I saw "Superman Returns" tonight, and I’m working on my review. I have plenty to say! If you want a preview, check out an interview I did with Forbes magazine online.
I’ll tell you this now: the original was still better. Chris Reeve, John Williams… man. I could have done without the whole Lois-Lane-talking-instead-of-singing-while-flying-over-Metropolis bit (and really, did we want to hear Margot Kidder sing anyway?), but it is still my favorite comic book movie. And yes, I saw Spiderman, and no, it cannot hold a candle to the original Superman movie. If you disagree, then feel free to comment. But, alas, you’ll still be wrong.
June 28th, 2006 at 11:08 pm
Did you see me in it??
June 28th, 2006 at 11:55 pm
I simply cannot understand why the US TV/movie industry is so crazy about the superman franchisee.The oroginal movie was a classic … it seems to fit right into the flavor and feel of the comic book.
First there is superman on TV, its a show called called smallville, with a very irritating looking lex luthor…
Now the movie , remade
Hollywoood seems to be in a major creative slump, and remakes or sequels are the order of the day.
June 29th, 2006 at 12:04 am
Just saw the movie myself. It’s a good movie if you don’t know anything about physics. I don’t want to post spoilers here, but my thought process for the first action scene was “that probably wouldn’t happen, that probably wouldn’t happen, oh, give me a break!” etc. I tried really hard to just enjoy the action, but allas some of the problems were so fundamental it kept jarring me out of the story. I still liked the movie overall, and looking forward to reading BA’s review.
June 29th, 2006 at 1:03 am
I have to agree. Chris Reeve was the best possible Superman. Sure, he may not have the bulging biceps that Big Blue sports in the comic books these days, but he personified the boyscout attitude of the Man o’ Steel.
As a kid I was convinced that Superman and Clark Kent were played by two different actors – such was the quality of Reeve’s portrayal of the character’s two alter-egos.
Here in South Africa we still have a couple of weeks to wait before the new one is released, but I’ll be there on opening night. I must say I’m really looking forward to Kevin Spacey’s Lex Luthor… I never really bought Gene Hackman’s interpretation.
June 29th, 2006 at 5:28 am
I never really got into Superman, there’s something about me not liking superheroes in cape tights and… over the clothes panties. But I plan on renting it whenever it comes out on DVD.
Nevertheless I can’t wait for the review.
I found out that your reviews are often more entertaining than the movies themselves.
June 29th, 2006 at 5:34 am
Tonight the National Geographic Channel will have an episode of their “Hollywood Science” series about Superman (8 p.m. ET). The series is really good. They point out the good and bad science. The one about natural disasters (volcanoes and “Day After Tomorrow” among other things) was solid.
June 29th, 2006 at 6:29 am
I had a weird dream a while back in which I was in the audience, watching an action flick about Superman & Batman having a competition, a super-scavenger hunt/race.
To keep up with Superman, Batman had to use rocket propelled boots. So there was a looooong shot following Batman soaring above the city, with Superman not too far ahead. So I started thinking to myself, “Superman has ‘magical’ powers, so I don’t fret about why he can fly, apparently reaction-free. But Batman doesn’t have special powers, and the impulse on those teeny-weeny rockets has got me a bit worried… But this movie is GREAT!”
June 29th, 2006 at 6:29 am
I hear a lot of people talking about the original Superman movie as being a “classic” film. I’ve never understood that. I saw it once, way back when it first came out, and it never did a thing for me. Based on my first impression, I have never been tempted to see it again. Listening to everyone on the Internets gush about it as if it was a really good movie, or something, leads me to think I might have to rent it one day to see if my memories are faulty.
June 29th, 2006 at 7:06 am
I thought the new movie was very good. The acting was certainly better imho. Look at the original when Clarke leaves his mother, the way they hug, yukk.
—— there be spoilers ——-
As for the physics, they were much better than the original movie. Just when he tries to straighten the plane’s trajectory, its structure can’t take it and it breaks. Ok, stopping the plane by pushing on the nose, it shouldn’t have just buckled a little! But he definitely can’t hold the plane just by gripping the nose, so it fell on the ground in a realistic way, I think.
Of course forget about the shuttle. Five hugely powerful engines, with no apparent propellant reserves? BLACK exhaust smoke? I believe this is only possible with incomplete combustion, so it implies chemical engines, and so the need for a huge quantity of reactive mass.
Also, when Superman pushes the new kryptonite asteroid in orbit, he loses consciousness almost immediately, with a very small delta-v difference between him and the new mini-moon. So we’re supposed to believe the asteroid will stay in orbit while he reenters the atmosphere only a little time after?
I like the bullet smashing against his cornea though…
——- end of spoilers ——–
June 29th, 2006 at 7:50 am
I had been debating about seeing it with my dad, since he enjoyed Batman Begins with me. I figured there was a good chance he’d enjoy this, too.
But I’m worried, now. If we do decide to go, should we bring along Crow and Tom Servo?
June 29th, 2006 at 8:00 am
“the original was still better” Huh? The Superman movie from 1978 was not the “original”. Poor forgotten George Reeves.
June 29th, 2006 at 9:04 am
All I know, is Superman better punch someone in the next movie.
June 29th, 2006 at 9:59 am
I thought this new one was fantastic. Can it compare to the original? Not sure. I need to see it at least two more times privately before I can say if it’s as good as Chris Reeve’s original pic.
However, I don’t think we can really compare Brandon Routh to Chris Reeve. For one thing, Clark Kent is barely in this movie. On the Farm, he’s Kal-El, not Clark. I think Clark gets 5 minutes of screen time and it’s mostly jokes. Look, he eats burritos funny!
But it’s a great movie, and the actual end scenes are touching (not the big muscle scenes). In tone, this one felt like X-Men 1, and here’s hoping we get an X2 out of the sequel.
June 29th, 2006 at 10:06 am
I always thought that the original movie was a bit bland, something didn’t quite click, almost like eating french fries (chips, pommes frites, etc..) without salt.
Also I was very disappointed that Lex Luthor had hair, come on, he’s bald and all his hate towards Superman is because he’s the one that caused it.
June 29th, 2006 at 10:11 am
Not sure how one can criticize Superman Returns yet claim the superiority of the original movie based on their application of physics.
Especially considering the end of Superman: The Movie. You know … the “flying really fast will not only reverse the rotation of the Earth, but reverse time” trick.
Sometimes you have to leave reality behind when you go into that darkened theatre. Sure, laser fire wouldn’t make sounds in space, a lost ark probably doesn’t have mystical powers and a man can’t fly… But would you really want to be watching Star Wars without the sound effects, follow along as Indiana Jones looks for a lost empty chest or Superman tries to rescue Lois in time by jogging as fast as he can?
June 29th, 2006 at 10:14 am
I didn’t say the physics was better in the first one. I said it was a better movie!
And Thomas, Lex was bald in both movies. At the end of the original, he takes his wig off (when he was making his speech on the prison gorunds).
June 29th, 2006 at 10:27 am
Yeah, but he should have been bald all the way through, he looked to much like… eh.. Gene Hackman
June 29th, 2006 at 10:29 am
I’m wrong about my own opinion? Now who’s being the poor critical thinker? =P
June 29th, 2006 at 10:53 am
D’oh! Two comments and halfway through I lost the plot.
What I meant to say; Luthor having hair in Superman The Movie is a classical example of the old saying: “Less is more”.
OK, that’s it, I got it off my chest and I can sleep peacefully tonight without any “… I should said…” thoughts on my mind.
Move along nothing to see here.
June 29th, 2006 at 11:37 am
A wonderful little comic on superheroes and physics:
June 29th, 2006 at 11:38 am
Bah, link didn’t appear.
http://www.cooljerk.com/comiccon2005p1.html
June 29th, 2006 at 3:20 pm
George Reeves made a television show – that’s not the “original movie”.
The guy who gets forgotten is Kirk Alyn, the man who made the movies in the 40s and early 50s…
June 29th, 2006 at 4:37 pm
I agree with many of the above posts – the original Superman movie starring Chroistopher Reeve was a brilliant portrayal of Superman (and, incidentally, introduced me to the man of steel as something more than just a cultural icon). I recently saw it again on DVD, and I was very impressed with (a) Christopher Reeve, (b) the cinematography, (c) Marlon Brando, and (d) the script. However, I could not help but wonder why the supervillain Lex Luthor has such incompetent staff.
And, BA, don’t compare Spiderman with Superman – instead compare Superman wth Spiderman II, which was that rare thing, a sequel better than its predecessor.
Also, since judging movies is very subjective, no-one can actually be wrong as such, they just have different opinions. So, you’re wrong there, Phil.
June 29th, 2006 at 6:02 pm
There’s something to be said for Christopher Reeves’s “Superman II”. Quite a lot, in fact.
There’s a spoof comics character named Ambush Bug who, as far as I recall, knows he’s a character in a comic, and wants to get his own title… when he does, there are spoof features too, which I presume are like comics actually used to run. This one went, “Science Sez: If a man from a red sun travels to a yellow sun, …” I suppose that probably comes into a review of the science in the thing??
Oh, and apparently his super-strength is because his body stores sunlight – this is from the comics too – so if you calculate the energy he absorbs every day, or in his entire life, and how much he expends… I think heat-vision is probably the big one, but flying should be up there too.
In the comics they also gave him a specific super-power of making things that he picks up stay in one piece instead of breaking apart – a building, a cruise liner…
June 29th, 2006 at 6:46 pm
You know what, it could have sucked big time, and it didn’t/doesn’t. While Chris Reeve is gone, I will always think of him as the real Superman, if you get my meaning. But Brandon did a good job of stepping into those huge shoes.
I have seen way worse movies made from DC heroes and lets be honest, after Superman II the franchise went down hill fast.
And they kept the music! They respected the Superman as portrayed by Chris! I so didn’t expect that from Hollywood.
4 Stars (out of 5) from me.
June 29th, 2006 at 6:57 pm
I could not help but wonder why the supervillain Lex Luthor has such incompetent staff.
You must read this:
http://www.eviloverlord.com/lists/overlord.html
June 29th, 2006 at 10:59 pm
I haven’t seen the movie, and I doubt I will. I saw footage of the movie, either in a preview or a making-of short, and I saw a picture of DNA in the background… coiling backwards. Come on, people! Can we at least get the stupid stuff right?
June 30th, 2006 at 4:02 am
Rob, I have read the evil overlord list. That was perhaps one reason I wondered about Luthor as I watched the film. But at least the villains in James Bond films have hordes of mooks and one or two really competent henchmen (such as Jaws and Odd-Job). Luthor in Superman the Movie had one really incompetent sidekick and one really irritating hanger-on. I only mentioned it because it jars so with the concept of Luthor being some kind of genius.
June 30th, 2006 at 2:58 pm
Teresa Nielsen Hayden, a prominent SF fan and editor who teaches science fiction writing at the annual Viable Paradise workshop, has refined the Evil Overlord list (and related lists) into a tool for teaching writers who are having trouble coming up with plots how to come up with plots.
If your writings are high-flown and literary, but lacking in plot, throw in some of Teresa’s cheap theatrics to keep your reader turning pages. Playing with such scenarios is a great excercise for your plotting-muscles.
This process has been automated, so that one visit to this Web site will provide the aspiring author with one thing for the Evil Overlord to do (or not to do), one thing for the hero to do (or not to do), and advice for supporting characters as well. As a bonus, there are Murphy’s Rules of Combat thrown in, to help create twists in the plot. Random example:
Advice for the Evil Overlord:
If an attractive young couple enters my realm, I will carefully monitor their activities. If I find they are happy and affectionate, I will ignore them. However if circumstances have forced them together against their will and they spend all their time bickering and criticizing each other except during the intermittent occasions when they are saving each others’ lives at which point there are hints of sexual tension, I will immediately order their execution.
Advice for the Hero:
If my Mentor tells me that I am not yet ready to confront the Evil Overlord, I will quietly accept his judgement and remain to complete my training.
Advice for the Bad Auxiliary Character (Evil Overlord’s Accountant):
Keep a fifth set of books, listing the locations and passwords for a small portion of the Evil Overlord’s loot, in the form of unmarked and untraceable cash. Use this information to set yourself up for retirement after the Evil Overlord is overthrown.
Advice for the Good Auxiliary Character (Good Guy’s Sidekick):
If the Hero calls for me from some dark place I did not expect him to be, I’ll hit the place with some manner of illumination, ask for the password, and proceed with the utmost caution.
Further Evil (Advice for the Evil Empress):
My slinky sorceress’ robe will have a chain mail foundation garment, at minimum.
Murphy’s Laws of Combat:
* If it jams, force it. If it breaks, it needed replacing anyway.
* When in a firefight, kill as many as you can; the one you miss may not miss tomorrow.
* The tough part about being an officer is that the troops don’t know what they want, but they know for certain what they don’t want.
* When you have plenty of ammo, you never miss. When you’re running low, you can’t hit the broad side of a barn.
July 2nd, 2006 at 8:25 pm
Somewhere along the line, I recalled the line from [i]The Incredibles[/i] – “No capes!”
Anyway, I think what made this movie “not as great” was the fact that, based on screen time, the main villain of the movie wasn’t Lex Luther (Superman doesn’t even catch onto Luther until near the end), but the main villain was Superman’s broken relationship with Lois.
Oh well, the action was worth the ticket!
July 5th, 2006 at 9:05 pm
This is a pre-Superman new movie comment. So there are no spoilers! Following the various links, I ended up reading the original Newspaper comic strips, drawn and illustrated in 1934, as published in 1939. (Now that is a familiar year… oh yeah, it is on my drivers licence…)
It was much more detailed story than the version I subsequent read in comic book form as a kid at school, but at least that was in color. And finding all the script/plot variations as detailed in that trek.. oops wrong tv series.. flight through the links Phil and others provided, I wonder if it is the same story.
One thing though, I noticed a big blunder in that first iteration of the Superman beginings. I wonder if it has been noted that when buildings on the the planet Krypton started toppling and really disturb the inhabitants, Supey’s dad exclaimed that it was the result of an ‘earthquake’! An EARTH quake! Not only once, but on subsequent occasions with increased urgengy. At least it started out as a tremor. All of this was in that first newspaper strip. A far cry from the version now served up to us.
Coincidently, I must mention that between reading all about Superman, being sidetracked to the Star Trek links, and their variations, and especially the parodies and other funnies, and writing this, I have had the pleasure of watching, LIVE, the view of the Shuttle ‘Discovery’ as the Astronauts scan the tiles outside for any damage caused during lift-off. This was as it passed over England. That I could have access to that kind of immediacy of events, is to me, outstounding. Prior to that it had come close to Sydney on the previous pass, but due to being early-ish morning, would not have been visible from here, in the dark. Pity about that. Guess we can’t have everything.
Ivan.
November 27th, 2009 at 5:46 am
Ahh. I feel peace and harmony in the videoblogging community. Unbridled creativy abounds. The future is bright. merci