Superman Returns..but you can't go home again.
Superman Returns is set 5 years after Superman defeats General Zod and his 2 cohorts in the second movie. So I guess that means Superman II takes place in 2001 and the first one in like 1999. Funny that I don't remember those movies being set in the future.
I've tried to think of this movie with an open mind, and not let my nostalgic impulses guide my feelings. It doesn't matter. No matter how I look at it, I can't find much good to say about Superman Returns.
I can say that I had coloring books, as a child, with better storylines than Superman Returns. It's like they wanted to remake the first movie, but they couldn't so we're left with the most threadbare story imaginable.
There are a few definable problems with this movie:
1. Lex Luthor - Why have Lex Luther be the villain again? Did these people ever read the comic books? Superman had plenty of foes besides Lex Luthor. Between the original movies and all the different television series, Lex Luthor is played out. Not to mention that Kevin Spacey didn't bring one second of fun to the character. Isn't Lex Luthor supposed to be the villain we love to hate? And what's with the real estate plot line? Again? So instead of turning Arizona into Ocean Front property, he wants to create his own piece of property off the east coast. Boring.
2. Lois Lane - Kate Bosworth is definitely a weak point in the movie. She has none of Margot Kidder's fiery attitude. This might be forgivable if these weren't supposed to be the same people from Superman II, and if Brandon Routh wasn't doing a Christopher Reeve impression.
and that brings us to:
3. Brandon Routh - he's about as boring as you can get. Yes, he looks a little like Christopher Reeve, and he can talk just like him, but he lacks all the charm.
Should I feel guilty for comparing this movie to the first two? I don't think so. What with the use of the original score and Marlon Brando, it's pretty clear they want us to remember those movies.
Is it because I'm 32 and not 6 that I don't believe someone looks like a different person because he's wearing glasses or that Clark Kent (is there even a reason Clark Kent is in the movie?) and Superman can both disappear for five years and then return on the exact same day and not one person makes the connection?
Is it because I'm too happy of an individual that I can't relate to a depressed and morose Superman whose facing an identity crisis? Am I wrong to somewhat dislike a Superman who lacks personal integrity?
Well, we're each entititled to our own opinions, but if this movie were good I wouldn't be asking any of these questions.
I've tried to think of this movie with an open mind, and not let my nostalgic impulses guide my feelings. It doesn't matter. No matter how I look at it, I can't find much good to say about Superman Returns.
I can say that I had coloring books, as a child, with better storylines than Superman Returns. It's like they wanted to remake the first movie, but they couldn't so we're left with the most threadbare story imaginable.
There are a few definable problems with this movie:
1. Lex Luthor - Why have Lex Luther be the villain again? Did these people ever read the comic books? Superman had plenty of foes besides Lex Luthor. Between the original movies and all the different television series, Lex Luthor is played out. Not to mention that Kevin Spacey didn't bring one second of fun to the character. Isn't Lex Luthor supposed to be the villain we love to hate? And what's with the real estate plot line? Again? So instead of turning Arizona into Ocean Front property, he wants to create his own piece of property off the east coast. Boring.
2. Lois Lane - Kate Bosworth is definitely a weak point in the movie. She has none of Margot Kidder's fiery attitude. This might be forgivable if these weren't supposed to be the same people from Superman II, and if Brandon Routh wasn't doing a Christopher Reeve impression.
and that brings us to:
3. Brandon Routh - he's about as boring as you can get. Yes, he looks a little like Christopher Reeve, and he can talk just like him, but he lacks all the charm.
Should I feel guilty for comparing this movie to the first two? I don't think so. What with the use of the original score and Marlon Brando, it's pretty clear they want us to remember those movies.
Is it because I'm 32 and not 6 that I don't believe someone looks like a different person because he's wearing glasses or that Clark Kent (is there even a reason Clark Kent is in the movie?) and Superman can both disappear for five years and then return on the exact same day and not one person makes the connection?
Is it because I'm too happy of an individual that I can't relate to a depressed and morose Superman whose facing an identity crisis? Am I wrong to somewhat dislike a Superman who lacks personal integrity?
Well, we're each entititled to our own opinions, but if this movie were good I wouldn't be asking any of these questions.
posted by Sherry L at 1:00 PM
2 Comments:
For the most part I enjoyed this version of Superman. My trouble with the movie was even though the superman actor looked like Christopher Reeve he wasn't, and that was the downer. He had practically no personality, no change of expression. Lois Lane was no Margo Kidder that's for sure. She was too young and lacked the fiestiness that made Margo Kidder so memorial.
The time frame was also confusing.
I am 30 years old and was in love with the superman movies and yes even the 3rd and 4th one!So I was a little nervous on how this new one was going to be but I loved it even though I was really heartbroken that Christopher reeve could not see it for himself and let us know what he thought about it . Well if you loved superman as a little child like i did and do then I think you will like this one too despite the new stuff but I will tell you this I loved hearing the music from the first supermans I felt like I was ten again !
Post a Comment
<< Home