Superman was amazing
I've been meaning to see Superman since it came out, but I didn't get a chance till this weekend. The whole family went along with my wife's sister and her family. All in all we make a small army, but hey, that's all good.
From the very beginning I absolutely loved the movie. It both referenced the old movies and charted a new course for the character, much like Batman Begins. Unlike Batman Begins, which was very good as well, Superman was much less dark and just plain fun to watch. Kevin Spacey makes an absolutely perfect Luthor, and I'm glad they didn't kill him off. (But I'll stop here, I don't want to reveal any spoilers.)
Comments
What was the superfriend ref?
# Posted By Raymond Camden
| 7/16/06 7:52 PM
was it something to do with pajamas?
# Posted By charlie griefer
| 7/16/06 8:49 PM
I thought the fx were amazing - but Gene Hackman was a superior Lex.
# Posted By Peter Tilbrook
| 7/16/06 9:11 PM
I really liked it, but I thought it could have had more action. I really liked Kevin Spacey as Lex, but I've heard from others that they didn't like him. To each his own. :)
# Posted By Jacob Munson
| 7/16/06 11:11 PM
Superman Returns put a bad light on the characer as a love 'em and leave 'em dead-beat dad. Used to be the character stood for "Truth, Justice, and the American Way"...now we have "Truth, Justice, and Child Support".
Can't see how Warner Bros. & DC Comics allowed that "love child" plot be included in the movie.
Totally unnecessary. btw, Lois needed an older character, not some early 20 year old, mis-cast actress.
Can't see how Warner Bros. & DC Comics allowed that "love child" plot be included in the movie.
Totally unnecessary. btw, Lois needed an older character, not some early 20 year old, mis-cast actress.
# Posted By Greg Smith
| 7/17/06 6:33 AM
Oh come on. He didn't know he had a kid. Kinda hard to call em a a deadbeat dad when he didn't know he was a dad. Let's try to keep the spoilers off of here too please.
# Posted By Raymond Camden
| 7/17/06 8:11 AM
Sorry but I have to disagree - as a long time Superman fan, I was hugely dissapointed - in fact I almost fell asleep - it seems that these days CGI and amazing visuals is regarded as some substitute for a good story. Went home and watched Superman 2 which despite its age I still think is a better film. The makeup seemed way too much with a lot of close ups looking like they had airbrushed his face. There was also a lot of shots which didn't have to be computer generated. When I first heard they were making a Superman film I expected scenes much more like the fight scenes in the second matrix. I guess the real problem with Superman is that unless he looses his powers, is exposed to Kryptonite or meets a super villan of equal power (which has basically been the theme for all the films) - there is never really a feeling that he is in real danger after all he is invincible!
Kola, wouldn't your last complaint (abut Supes only being in danger rarely) also apply just as much tot he old movies, and the comics? It seems like despite this "flaw", people still like the story. :)
# Posted By Raymond Camden
| 7/18/06 5:46 AM
Ok. First off I thought the film was great... Was very excited whe I heard it was coming out. But....
The only real problem I have is the child... Not that he had a child mind you, but HOW?.. Lets look:
Movie one: no hanky panky.. saves Lois by spining the earth backwards..
Movie two: ZOD, Gives up powers.. He and Lois have a go, wipes her memory at the end.
Movie three: Richard Pryor.. No love there.
Movie four: Doesn't he start going after Lana Lang again.. No Lois Love in that film.
Now the back story for "Returns" says he was gone for five years.. That "love child" is five years old.. If we put them in a time line and assume that film two was the only "action" superman and Lois saw with each other...... Then HOW?
The only real problem I have is the child... Not that he had a child mind you, but HOW?.. Lets look:
Movie one: no hanky panky.. saves Lois by spining the earth backwards..
Movie two: ZOD, Gives up powers.. He and Lois have a go, wipes her memory at the end.
Movie three: Richard Pryor.. No love there.
Movie four: Doesn't he start going after Lana Lang again.. No Lois Love in that film.
Now the back story for "Returns" says he was gone for five years.. That "love child" is five years old.. If we put them in a time line and assume that film two was the only "action" superman and Lois saw with each other...... Then HOW?
# Posted By Robert Owen
| 7/18/06 8:22 AM
I think you are being a bit too anal. And as we all know, that is only allowed for LOST. ;)
To me, I felt this was a pseudo-sequel. We shouldn't expect it to _completely_ match up, but unlike Batman Begins, it wasn't a completely new story.
To me, I felt this was a pseudo-sequel. We shouldn't expect it to _completely_ match up, but unlike Batman Begins, it wasn't a completely new story.
# Posted By Raymond Camden
| 7/18/06 8:28 AM
The very subtle reference to another SuperFriend made me giggle too.