I want to know what these guys were smoking when they were writing the script for Superman Returns. So what was great about Superman Returns was the possibilities it could have taken with the script. After the beginning credits (which were a great homage to the 70s/80s version of Superman), the whole film went downhill fast.
The man who took this movie must be tried and convicted to the farthest reaches of space for having used such vast assortment of cliches to the point of embarrassment and undermining the franchise. The movie starts off with Superman (Brandon Routh) crash landing back into the Kent farm after a five year hiatus. He returns to Metropolis as a reporter at the infamous Daily Planet and hoping to patch things up with Lois Lane (Kate Bosworth). Except that someone should have told him that stranding a girl for five years doesn’t really cut it. She finds a new man (James Mardsen of recent “X-Men 3 – The Last Stand” fame) and has a son. Soon after, Superman has to show up to handle an out of control aircraft and save the day. And yet no one even thinks to suggest that Kent’s return and the Man of Steel around the same is just not coincidental and little too convenient (but then they are also fooled by a pair of glasses too). Lex Luthor (Kevin Spacey) isn’t too far behind, scheming to end Superman long before he actually returns. This time he goes to the source of his trouble to flush Superman out and destroy him.
By the time we get around to the third act, the plot is so thin, I wouldn’t breathe on it much less skate. The ending is a little too clean for my taste and there’s a heavy handed epilogue that promises even more fun with the next installment. But most importantly what really hits me hard is that Superman is supposed to be an action movie and not some soppy mushy romantic flick. The story is clunky and inherently uninteresting, thanks peeping tom using his super powers to eavesdrop.
The only thing worth mentioning in this movie is Kevin Spacey being Spacey. He essentially tries re-doing the Gene Hackman interpretation from the old movies but goes a tad more darker and serious. The pace of this movie is from flat to none for most parts. Superman Returns flies but does not soar. This movie has great potential but with no energy, fewer emotional scenes and stronger action would truly make this worthy some day.
'Movie Review: Superman Returns (2006)' have 7 comments
July 14, 2006 @ 11:23 am General Disdain
Well, well, well. Seems for the first time I actually agree with you, Nashtrodamus.
Superman Returns is a major dissapointment. With so much potential at their fingertips, you’d think the writers, producers and the director would have created an action packed movie that everyone and their mothers would be proud of. Instead, after two years of setbacks and rewrites they apparently settled on a movie that would be cheapest to make (it reportedly cost ~$300,000,000 due to all the problems in getting this made).
There was but one good action sequence in this entire movie – the airplane scene. Otherwise, the action was boring and the mushiness of the drama was sickening.
On a side note, I’d love to be as strong as Lois Lane! She survives getting thrown around the out of control plane (wear your seatbelts boys and girls), she survives a boat falling hundreds of feet into icy waters and doesn’t get a bruise while getting her ass kicked by a Luther brute. Incredible!
For once I wish they’d make a superhero movie where the person with super powers embraces them. Has fun with them. Why does it always have to a be tremendous burden?
I’ll go one step further than Nashtrodamus for rating Superman Returns.
July 18, 2006 @ 1:37 pm DETACON
Boys and Girls. Let’s just say the handsome, perfect hair white guy super hero look is dead. I like superman but this movie sucks more than Superman III did. Terrible death to a great story and a great Hero.
July 22, 2006 @ 8:26 am General Disdain
Not sure if I entirely agree with you, DETACON. While I nearly agree Superman Returns was worse than Superman III, I cannot agree with the statement “the handsome, perfect hair white guy super hero look is dead”. I choose to think we can always have more handsome, perfect haired, white guy super heroes. We just need better movie adaptations of them!
August 2, 2006 @ 11:55 am DETACON
No disrespect intended. Superman is just to clean. He’s a nerd in this movie. C’mon, you said it yourself; if you had Supermans powers (ex-ray vision, pick up buildings and can fly, Mrs. Lane would be the last trick on your mind! He should take pointers from Spiderman or the Xmen. And change that suit
August 2, 2006 @ 9:11 pm General Disdain
Agreed, they should spruce Superman up a bit and bring him into the 21st century. His ideals, although commendable, are stuck in the past. I wouldn’t want to see his core goodness changed, just a bit of his nerdiness. If they can liven up Batman and the Hulk (among others), surely they can help the Man of Steel.
November 24, 2007 @ 10:14 am MrBlueCN
None of the flaws pointed out in the review (although all perfectly viable) bothered me as much as the obvious breaks in established logic:
Superman cannot go near Kryptonite. Ever. He will lose his powers, slowly die, and turn a color that clashes with his suit.
So to save the world, the will lift several tons if it by hand and fling it to the far ends of the cosmos…
September 30, 2010 @ 7:50 pm Oscar Andrews
You guys are missing a great deal. Your stuck on a super action movie-which it is not. The story becomes much better when you rewatch the original 70s version.There are many references. Also the 70s version was beloved, much for the love story between Kal-el and Lois Lane. Fans of that generation that promted 3 sequals at the time are not looking at an “aliens 2” type action film (every moment more intense than the next with blood, death, acid blood, machine guns and crashes)
Superman returns helps answer the question of “what now?” Do we care about superman anymore-does Lois care. Lois Lane is older, nearly married, has a young boy…she has moved on, like all of us that were kids, like all of us burnt out on the old sequals
Notice the newspaper article “superman is dead…superman lives.” Her pulitzer article (the world doesn’t need superman) and then her new article (why the world DOES need superman.)
Superman has come and gone in pulp culture popularity since it was created.
Do we want superman?-Does superman live for you, are you done with him
Early in the movie we see him eavsdroping and noticing that he is seemingly saddened that Lois says she doesn’t/didn’t love him.
Does she? Do we?
Really it is us that are saddened that she doesn’t love him anymore. or at least saddened with the thought that she doesn’t love him. That superman doesn’t matter-maybe never mattered.
As Clark, Kal-el, stumbles over/ and around Lois as a lost puppy. But as superman, He leaves Lois for 5 years without as much as a good bye. When he sees her again he apologizes, but he really doesn’t need to.
Didn’t we let superman go after the 4 sequal films of the seventies. Didn’t we have our fill, we don’t and didn’t need a superman. The darker Batman and cool alien 2 action films buried Superman in pop culture popularity
He leaves her, but she then leaves him. We leave him. She moves on and we move on.
It is she that says we don’t need a savior (and wins and award for it), but it is he that says “he hears people cry for one everyday”.
Do we need/want Superman? Are we crying for…Superman Returns.
Superman saves lives, flys faster than a speeding bullet, invulnerble, has xray vision. Can send fire from his eyes and listens to a world crying for a savior. His ideals are pure, he never lies. He stands for Truth Justice and the American way. Our way.
Why the world needs superman or why it doesn’t
Is superman dead or does he live?
Do we need superman. Do we want superman.
If we do, he is “around” he is “always around” as has been shown for the last 60 years.