Genres

Visitors Review

soxlade 2012-05-25 12:02:21

A very dull superhero film

Firstly, I'm not a Superman fan. Give me Batman any day, Spiderman at apinch, or the angst of the Xmen series, but Superman was always a steptoo far. That being said, the original Superman is one of THE films ofthe 70s. Superbly crafted, brilliantly acted and wonderously puttogether it combined romance, action, derring do, hissing villains.Hearing glowing reviews, I happily coughed up my six quid to watchBryan Singer's take on the man of steel and ... boy was I disappointed.Singer excelled with Xmen, especially the second one, he also made thedeft Apt Pupil and the superb Usual Suspects. He's very good atcharacter, and this shows in Superman Returns. The character momentsare the very best parts of the film - well, from Routh anyway.Bosworth is more Lois Lame than Lois Lane. Bring back Margot Kidder'ssassy newshack. Heck get Jennifer Jason Lee from the Hudsucker Proxy toshow Bosworth how it is done. She was terrible, and a real drag on thefilm. I just didn't care about her, and the kid - while cute - didn'treally do much and I didn't give a stuff about him either. JamesMarsden, good as Cyclops, was also wasted - there was nothing for himto do and he added absolutely zero to the plot or story overall.So with the entire Lane household consigned to the "I don't care" bin,what about the rest of the film? Spacey should have been a brilliantLex Luthor, and indeed in many sequences he is excellent, but hedoesn't have that many sequences. Woefully underused, along with ParkerPosey, who is turning in a neat line of comical bad girls recently.However neither are particularly well developed, and Lex's continentgrowing scheme too out-there to really register as a threat tohumanity.So the plot's rubbish, the good actors under-used, the bad actorsglaringly obvious, is there anything to like about this film? Yes,Routh. The new boy is excellent as Superman, as perfect a fit to thecharacter as Reeve ever was. Where he is believable as Superman, he isexcellent as Clark Kent - the film really becomes fun whenever Kent ison screen.Outside of Routh, the film is turgid and po-faced. It has no sense ofadventure, and no real sense of fun. It is trying to do Batman Begins'trick of making a serious, adult take on a comic book character, butSuperman isn't that kind of character. You can't do a moody film abouta bloke in blue lycra. It would have been better if they hadconcentrated on following the Spiderman precedent - ticking all theboxes the comic fans want to see.I just wish Singer had stayed with the X-men, file this one under bigdisappointment. "Best entertainment since LOTR"? Puh-lease

MarkDrakes 2012-05-24 19:41:08

Is it a bird?, is it a plane?, is it a .... oh who cares?

Great director, brilliant idea, pointless film! How did it come tothis?In getting Bryan Singer it seemed that Warner Brothers had made ainspired choice, (X-men 1 & 2 are without doubt two of the best comicbook adaptations ever) add to that the casting of Kevin Spacey as LexLuther and a game unknown actor called Brendon Routh in the title roleand everything appeared to be set for a heroic return by the Man OfSteel (Routh even looks like Reeve for pity's sake). UnfortunatelyRouth's looking like the much missed actor is the one and only thing hehas going for him, His Clark Kent comes off as a flat impression ofReeve, failing to convey any emotion whatsoever and his Supermanamounts to little more than looking buff and righteous in between boutsof rather flat S-FX action. Faced with this damp squid of a leading manmuch is required of the rest of the cast to rescue proceedings and tobe fair Spacey is on top form, however despite being perfect for therole his efforts are wasted by Singer criminally underusing him andinstead choosing to give just as much time to pointless characters likeMarsdens risible Richard White. Other talented actors like FrankLangella and Parker Posey would seem like wonderful choices to fleshout the story but are given nothing to do. This brings us to the realvillain of the peace; Kate Bosworths Lois Lane, What possessed Singerto cast a 23yr old to play a top reporter who has a 5yr old son? i havesocks older than her! Once this character had guts and was spunky, sheadded the brains to Supermans brawn, she was our way into his characterbut Singer has thrown this all away for a pretty face! All in all thisfilm is a criminal waste of time, We learn nothing new about Supermanand i can't help but feel that we've lost something magical along theway. $200 million Dollars buys a lot of bang, but once again we see youcan't buy Heart. Oh yeah and Son of Superman! Give me a break.Pointless.

julyia90 2012-05-23 13:51:40

You know when James Marsden is the best actor, you are in trouble.

I didn't like it. Maybe I grew up watching to much of the original- orthe cartoons spoiled it for me on TV, but I didn't enjoy the film. Inmy mind, the perfect Lex Luther is calm, cool, and a dispassionate badguy- the ultimate undefeatable super villain. In the movie he is aangry, childlike, whiny, bad-line spurting B villain. Now, one justcan't blame Kevin Spacey (Ill always love American Beauty forever!) buthe was the wrong choice. He wasn't.. Lex Luther. The other problem Ihad was Routh. Now, maybe he is young (this being the only movie I hadever seen him in) but Christopher Reeves would have wept! I mean, yes,he was beautiful (and my god, he beautiful) but he didn't have asuperman quality. Actually, in my mind, he was more beautiful then KateBrosworth (who didn't do a bad job herself). But a wonderful face andlarge, broad shoulders don't make the Superman-- the acting does. Ittakes talent to spurt off the corny lines, and talent the young lad hasnot been given time to acquire.My analysis? Good movie, bad actors.

dreamer.ice 2012-05-22 23:28:52

I'd rather be boned by CR9

...or CR7, as he's now called, than watch this. Both prospects are ofroughly equal homo-erotic content. In retrospect, CR9/CR7 would havebeen done a lot faster (no offense to the Portuguese!), though, andthus could have saved me hours of indescribable suffering at the handsof whoever wrote and directed this junk. The "story", what remnants youmay find of one, is 85% predictable and 150% painful, and really notworth discussing here. We basically revisit some other junky Supermanmovie (that admittedly was bearable when I was 10, simply due to thefact that 10-year-olds are not all that terribly judgmental), and nowhave Kevin Spacey as Lex, but Lex as usual doesn't do anythingnoteworthy and is about the least interesting villain of the 80s (orwhenever he was conceived). His evil antics aren't really interesting,there's no character development during the movie, we get to experiencea few obvious-from-the-start plot twists, and then it's over again asSuperdude rises into space, to float about doing just about nada.

redhawk 2012-05-20 13:38:33

Superman Returns - badly

I found it impossible to ignore the ongoing script problems whichveered waaaaay off center from the Man Of Steel mythos we have from thecomics and the previous movies. I cannot fault the writers for ignoringSuperman 3, 4 and 5. . . .There is simply too much disbelief to suspend here.In this film, Lois Lane is practically invulnerable, surviving beingflung about in a falling plane without a scratch and being whammed overthe head by a heavy metal door later in the film to minimal effect. Shealso must be infected with a Merlin virus, which is the only thing thatcan explain her being significantly younger than any of the character'sprevious appearances. We can always justify an unaged Clark/Superman bysaying Kryptonians age differently than humans - I am giving thewriters a break here. Lois also must have been having an affair aroundthe time she and "Clark" slept together in Superman II - her memory ofsuch erased by a Super Kiss at the end of that film - which is the onlyexplanation for her not being surprised at ending up pregnant. Let'snot even go into her level of unawareness about her son. Once sherealizes the boy is "different" in this film, is there any sense of herwondering how that could have happened? Nope. And if not, did she andSupes have other moments alone we don't know? Well, if so, there goesthe Super Boy Scout image.Kevin Spacey rises above the mediocrity of the script, as does BrandonRouth. He does a fine job recreating the characterization originated byChristopher Reeve, though it is a bit of a shame he did not get achance to bring anything significantly new to the role. Not his faultas it's obvious his hands were tied by the director, writers, or both.If not for the effects work in this film, I would have given it onestar - or perhaps none.Knowing the pantheon of DC and Marvel characters from my comiccollecting days through the media success of so many Superheroes, Iwish I could say this is going to be added to my extensive filmcollection, but I can't. I think I will go find my copy of LarryNiven's short story "Man Of Steel, Woman Of Kleenex." A Much moresatisfying "what if" about a Superman love life.

Ferenc Nagy 2012-05-19 22:24:31

Why the audience need Superman Returns?

OK, maybe this small article doesn't worth a Pulitzer prize, but Ithought my experience will help to some folks who are hesitating to goor not to go to see this movie. To start with, I am a big fan of the Man of Steel. As a child I alwaysadmired the ultimate power of this superhero and loved the originalSuperman movie with Christoper Reeve. So when I knew that Bryan Singerwill direct Superman Returns, I just said: this movie can't be suck.During the opening credits, my bloodstream went high. The music, thecolor and fonts of the credits text were just like the Richard Donnerversion (except of the planets, but hey, this movie was made in 2006).I got the same feeling when I was a 6-years-old kid and watched theoriginal Superman.The actors were brilliant. Brandon Routh was indeed a perfect choicefor Clark Kent/Superman. He absolutely looks like the dear ChristopherReeve. Maybe that is just some joke from the Fate. Maybe not. Whoknows. Kate Bosworth is too young for the role of Lois Lane (sorry,Kate fans, but my perfect Lois Lane is still Margot Kidder), althoughshe did what she could do. The highlight of the actors is absolutelyKevin Spacey. He is brilliant as the evil Lex Luthor. In some scenes Igot the old "Se7en/John Doe" feeling when I watched him. Nice work, Mr.Spacey. You proved that you can be better Lex than Gene Hackman. I wasvery impressed by the cameo of Marlon Brando. He IS Jor-El: despite ofhis death, his spirit still here among us. His voice was a sound fromthe Afterlife. It stunned me.The screenplay was also good. Michael Dougherty and Dan Harris did anamazing job, because they preferred the character's emotional feelingsand they wrote a very touching love story. In the scene where Supermanflies in the skies with Lois is astonishing: you can feel the lovebetween them. It's all about in their eyes and in the beautiful music(How Could You Leave Us). The pretty thing is Richard's feelings towardLois: he isn't a jerk, he loves Lois with all his heart and understandsthat Lois still loves the Man of Steel and he accepts Jason as his ownson (despite of his knowledge that Jason is Superman's son). The action scenes were breathtaking, although my favorite scene iswhere Superman gets into hospital and lays between life and death andthere are people outside the hospital who watch their beloved hero andbeg to God for his life. It is just perfect. Superman can be a simplehuman. And when Lois and Jason visiting him and talk to him...that wasthe top. That was the top.There are still a lot of things I didn't mention in this comment. Soyou have to go and see is for yourself. You won't regret it. It isworth every single minute. Well done and thank you, Mr. Singer. I knewyou won't let us down.Ferenc Nagy a.k.a. Solid Snake Hungary

imdb-14552 2012-05-19 07:24:28

Otherwise good movie marred by bad acting, and too long

How people rate this a 10/10 I can not begin to understand. In myopinion 10/10 means this is right up there with the best movies evermade. Even if you thought the movie was really good, it surely deservesa 9 at best.While some action sequences were great, and there were some good parts,two major problems kept me from giving it a 7/10 Too long. This movieneeds about 30 minutes chopped out of it. At least three sequencesleave you squirming in the seat going "Ugh, let's move on soooboooring" Secondly, the Olsen and Perry White characters were bland andunbelievable. Especially Sam Huntington as Jimmy Olsen. Kate Bosworthas Lois Lane was almost wasted.Spacey is the movies savior, his solid performance manages to pull thismovie up above the mediocre level.

Trashbag 2012-05-18 16:02:46

Spectacle for the eyes (IMAX 3-D Version)

Everything a Superman fan (the movies or the comics) could want ishere: The classic theme by John Williams, spectacular visual effects,repeatedly showing off Superman's powers, and Kevin Spacey. His LexLuthor is much more evil and sinister, while still retaining the humorof Gene Hackman's original. The Man of Steel himself also did anincredible job. He resembles Christopher Reeve in so many ways, Ialmost forgot it was a different actor. Kate Bosworth was fantastic aswell.I saw the IMAX 3-D version, and I gotta say it was somewhatdisappointing. Don't get me wrong, it was great seeing the whole thingon that gigantic screen. You almost feel like you're flying alongsideSuperman. But the 3-D here feels like a wasted opportunity sometimes.Sure, twenty minutes is better than nothing, but there were otherscenes that would've looked great in 3-D as well (Opening Credits forexample). Still, it was a very cool experience, and I think I stillwould've enjoyed it in a regular theater.9 out of 10. Not as good as the first movie but better than the othersequels put together.

richwilder-1 2012-05-14 23:36:41

Superman Returns Earns Respect

Saw this and thought the movie was highly respectable of the storiesand plot lines from previous movies. True fans of Superman and SupermanII will think this is a great movie and flows well with the previousones. III and IV were atrocious as far as the stories are concerned.However, this movie puts Superman back on top with no disrespect toChristopher Reeve. The director is a fan of the early movies as well asversed in the comics and it shows throughout the movie. Better specialeffects than most, and without tons of computer animation - a lot offace time from the characters to give that realism that the firstmovies had. Casting was good and soundtrack is great. A thumbs up forthis re-make.

Vincent_G 2012-05-14 09:07:48

Mortalized Superman

I was lucky to get early preview of Superman Return. And I put highexpectation on this one compare to other movies at this summer. Butafter watching it, I just feel weird how Superman is tried to betreated like human. It seems that Bryan Singer try to bring the samerecipe as previous Superhero movies, like Spiderman, X-Men, Hulk, etc.But for Superman case, it become not so relevant because Superman isnot human at all. *Spoiler* Most people at cinema smiled or evenlaughed, when Superman was bullied and sent to Emergency Room. Otherthing is too much romance on this sequel than action. There is noproper ending about relationship between Superman and Lois.Special effect, acting, picture, etc are very well done. Kevin Spaceyshow his performance again as one of the best villain on big screen. Ilike Brandon Routh as new Superman as well.

AlanaJedi 2012-05-14 17:11:47

Loved it! Few films have touched me so deeply!!! But maybe not for everyone....

I caught this film again last night on TV (after a couple of years ofnot seeing it) and remembered why I had to see it over and over againwhen it came out in theaters.First, it honors Christopher Reeve's films superbly, which I so muchappreciated. Yet I also liked that it is not campy like those originalfilms.Second, I thought that Brandon Routh was absolutely fabulous. I don'tunderstand those who say he can't act. He just transmits the emotionsso well!!!And that is what touched me so deeply: the emotions! I tend to measurefilms by the emotional after effects they have on me. This is one ofthe films that have touched me most profoundly. I hadn't had thosefeeling since watching Star Wars when I was 13 years old in 1977. Andwhile this film didn't leave me in awe like Star Wars did back then, itdid leave me not being able to stop thinking about it for daysafterward and needing to see it over and over again.The film is also fun, has superb special effects and cinematography,and has a fabulous villain in Kevin Spacey. Also, some people havecriticized Kate Bosworth as Lois. But I must say I really liked her andMUCH prefer her to Margot Kidder.In all, this was a PERFECT film for me. I absolutely LOVED it and itwill remain as one of my all time favorites!! THANK YOU Bryan Singer!And yet, I also recognize why this film may not appeal to everyone. Inan era where what the box-office appreciates is over-the-top action anddarkness, this film is too much on the soft side. That is why I lovedit, it's softness, sometimes slowness, and the emotions of the heart(instead of a roller-coaster ride like in other contemporary superherofilms). But that is why other people may not like it: if you arelooking for non-stop action, then this may NOT be the film for you.But if you want the combination of an old-fashioned super-hero film(where the hero is good, and the film is not dark nor too violent) withslow-paced scenes dealing with emotions of the heart, then this may bea film for you.

Agita 2012-05-14 08:12:13

Superman Retreds

Look, this film cost a lot of money to make...and a lot of that money'sup on the screen. It LOOKS expensive...but it feels cheap. I couldn'thelp but wonder what Kevin Smith's script was like...or even TimBurton's version. Either one of them HAD TO BE better than this.Watching this film also had me thinking back to the Christopher ReevesSuperman movie...the first one. That film was FAR superior tothis...and in many ways this is an attempted remake of it. What's withLex Luthor and his real estate schemes? At least buying beach frontproperty in Nevada made sense, in a comic book world. His plan herejust seemed...like something expensive to shoot. His henchmen andfemale side kick are all fun to watch character actors from betterfilms who are given almost nothing to do here but avoid the cuttingroom floor.Frankly after Superman saves Lois Lane from being killed by the SpaceShuttle (at this point in time, as soon as I see anyone near the spaceshuttle I'm feeling something bad is about to happen! Stay away fromthat thing!) about halfway into the film - it's all down hill.I vote for Superman to go back into space for a few more years, comeback, and try this all over again.

Shawn P. Egan 2012-05-10 14:10:25

Superman Returns!!!!

After seeing this movie, I have to say this is possibly one of the bestcomic book adaptations I have seen. In the SUPERMAN films, notincluding 3 or 4, I would say this is a worthy addition to the Supermanfranchise. This film is not in the same league as BATMAN BEGINS, but ithas resurrected not only Warner Brothers, but also the DC Comics andmore importantly, the Superman franchise. This movie is also anallegory of sorts, and you can see bits and pieces of it in the film.One bit of trivia that I am sure not everyone knows, is that NoelNeill, who played Lois Lane in the 1950's television series, plays asmall part at the beginning of the film, also played young Lois Lane'smother in the first Superman film back in 1978. Brandon Routh wasexcellent as the Man Of Steel and Clark Kent. Kevin Spacey is excellentas Lex Luthor, and even though the chemistry is not totally there, theinteraction between Kate Bosworth(Lois Lane) and Brandon Routh(ClarkKent/Superman) is pretty decent. Frank Langella portrayed the role ofDaily Planet editor Perry White, and for the most part reminded me alot of John Hamilton's version of the character. Don't know if I wouldhave picked Kate Bosworth as my first choice to do Lois Lane, butalthough she didn't Lois Lane like Noel Niell or Margot Kidder, she wasexcellent in the portrayal of Lois Lane. Overall, It is good to see theSuperman franchise resurrected by the folks over at Warner Brothers.

HeyJude014 2012-05-10 08:46:06

He's not flying quite as high...

Superman Returns... after 19 years, 5 directors, and 30 other superheromovies. But the question is, "Can he still fly?" -EW MagazineMy personal answer to this question is he can still fly, but not quiteas high. Brandon Routh (making his big movie debut) stars as the newMan of Steel in this 19-years-late sequel, with Kate Bosworth (Rememberthe Titans, Blue Crush, Bee Season) as the tough reporter Lois Lane,and Kevin Spacey (Pay it Forward) as the evil-but-not-quite-evil-enoughvillain Lex Luthor. In this sequel that doesn't really count as asequel, Superman returns to planet earth after discovering that hishome planet of Krypton was nothing but a graveyard, completelyobliterated. After his five-year absence, though, he finds that *gasp*maybe the world doesn't need a hero after all. He returns to his workplace as Clark Kent, only to find that the woman who had loved him (asSuperman anyway), Lois Lane, is with a man named Richard, and theyshare a son, whose name is Jason. She has also won the Pulitzer Prizefor an article in the newspaper entitled "Why the World Doesn't NeedSuperman". Ouch. Behind the scenes though, long-time arch-villain LuxLuthor has been awaiting the arrival of Superman, and planning hisdownfall; along with the deaths of billions of people all over theworld. *in big announcer voice* Will Lois ever love Superman again?Will anyone ever figure out that Clark Kent doesn't even need glasses?Will Lux Luthor succeed in his villainous acts? Blah blah blah. Themovie was entirely predictable, and quite frankly, I would like topoint out that not every superhero movie needs to become a love story.As nice and twisted as that may be, it's lost the twist and nice hasturned to annoying. Although the emotions were perfectly portrayed inthis flick, and one twist that'll probably lead to a sequel was added,it didn't quite live up to all the hype. Lux Luthor's "brilliant" planmay have been brilliant, but pretty lame at the same time. Butall-in-all, I can't completely shut down this movie. Because theeffects were pretty sweet, I loved the music, and Brandon Routh asSuperman was absolutely super. Lex Luthor did have his moments, and Ibelieve Kevin Spacey was amazing in portraying him. And Kate Bosworthas Lois Lane? Genius. So casting was right on, plot was a bit iffy, andthe one major twist... well sadly I saw it coming. As a superhero moviefan, I'll say this movie was okay. Just another superhero movie, with apredicted thousand sequels to come.

smarkel21 2012-05-10 10:44:53

Extremely DIsappointing

It saddens me to say this but unfortunately, I think a lot of peopleare going to be disappointed with this film - it's definitely full ofaction and is entertaining, but it severely lacks substance. I felt theperformances were weak, especially Brandon Routh and Kate Bosworth.Kevin Spacey was the saving grace of the film. The CGI effects were tooover the top and I walked out of the screening feeling unsatisfiedgiven the amount of hype. All I can say is the warm sensation I used toget while watching Christopher Reeve was non existent and everythingthat embodies superman was somehow lost in translation. Sorry todisappoint y'all, believe me I was disappointed too...I had such highhopes for Superman Returns. :-(

ramibo007 2012-05-10 03:09:53

Rami: Superman Review

NO SPOILERS:: I went to watch this movie Tuesday night at IMAX 3D withmixed emotions. Superman has always been my favorite superhero, and Iwas worried, and excited about what I would see.Anyways, without wasting anymore time, I basically found this movieincredible. Story was smart and fits perfectly after superman 2. Theactors were great choices (brandon, Kate, Kevin all played their partsperfectly - any changes they might have made on the acting werejustifiably so). The music/score was perfect and the mix of action,comedy and romance was great. The movie gave superman a big challenge(we got to see superman in action), and opened up a lot of thingsduring the movie to leave way for sequels (superman is back).SPOILER:: I just wished that Superman had at least 1 or 2 scenes whereyou could see him over power some guy (a guy punches him and gets hurt,superman takes a guy's hand and you hear a crack and see the guys painas superman throws him to the wall/ground... or just ties the guy up).BACK TO NO SPOILERS:: Batman was successfully brought back, and nowSuperman has been excellently brought back. I just wish that if theymake another 2 Superman's and Batman's, and then IF they make a"superman and batman" movie, that they keep it realistic (that's thereason why I liked this movie so much). Superman is the super-hero, andbatman is the hero. Superman isn't just a a nerd with super powers, hewon't just fall to the ground if you have kryptonite (which is why iliked this movie a lot) - superman is the "bad-a#@" Rami

crobarj1 2012-05-08 07:36:38

Superman Lives!

Saw an advance screening yesterday...Brandon Routh pulled it off beautifully. He resembles ChristopherReeve's Superman so much it's uncanny. The first time he smiles asClark Kent, back at work at the daily Planet, it felt like it wasChristopher Reeve again.Kevin Spacey is an excellent Lex Luthor. His role was written muchbetter than Hackman's role in the original films. He didn't seem to becoming up with plans that could only work under comic book logic.Admittedly, they could only work in Superman's comic book universe,(Fortress of Solitude, Krypton, Kryptonite, etc.) but the logic of hisplan is sound. His character's obsession with real estate resemblesHackman's Lex, but Spacey's Lex is a much less silly version of therole. Hackman is a great actor, but his Lex Luthor was very badlywritten, IMHO. Nobody could have saved it.The effects were great, the story was great, the acting was overallvery good. There were, however, numerous errors in the reality of realthings. The end of the scene involving the Mustang (no spoilers here)defies the reality of cars, as an example. Sure it's not the first timea Superman movie, or indeed any comic book adaptation, has made thesetype of errors, but it would have been better if they did little thingslike that right, instead of using the "Eh, it's just a movie" excuse.Ultimately, I loved this film. It's a great story well told. It doesn'tneed to be anything else.

mossy1 2012-05-07 19:42:59

Pale imitation of the original Superman movie

Having seen the original Superman movie in the seventies and thinkingit was one of the greatest movies I had seen. I took my kids along tosee if they could reproduce the magic with a new cast and the biggestmovie budget ever. Sadly they failed. It was hard to see where thegigantic budget went...the special effects looked like well..specialeffects. It made me realize how good the original cast were,Christopher Reeve, Margot Kidder, Gene Hackman, Valerie Perrine and NedBeatty and the others supporting cast. The cast of Superman Returns arepale imitations compared to the originals, even Kevin Spacey who hadthe juicyest role didn't deliver. The plot was so-so and I can only laythe blame with the director who seemed unable to get the best out ofthe actors he cast. I think the best thing now is they forget about anysequels, I think the box-office will see to that, and let the Supermanstory lay dormant for 10-20 years and bring it back fresher for adifferent generation.

2012-05-07 15:53:01

"Superman Returns!"...What Else, Exactly?

A title card displays telling us that Superman came to Earth to protect the world and serve justice, but then inexplicably left us. We are then given the famous John Williams score from 1978 and even the cool blue credits (if you've never seen them, you are missing history, people!). And then the movie begins with a bizarre scene where Lex Luthor steals a dying widow's fortune, Luthor then returns to the Fortress of Solitude (Superman's hideout in the Arctic), and then Superman crash-lands in a spaceship to Smallville outisde of Martha Kent's home. What in the blue hell (forgive the pun) is going on here? Fortune-stealing, hideout invasion, an invincible hero with flying powers crashing in a spacecraft? Such events are not the traditional "Superman" happenings. The movie goes downfill from there.We learn that Superman left Earth to visit Krypton and...um, visit Krypton to...oh wait, he left Earth simply because the plot demanded some character developments that wouldn't have happened otherwise. Okay, let me get to the bottom of this. Lex Luthor, Superman's most notorious adversary, is trying to kill Superman basically to kill Superman. No surprise there, however there is a logical if laughable reason that Luthor still roams the Earth freely - Superman missed his court appearance! Lois Lane, the feisty hard-edged reporter of the Daily Planet and closest correspondent to the Man of Steel, has a son and is engaged to the editor's nephew. Interesting idea, and a few good scenes, but what ultimately develops out of that idea is a melodramatic love triangle that goes on and on and begs for our sympathy and our tears as if we were watching "The Notebook" or "Before Sunset". What about Superman, or his alter ego Clark Kent? Again, why did he leave Earth for five years? What compelled him to return? Why was he in a spacecraft? Clark Kent is still that charming goof who conveniently shows up when Superman does. Do people STILL NOT see behind the glasses or notice the coincidenes? As for Superman, he's one cool-looking hero who returns in awesome fashion, but then just does his usual thing. More on the Man of Steel, later.The key to a great superhero film, in most cases, is a great villain. Kevin Spacey portrays Lex Luthor as a greedy intellect who has no problem with destroying parts of the world so that his real estate value will begin and grow into a fortune. Sound like a good idea? It does, but it also did so back in 1978 when Lex Luthor had the same exact idea - cause destruction so that real estate empire begins. But I really am too harsh, because in 1978 it was nuclear missiles that would do the damage, whereas in 2006 it's Kryptonian crystals from the Fortress of Solitude. What's equally disappointing is that Luthor and Superman barely share any screen time together (I counted two very short scenes).Okay, so the character developemtns and romantic interest and villain conflict are all out. But every superhero movie has some exciting action, right? This "Superman Returns" does very well. There is an exciting plane-crash save, some Superman errands (stop robbers, prevent civilian harm), and a bizarre land-mass removal (don't ask). But there is very little Superman action, so the main appeal of watching most superhero movies is totally thrown out the window.Part of a superhero film is showing the splendor and imagination of using one's powers for good, or the struggle to remain selfless when using them, or the loss of will to use them at all. There are an infinite number of themes that can be used to portray a superhero. What "Superman Returns" chose to do with the Man of Steel is vaguely explain why he quit, show briefly why the world is in awe of his return, and then let him do a couple of neat tricks. Throw in the aforementioned love triangle into the mix, plus that sweet-faced kid who carries unbelieveable secrets I dare not reveal, and we have one hell of a mess here.I've come to believe that making a good "Superman" movie is one tough task. Think about it: he's an invincible hero with a weakness for radioactive pieces that only the most knowledgable villain could even have a chance of finding. Because he has few physical weaknesses, then the only way to show depth is explore his emotional levels. Because this movie doesn't show much heart through its characters, then we basically have a slow-paced action flick with some good-looking scenes.The first movie from 1978 was the setup for the Man of Steel. The second film showed Superman's toughest challenge yet - three Krypton villains. "Lois and Clark" addressed the romantic complications of Superman and the woman he loves most. "Smallville" is showing Clark Kent's growth from a teenager into a young man, learning to embrace his identity. All of those movies/shows are terrific! It saddens me to say this, but maybe the character of Superman has been completely exhausted.

Sambit Dattachaudhuri 2012-05-07 03:34:58

Brilliant comic to celluloid adaptation....

The Superman franchise is more popular for the performances of thelegendary Christopher Reeve than the films themselves. Superman Returnsis a continuity 'branching off' from elements of 'the first two films'.Personally, I have never been a big fan of the franchise. However,Superman Returns deserves praise! It is probably, together with StevenSpielberg's War of The Worlds, one of the most under-rated films ofrecent times. It is ground-breaking cinema. You do not expect BryanSinger, who Peter Jackson called up to direct scenes of his phenomenalKing Kong, to pull off some cock and bull movie. I seriously do notunderstand why this movie doesn't have a rating up their in the 8's. Itis, together with Christopher Nolan's Batman Begins, one of the bestcomic book to celluloid adaptations ever made. Right from newcomerBrandon Routh's portrayal of a very vulnerable Superman (With all duerespect to Christopher Reeve!), to Kevin Spacey putting the icing onthe cake with his chilly take on Lex Luthor, Superman Returns is atreat! Be it the straightforward storyline or the realisticperformances (Loved Kate Bosworth as Lois Lane!), be it the minimaldependency on visual effects (Superman actually gets beaten up with aperson's bare hands!) or the smash-bang edge-of-the-seat actionsequences; Superman Returns is a film worth watching.. Over and overagain.8/10. The sequel, Man of Steel, is in the making already.