Black backgrounds with White text leave the most horrendous after images.

I've just watched about 60% of Donner's Superman (ffwd'ed a bit), and as such my estimation of Returns has gone down eeeever so slightly. But that can't be helped really. I completely understand Singer's desire to realize whatever he can with CGI assists, and more power to him. (He unlike others *cough*Lucas*cough* doesn't get carried away with it.). Still, there are absolutely no shots in his film as gorgeous as this one:



...and the crane shot that follows it.

I now return you to your regularly scheduled geeking.

Completely agree. Donner's movie is amazingly shot during the Smallville bits and it's a great accomplishment that he managed to make the film feel like 3 distinct parts the way that he did. The different styles of acting and dialogue helped but his direction is what really makes that film so special.

I really want to watch 1 & 2 now but my DVDs are 3,000 miles away. Curses.

I cannot WAIT for the special edition Superman II to hit. Is there a date on that yet?

I read an interview with Richard Donner where he hinted that it would be released at the end of the year (if you're talking about the 'Donner Cut' that they've put together).

What I thought:

meh.

Just a point of interest for those who have seen the film (heavily spoilered, of course).

Shouldn't Lois be going into some sort of therapy at the end of the film? She knows that Jason is Superman's, but she had her memory wiped at the end of Superman II, so she forgot who Superman really was and she also would have forgotten that they had slept together. Assuming that they didn't sleep together afterwards (and, knowing Superman, they probably didn't) surely she would be a bit less accepting of everything and would be demanding some answers. Just something that has been bothering me

That seems to have been bothering a good number of people. And quite right, too - while on one level it's nice that you can easily tie the "Kal-el is the baby's daddy" plot line to the fact that they slept together in Supes II, Lois having had her memory erased presents a huge problem re: the same revelation. It could have been fairly easy to rectify - just have Lois knocked unconscious, menacing Luthor lackey approaching her, then Jason does his thing and Mom never sees it, only the baddie does. But they didn't.

Also, IMO, Having Supes make his grand entrance on the very same day Clark returns is pushing the time-tested "gee whiz" aspect of NO ONE managing to do the math - except Richard, who shrugs it off as easily as Lois does - to the absolute limit.

What are you implying? That Clark and Superman are...no, that's just silly. Although, when Clark removes his glasses...Nah

No, see....he's CAREFUL about when he removes his glasses. At least SOMEONE is being careful about SOMETHING.

Not got much to say apart from that I enjoyed the film and couldn't see how it could have been that much better but Lois "died" twice in the film. When she gets thrown around the plane and later has the metal door slam on top of her head she would have died, plain and simple. I know it's being a little picky but given the relative believability of the rest of the film this irritates me. Would it have been so hard for Singer and the writer to spot these glaring flaws and get rid of them? Also, Lois swims quite soon after recieving the blow from the door, surely she would be very heavily concussed (at the least)? Surely Richard would have stopped her?

Hey if the five year old kid (don't actually know how old he is, seven keeps popping into my head for some reason) can work it out I'm sure the rest of the world can.

The best explanation I heard for why people don't realise is that no one in Superman's world thinks that he is someone leading an ordinary life and so they don't think twice about Clark looking like Superman. His demanour is different, his voice is different, everything about him is designed to throw people off.

It's a bit of a daft plot device but it's a fairly daft story and, like all Superhero stories, it's all fairly ridiculous anyway so focussing on a minor point isn't all that important.

Yeah well... Clark's a cunt.

It's also the thing of because Superman doesn't wear a mask people aren't going to be looking for a secret identity, for all they know he's just spending the time where he's not saving people sitting about in his fortress of solitude looking at kryptonian porn or whatever. Whereas Batman, Spiderman et all obviously have something to hide, hence the interest in who they really are.

Mmmmm...Kryptonian porn.

Just don't get me started on Supermans motivation and the fact that Superman isn't Clark Kents secret identity, Clark Kent is Supermans.

He's still a cock.

That was one of my favourite little moments in Superman II, when Superman starts talking to Lois about Clark as if Clark were a separate person from him despite the fact that they know they are the same person. I thought that was a bit strange and added an oddness to Superman that I hadn't thought about before.

Essentially it boils down to the fact that he will never be human and as such he cannot not be Superman, even when he takes off the cape and outfit he is still intrinsically different from everyone around him. This is also his main motivation to be a hero. unlike Batman or Spiderman who have the classic revenge motive, tryting to atone for the loss of a loved one, Superman is a hero so he can gain acceptance into a society he doesn't belong to on a fundamental level. This is why Lex is the perfect foil for Supes as he cannot accept what superman is. This also results in his classic hero complex where he's convinced that he can and will save everyone. Most of the best Superman stories revolve around his losing confidence when he fails to save someone.

Nah, I think heroism is addictive.

All heroes are just big druggy twats.

Except Spiderman, he rules.

Batman is awesome as well.

In the JLA comics it's nearly always him/his plans that save the world, or the other JLA members when they get inevitably captured or whatever.


Batman <3

I always found batman to be a bit of a gimp to be honest. Although I'm going purely on films here.

The films are a poor rendition of the Dark knights past and the such.

Batman is insane.I mean he is actually crazy,he just doesn't think he is.
He, to me at least, has the biggest superhero complex as he is one of the few comic book heroes without any real powers, and unlike the Punisher for instance, he refuses (in general) to kill.

I dunno I just like a lot of the dark comics of the past few years,they show his struggle against evil to be much tougher then that of other superheros because he relies on his own intelligence,strength and toys to fight.

[/Pointless Ramble]

And any batman film apart from the first and the last are shite.

I adore Batman, he is brilliant.

I also can't wait to see Superman returns
Edit: The last being either the new one... or in some people I knows opinion...Batman Returns...hmmm

That's one of the reasons why I really liked Rorschach in Watchmen. Moore got to the heart of Batman and nailed the character perfectly by creating a brilliant parody of what he could be at his extremes. There's a bit of punisher mixed in as well, but generally he's an amalgamation of the ''darker'' heroes and the madness of Batman is key to that character.

Batman Begins.

Batman returns was a piece of shit.

I prefer Batman Returns to the first one as a film, but I think it's lacking as a Batman film. It's a great romp and everything but Burton has a bit too much free reign and it doesn't feel like Batman to me.

Batman Begins rules all.

I enjoyed Batman Returns. I thought Burton corrected the mistakes he made with Batman and made what he'd liked the first film to have been.

Batman Begins clearly rules all. Followed by the Adam West film. Then Batman Returns. Then Batman.

No other Batman films exist.

This isn't including the animated ones of course. Otherwise Return of the Joker would be way up there.

Back on topic.....

I thought Superman Returns was blinking terrific!

It was 2 and a half hours that felt much less. That's the mark of a quality film, when the pacing of it is so perfect that I didn't believe I'd been sat in the cinema for that long.

I understand now why Bryan Singer left X-men to do this instead. He obviously really wanted to do a Superman film and felt he had a lot to offer it. You can see this in every frame.
He comes across as a director with a lot of wit. There's clever little touches all the way through it that made me laugh. The destruction of the train set in Lex's basement for instance, which I think Singer shot like a mini-homage to the earthquake at the end of the original Superman. He also does the real action scenes amazing.
Plus he's definitely a good director of people. He casts extremely well and gets great performances from them.

Brandon Routh was a particularly fine find. He was brilliant both as Superman and Clark. Yes, we have to compare him to Christopher Reeve. We can't ignore this. Especially with the physical likeness in his Clark Kent guise. The bit where he meets Lois's kid for the first time and says "Hello?". That was almost like Reeve was on screen himself.
The way I look at it is Christopher Reeve found THE perfect way to play Superman. It was like an acting lesson. This is how to do it. If you do it any other way then it'll be wrong. So Routh plays it this correct way. And he does it very well.
This is the reason why Christopher Reeve deserves his dedication at the end of the film.

Kevin Spacey was doubly fantastic. He's got a wit to him too which shone through in his performance. But his best attribute is that he can switch to full-blown viciousness in the blink of an eye. That's ideal for playing Lex.
Kate Bosworth did ok with what she had. The problem is it's a less fun role than what it used to be. I appreciate that she's a mother now and needs to have settled down. I'd just rather be watching the Lois Lane who hangs onto the underside of a lift at the Eiffel Tower, instead of one who phones up lots of power companies.

The other complaint I had was Lex's grand scheme was ultimately a little poor. It felt like he wasn't really in control of it and was unsure about what would happen. This is the only thing that they'd need to sort out if they bring him back for another go.
Fortunately the film doesn't hang on this point. It has loads more going on in it.

I really hope this is start of a new run of Supes films. With the director and cast in play, and the plot-lines that have been set up, they could be a fantastic set of films.

That's only as long as they never bring in anything as bad as Nuclear Man.

Come on people, face it, the evil scheme was shit.

I absolutelly adores this film, to me it capyured everythign I wanted it to be. it had that essence of the original films, but with less shite cheese and ace graphics.

When the title music played I was almost in tears!

Routh was awesome in the role, especially as Clark, it was so much like Reeves but in the best way possible. It just fitted so well. Even Bosworth was good!!

Yeah, the big evil sceme was a bit pants, but thats sort of how it should be, the guy is a genius, but a complete nutter and an extremist! It was a bit rubbish, but I liked it. he did a pretty good job of just getting rid of Superman pretty swiftly as well, if it wasn't for that pesky kid and all.

I really enjoyed it, it was good fun! YEY to it all.

Oh yes, the credits was one of my favourite bits. And Routh and Spacey were good, I was just a bit disappointed by the rest of it.

Vic?

Wow, looks like it is rubbing off on everyone in here....poor youth.

My mistake, silly typo! I can't even remeber if I mean it to be like... reeve's but not with the '... AKA I was trying to type it how us foks from round here say it. but well done, anyway.

Meh, ive always said it Christopher Reeves as well.

Yeah, it just rolls of the tongue easier I find. I was trying to say it like Reeveses...like how we speak. no doubt much criticism willa rise from that for being so damn wrong to the english language.

I thought Routh and Spacey where the only good people in this film, Lois Lane and Perry White where nothing like the charactors in the original film. Plus Lois is unkillable in this film, how was she alright after that soild door landed on her head? Routh was amazing though, but did he have contacts in? cause his eyes looked so blue, also the young Clark did he have a fake chin on? that was huge, Bruce Campbell huge...

I think that would be a painful statement for Moore to read, to say he's an algimation of any "darker" hero's is somewhat of a injustice to his work. Rorschach is simply Moore's take on what a believable hero would be, well a believable hero that establishes his persona and sense of justice from abuse and tragedy (which was simple an event quite distance from himself but amplified by his own mental instability and perception of the world). Though everyone loves Rorschach given he's the ultimate hero/anti-hero, black is black, white is white, and that's not even going into how awesome calling your real self your disguise is.

True, but part of the appeal of Watchmen is that it is a brief history and satire of all comic book heroes (early 50's heroes battling communists, more vicious ones in the Vietnam era, the appearance of heroes created by meddling with scinece etc.) so Rorschach is, to some extent, an examination of the vigilante heroes that the likes of Batman and particularly the Punisher represent in comic books. He's certainly an amazingly complex character and more than just a bit disturbing/heroic depending on whether or not his breaking your arm, but one facet of his make-up is that he is a bit Batman-esque.

Donner Kebab anyone????

-m0r

^Jepp, read about that, when the latest came out. I'm looking forward for it. I should really rewatch the old films some time.

I just finished watching the Donner cut, along with the Lester cut, for next week's column. I'm still absorbing everything and I should probably write the piece before I post, but until then....

Wow.

It's better I take it?!

Overall, yes, despite some hiccups which were ultimately unavoidable. I just posted my take in Last Film You Watched, BTW.

Spacey to return as Lex Luthor in The Man of Steel.

Is it bad that I don't remember what happened to Luthor by the end of Superman Returns? Is it worse that I just don't care?

I would prefer to see Peter Petrelli vs Superman.

I certainly won't think worse of you for not remembering. To my eyes it was a pretty bad movie.

As I remember though, the last we saw of Luthor he was trapped on a tiny dessert island, eyeing up some small dogs that he wanted to eat, whilst Parker Posey pulled a face.
Ring any bells?

Stranded on a desert island. (Written before HK's reply)

I liked Superman Returns, but I do hope the sequel is more action based and less ponderous. The main problem with Superman compared to Singer's X-Men films is that the large number of characters in X-Men allows him to create the illusion of complexity, whereas when you focus on one character it's difficult to hide the fact that most characters in comic book movies lack any real depth.

Is also doesn't help that in the X-Men films there was at least the chance that one of the good guys might die in a fight. Not so much of a problem in a Superman film.

Ah, thanks guys. I remember now, but still don't care. As time passes my inclination to watch it ebbs away. I do hope there is more of the aircraft-stopping action in 'Man of Steel', though. After that stunning opening, the rest of the film was an overlong, glossy bore.