why superman should not have returned!!!
obviously this is for people that have seen the movie.
again... SPOILER ALERT!!!
well, i guess the title for this blog was sort of harsh considering that i don't have anything against the actors or the effects. i thought brandon routh pulled it off quite well, kevin spacey was genius, kate bosworth was endearing, and sam huntington was entertaining – even james marsden faired better than his lip quivering counterpart in x-men - hell, even the 'sorta' cameo of kumar was amusing. kudos for casting noel neill (gertrude vanderworth) and jack larson (bo the bartender) who played lois lane and jimmy olsen respectively in the george reeves superman incarnation of the 50s – which i have not seen but i thought was a good addition simply for nostalgic reasons (interestingly enough the trailer for ‘hollywoodland’ premiered during the screening, made me want to go see that one). the action sequences, particularly the airplane rescue scene was amazing! although, if i were superman i would have flown immediately under the nose of the plane – like he eventually did - and slowly stopped it’s descent instead of grabbing the wing to stop it from spinning… it still made the whole theatre, yours truly included, burst into applause when he finally set the plane down in the baseball stadium.
anyway, like i was saying the actors and effects weren’t the problem. the problem i had with this movie was the overall plot! yes, i have a problem with singer and the wonder twin hacks he calls writers! first of all, for an evil genius you'd think lex luthor would come off his last evil plot (as witnessed in superman 1) and stop trying to sell realestate! second, the movie had too much of the ‘passion’ in it. fine! superman as savior! we get it! but force feeding us the whole death and resurrection and crucified poses! please! and what’s with that whole ‘the son becomes the father, the father becomes the son’ bullshit! hey if i wanted the circle of life, i’d watch the ‘lion king! but that’s not the best part. the best part, the part i truly hated was the audacity of these three stooges to actually think that they can give superman a kid! please! don’t mess with canon law kids! dc didn’t like it in the mid-80s and literally erased a superboy from the current timeline, hell, they even did it again just a year ago with their latest crisis! and here comes the director and writers thinking it would be cute to have a supertyke in the picture. it's like lois lane being with someone else and not superman - oh wait! the fuckers did that too! who the hell do they think they are that they can mess with such iconic characters! morons! to add to that, who also thought that supes wasn’t only a super voyeur but a super-ahas as well! sheesh! fine the first two superman movies from the 70s/80s were ok (not great, just o-k!), but with a $260 million budget (reportedly the biggest for any movie), you’d think b.s. and the funky bunch would have come up with a better, truly awe inspiring movie and not just a continuation to the earlier two! i’ve encountered people that really liked the movie. sure! they're entitled to their opinion. but for me, well, at a certain point in the movie, i was actually hoping it would end already!
two thumbs down! better yet, stick it up brian singer's ass! i'm sure he'd enjoy that one!
incidentally, the 'superman returns' premiere also previewed the 'spider-man 3' trailer. and well, what can i say... it was amazing!!!
posted by obijuancarlo at 4:00 PM
3 Comments:
So you saw the Spider 3 trailer; lucky you. Here, the distributors are so friggin' territorial about their movie trailers that probably the soonest we'll see it (in theaters, anyway, as we have, most of us, already seen it online) is when Adam Sandler's "Click" opens here.
Well, Columbia Pictures also releases Disney movies here, so maybe we'll get it with 'Pirates of the Caribbean.' Here's hoping...
Oh, and while I don't feel quite as vehemently about the movie as you do, I kind of didn't like it that much either, but the revelation didn't piss me off as much as I had already read a spoiler review before watching it.
well, i actually knew going into the movie about the 'surprise twist'. but i guess i was still holding out that these rumors weren't true. and i guess it didn't bother me so much until i finally saw how cheesy the whole thing was brought out. and if he didn't turn out to be superman's kid, then that's just another cardinal rule broken by giving lois a kid by someone else. i guess, for me, the plot would have failed no matter what.
some reviews talked about heart strings being pulled and how singer is a master at humanizing characters. for me, all these emotional scenes felt forced. it was, simply put, stupid. i can actually picture singer and the writers laughing while feeding us this horse manure!
incidentally, and even though it's been criticalled panned, i really enjoyed 'x-men 3'. i thought it was actually leaps and bounds better and more entertaining than 'superman returns'.
haha! very valid points, no argument.
they should have you as a critic to polish the work before it goes into final production. the script had its moments but it wasn't as good as it should've been.
Post a Comment
<< Home