He is too powerful!

I mean, with Spiderman, if you shoot him in the face, he's dead. If you put a knife to his throat and slide it across his jugular vein, he's dead. If you break his neck, he's dead. Superman is just too powerful.

The movie itself was good, as a movie, I suppose, but the concept of Superman is so stupid that you can't possibly write a good script around it unless you modify the core ideas of his powers and weaknesses.

So, apart from the concept, I thought it was a good movie.

EDIT - Click was better, IMHO. See it instead.




Posted by Vampiro V. Empire


Quoted post: No matter what he is up against, he CAN NOT lose unless there is kryptonite involved.


wat iz doomsday? :cookie:

Quoted post:
The movie itself was good, as a movie, I suppose, but the concept of Superman is so stupid that you can't possibly write a good script around it unless you modify the core ideas of his powers and weaknesses.


That's why they moved away from the action and focused on the characters more. It's a trend within most Superhero movies now. Most are a little too powerful for their own good, making the actions scenes interesting, but a little predictable and stale. So, they focus on their real identity and the struggle between the two - the hero, and the human.


Plus, it's a comic book movie. No matter what, it's made for comic book fans.



Posted by Moogs

Wow, the best superhero movie of all time?




Posted by s0ul

Jesus Christ, that movie ****ing sucked.

It got to the point where I was staring at the girls I was with instead, the movie was so ridiculously boring. The most fun I had was when the piano is pushed and I said "the force is strong in this one." Should've stayed at home.

It is, however, worth noting that it was not nearly as corny as I had expected. They more than made up for it in other fields though.




Posted by Fei-on Castor

Well, I am a comic book fan, but I, along with most people, preferred marvel to DC. DC has Batman, who is awesome, and Superman who is lackluster. Marvel has prettymuch everyone else worth mentioning, and the great Stan Lee.

Brian Singer should have done X-men 3 and let someone else do Superman.

Another huge problem with it was the falling action.

SPOILER ALERT. IF YOU HAVE NOT SEEN THE MOVIE, DO NOT READ ANYMORE OF MY POST

The obvious climax of the film is when Superman is lifting that huge continent into the sky and throwing it into space, all the while the kryptonite is growing closer and closer to him, and if it touches him, he and the rest of world become screwed. He successfully throws it out and wins. Good triumphs over evil for now. Luther got away like he almost always does, but his plan has been foiled. The guys in the plane got away safely. That should be it. Superman should return home, exchange a few simple goodbyes, maybe learn about the kid, and then be on his way. But no, that's not how the movies goes. AFTER the huge climax, they put in more suspense where Superman is unconcious and he might not make it. Sorry, but that's not how good action movies work. I'm all about breaking the mold and doing something new. But not when you have a good formula that is used on a sh*tload of excellent movies and probably could improve your movie that you are making. They dragged on way too long after the climax, I think.

After the climax, the viewer has watched the good guys win in the face of extreme adversity. And now all they want is a bit of closure and a few words to keep them waiting for a sequel (sometimes), but they don't want more suspense or action scenes that are resolved. The big problem is over, so no more small problems should come unless it's the kind that is not resolved until the sequel... Yeah, that's it.




Posted by Vampiro V. Empire


Quoted post: Well, I am a comic book fan, but I, along with most people, preferred marvel to DC. DC has Batman, who is awesome, and Superman who is lackluster. Marvel has prettymuch everyone else worth mentioning, and the great Stan Lee.


DC plz.


Quoted post: After the climax, the viewer has watched the good guys win in the face of extreme adversity. And now all they want is a bit of closure and a few words to keep them waiting for a sequel (sometimes), but they don't want more suspense or action scenes that are resolved. The big problem is over, so no more small problems should come unless it's the kind that is not resolved until the sequel... Yeah, that's it.


The falling action needed to be there. It would be a little odd for Superman to get stabbed by kryptonite, almost drown, proceed to lift a massive continent full of more kryptonite into space and then say "lol looks like my work here is done".

No, that's just retarded. We understand he's a [COLOR="White"]Go[/COLOR]d character, but come on. If he didn't end up in the hospital, that would have just been silly. I thought the whole ending was perfect, anyways. It gave more closure than a simple "peace out, *****es" would, that's for sure.

Oh, and falling action isn't the conclusion. I think you might have that confused. Falling action is what you saw in Superman, it showed the effects and the consequences of the climax. Which is exactly what happened...



Posted by Fei-on Castor

Spoiler alert


Quoting Emperor Vampiro: he falling action needed to be there. It would be a little odd for Superman to get stabbed by kryptonite, almost drown, proceed to lift a massive continent full of more kryptonite into space and then say "lol looks like my work here is done".

No, that's just retarded. We understand he's a [COLOR="White"]Go[/COLOR]d character, but come on. If he didn't end up in the hospital, that would have just been silly. I thought the whole ending was perfect, anyways. It gave more closure than a simple "peace out, *****es" would, that's for sure.

Oh, and falling action isn't the conclusion. I think you might have that confused. Falling action is what you saw in Superman, it showed the effects and the consequences of the climax. Which is exactly what happened...


No, I know the clear distinction between falling action and conclusion. But usually, they aren't so defined in a good action movie.

I'm saying he should not have been touched by the kyrptonite coming off the bottom of the thing.. It should have come close to getting him, but then he should've successfully thrown the land thing into space, and returned back, triumphant and victorious.

Let's take Spiderman for example.

Before the major climactic showdown between Spiderman and the Green Goblin, Spiderman encounters a few fights. Yes, he is in the face of adversity all along, but you know he'll make it out okay because the big climax hasn't happened yet and that has to happen for the movie to end. So then the climax happens. Spiderman fights the Goblin, and almost loses (stabbed by kryptonite and drowned) but then stops the bad guy (throws the thing into space). After that, no more adversity for the rest of the film until Spiderman 2. The audience has seen enough trouble for the guy, they dont' need to see anymore tonight. A few closing words, Norman Osborne's funeral, and a few clues into the fact that there will be a sequel, and BAM, credits roll. No more problems, no more issues to resolve today. If any more problems are presented, leave them for the sequel.

I would've been okay if Superman went into acoma and didn't come out before the film ended. That would've been okay. But to present another entire problem to deal with and try to cram it in after the climax... That's like trying to throw a second climax into a flim. Just let it end. If Superman is bedridden when it ends, oh well! At least we know there will be another one.

Another Spiderman equivalent. That would be like if at the end of Spiderman 1, after he beats the Goblin, to watch a few of those montages where Spiderman takes down smaller bad guys, then after 20 minutes of that, then go to the funeral scene and end the film. No, after the climax, you finish it off and either give some closure, or leave a few questions open for a sequel. Don't put your hero into ANOTHER bad position and make viewers see how he will get out of it after he already did the big thing he was gonna do.



Posted by Vampiro V. Empire


Quoted post: But usually, they aren't so defined in a good action movie.


Good thing it isn't a pure action movie then :cookie:

Quoted post:
I'm saying he should not have been touched by the kyrptonite coming off the bottom of the thing.. It should have come close to getting him, but then he should've successfully thrown the land thing into space, and returned back, triumphant and victorious.


Sorry, but that's really lame. Especially since Kyptonite doesn't have to touch him to affect him. With that much so close to him, while being so weak, while lifting something so gigantic... it wouldn't have made much of a difference if it didn't touch him or not.

Oh, and if you seriously thought Superman was going to die... then lol. It wasn't put in to make the audience go "oh noes hes dead!", it was just put in for the **** between Lois, the kid, and Superman. Oh, and because it makes sense.



Posted by Fei-on Castor

Of course I didn't think Superman would die. I know he won't because that's just how the movies work. Superman doesn't die.

The stuff between Lois, Superman and the kid could've been done without Superman being all out of it. It could've been done in a few minutes. They dragged it out way too long.




Posted by Vampiro V. Empire


Quoted post: Of course I didn't think Superman would die. I know he won't because that's just how the movies work. Superman doesn't die.


Then there was no suspense. Oh, and Doomsday.


Quoted post: The stuff between Lois, Superman and the kid could've been done without Superman being all out of it. It could've been done in a few minutes. They dragged it out way too long.


It couldn't have been done as meaningfully as it was. As for it dragging on for too long, I disagree. The length was fine.



Posted by s0ul

Eh, I'm going with feion here. Everybody in my row was continuously checking their phones to see what time it was for the last hour of the movie.




Posted by Vampiro V. Empire

People tend to do that no matter what... especially when the movie is close to three hours. But, I guess I'm just too much of a fag for superman to really complain about how lengthy it was. Personally, I was so glad it was as long as it was.




Posted by s0ul

NUH UH! I don't know, when it's constantly interesting, people don't tend to care how long it is. I neglected to mention that the cell phone checks were usually followed by groans.




Posted by Vampiro V. Empire

Eh, every long movie I've been to has been the same. You constantly see light from peoples phones and watches. Though the groan thing... well, I've never experienced that before, especially during Superman. Then again, I did go on tuesday...




Posted by Fate

I liked it.




Posted by Big Boss

WARNING! SPOILERS AHEAD! WARNING! MEGAMAN BOSS IS UP!








I came into the film with a few expectations. I expected the movie to be one of the better comic book films ever released, only because of Bryan Singer. The director of the best comic movie ever, X2: X-Men United, should work his magic again with Superman without a doubt. [color=lightgreen]Check. I also expected Brandon Routh to be a challenge for viewers to get used to as the new Superman. The image of Christopher Reeve as Superman is embedded in people's minds to the point where great comic book artists such as Alex Ross draw from his look when painting Superman. The man just looked like a Calvin Klein model and would have a hard time playing Sups. Wrong. I was surprised at how well Routh played his role as both Clark and Superman, and his voice fits rather well with the character.

But while I came out of the film hugely satisfied, there were a few things to note that the comic book elitist in me couldn't let go, and most of it starts and ends with Lex Luthor. This film is not meant to completely please comic book fans, but to please the audience that loved the old Superman flicks, regardless of their comic book experience.

If I remember correctly, I read in Wizard that Singer was a huge fan of those films, which is a big reason why Superman Returns takes relative place in that universe, but I don't think he ever read enough modern material (anything in the last 5 to 10 years, at least) to truly learn from Superman's world. Lex is the biggest example of this. Luthor is the same villain he was in the old Superman flicks: short-tempered but unusually hysterical, sort of like a human version of Mr. Mxyztplk, while still retaining his intelligence and vision... albeit a misguided one.

Luthor is a man you don't mess around with, and anyone that is near him and works for him knows better than to act stupidly or open their mouth without Luthor's approval. The stupidity of his henchmen and the stupid comments continually made by "Kitty," coupled with her dumping the crystals as Lex was flying away from a crumbling kryptonite-powered land would've guaranteed her quick demise. Yet she's still alive, just to give Luthor an unfitting comic role. It's very much like the Luthor from the old movies, and very unlike the Luthor from the comic book.

Sadly, it doesn't stop there. While there was a hint of Luthor's devotion to independent human growth without the aid of meta-humans, there wasn't any trace of the deep love that almost defines his character: His love for Metropolis. On the contrary, without giving it a second thought he was willing to destroy Metropolis, along with most of North America, to create his own Utopia. This complete lack of care for the city that he loves, the one that he would continue to "protect" no matter how much it spits on his face, is the biggest flaw in Luthor's character in Returns. Someone at DC should've passed "Lex Luthor: Man of Steel" to Bryan Singer.

Yet it's not Singer's fault. I'd say that to most fans of the comics, their image of Superman is defined by the stories told in that medium. By the same token, Singer's image of Superman seems to be defined by Reeve's Superman in the big screen, so it's natural that he'll draw inspiration and pay tribute to that instead. And while most people would identify with Singer, it's still a shame that the film is not meant to be the first of its kind. No matter how great it stands on its own, it's still tied by the older flicks behind the scenes, unlike the true revival of Bats in Batman Begins, where all the older movies have never taken place. That's how I would've wanted it. In the case of directing X-Men, Singer didn't grow up "liking the films" because there weren't any. He wasn't an X-Men fan either, as I understand it, and didn't read the books while growing up... so when he took on the job to make the first ever X-Men film, he had no choice but to draw inspiration and knowledge from the main source, resulting in a much faithful picture to the original characters, regardless of how much he changed from the comic book.

Oh, and the CG is some cases... ew.

It's still an amazing film though, just not the best. I guess your like for it will depend on how much you like and know about Superman. Either way people should come out of it relatively satisfied.
[/color]



Quoting Perestroika Castor] Think of it this way. If there is a conflict and Superman gets involved and takes a side, that side WILL win unless someone on the other side has some Kryptonite. And that stuff is hard to come by, you know. No matter what he is up against, he CAN NOT lose unless there is kryptonite involved.

...

The movie itself was good, as a movie, I suppose, but the concept of Superman is so stupid that you can't possibly write a good script around it unless you modify the core ideas of his powers and weaknesses.

Spoiler alert

No, after the climax, you finish it off and either give some closure, or leave a few questions open for a sequel. Don't put your hero into ANOTHER bad position and make viewers see how he will get out of it after he already did the big thing he was gonna do.


While I dislike your idea, it's not the reason why I'm addressing this. Superman needed to be "taken out" in front of the whole world to set up the ultimate resolution of the film, which is "The world needs Superman." The big question of the film was whether he was needed or not, after coming back from a 5 year hiatus. Him being in a coma showed that Sups was needed in more ways than one. Not only did people need him to save a plane, cool down a burning building, stop a robbery... but they also needed him for the simple fact that they cared for him, period. It was also the resolution for Superman, because no matter how much people embraced him when he came back, his doubts would not be truly put to rest unless Lois, whom he cared the most for, believed he was needed. Notice how he automagically got better only after Lois told him X to him at the hospital. It could've been "I love you," and just as well it could've been "We need you."



Posted by Vampiro V. Empire


Quoted post: It's very much like the Luthor from the old movies, and very unlike the Luthor from the comic book.


I personally had no problem with that. Because, like you said, that's the movie Lex, not the comic Lex. Just like how there's a different Lex in the cartoons. They're each fitting in their roles - one for kids, one for the general audience, and one for the comic fans. Though, I do agree about the crystal thing. I think, no matter what Lex they would have used, Kitty would be dead.



Posted by Domino

I honestly did not like the movie. I expected to be an action packed super hero movie, but no. It turned out to be three hours of floating and Superman catching falling objects.




Posted by Big Boss


Quoting Emperor Vampiro: Just like how there's a different Lex in the cartoons. They're each fitting in their roles - one for kids, one for the general audience, and one for the comic fans.


One thing to note, however, is that Lex Luthor from Superman: The Animated Series and Justice League is the same Lex from the comic books, but visually different.



Posted by higbvuyb


Quoted post: Superman can also be affected by magic, and he can pass out and be beaten by someone of equal or greater strength... which means other films would have to explore Superman's alien enemies. In the -100% chance that anyone with relative power involved in the film is reading this: Bring Darkseid for the sequel. You want to see Sups beaten to a pulp without the need of Kryptonite? Bring Apokolips into the mix. It'll be fair game from there, and I'll be a happy camper.

However, every single marvel/DC comic out there is filled with bucketfulls of plot induced stupidity and other plot devices, ensuring that if the stroy writers wanted to, a paraplegic with their jaw removed after a failed oepration could destroy the entire universe, for some scientifically unexplained reason, and people who survive the destruction of the universe get killed by a bullet if the plot says that they have to. However, they jsut come back alive just in time for the next comic.

Stories don't have to completely be logical to be good, but they have to make sense up to a point.



Posted by nich

I saw it last night and most of my opinions about it have already been said (Bryan Singer, new actor for Superman, the Superman chracter etc. etc.). I was quite dissapointed wioth the lack of *** kicking superman does. Other than that it was a very good movie, I liked X-Men 2 better but thats just because I prefer Marvel to DC.




Posted by Boner

I heard this movie was lame, long-winded, low on action, and a borderline chick-flick. "Not enough @ss kicking.", as one of my friends put it. If I see it, it danm sure won't be at the price of $10. But, I will still check it out.




Posted by Delilah

That... movie... was... awesome! The casting was great- though I don't think Marlon Brandon did a good job. I think that the director tried too hard to portray Clark as Christoper Reeves did, and that was the mistake made. I also think that Clark and Lois having a son was too small of a factor in the movie- if you are going to have a plot twist like that, then you have to play it out good and cheesy. But, anyway, I have decided to forgive Brian Singer for not doing X-Men 3.




Posted by Vampiro V. Empire


Quoted post: though I don't think Marlon Brandon did a good job.


That's where I stopped reading. You're so ****ing dumb.



Posted by s0ul

The ghost of Marlon Brando is not to be taken lightly as a driving force in the movie industry.




Posted by Delilah

I'm not saying he is a bad actor. I think he is a really good actor- just not with this role. He tried too hard to re-create the Superman that we all fell in love with when Reeves played him.

Besides, he's cute. :)




Posted by Bebop

WROOOOONNNGGG




Posted by NeXidala

WOW even though im not into the whole superhero in tights thing this movie was AWESOME i easily give it a perfect 10/10!! :D (superman was hott too lol ;) )




Posted by Vampiro V. Empire


Quoted post: I'm not saying he is a bad actor. I think he is a really good actor- just not with this role.


You do realise Marlon Brando is dead right, and the scenes he was in were just old clips from the original Superman movies, right?



Posted by El Capitan

I recently saw this movie and hands down the best movie I've seen this summer and probally the best super hero movie I've seen ever.

I saw this movie with my friend and like Big Boss, I had little expectations, I was thinking the whole time that Brandon Routh would fail miserbaly as Superman. Fortunately I was wrong, he did an amazing job with this movie and I was well satisfied with his first major film debut.




Posted by misogenie

[COLOR="Cyan"]Computer graphics can make the camera fly erratically like a bumble bee. Comic movies have action and long conversations between people. I like the camera view, instead of sitting still, to move erratically like the bumble bee to give audience that extra rollercoaster experience - even if the movie may not be all that great. [/COLOR]
:wacko:




Posted by omegga

Is superman's suit effected by kryptonite aswel? or is it just him?




Posted by misogenie

[COLOR="Cyan"]The movie has another Superman, a son not yet grown up. It was lucky the kid was still alive. Had it been a super-terrorist with the same powers as Superman, the poor kid would not survive to enjoy his next birthday party. Just be glad it was Lex, the devious land-loving villain whose body a fearless old lady can hit like a punching bag that doesn't hit back. [/COLOR]




Posted by Vampiro V. Empire

... what?




Posted by misogenie

A script is a picture of words and I believe anyone if mind-focused can imagine some amazing villains or giant monster enemies. If I added one script say a giant Tyrannosaur Transformer, it would definitely make Superman worth watching:cool: :eek: