2000 AD Online Forum

General Chat => Film & TV => : Mike Carroll 22 April, 2005, 10:50:01 PM

: Superman Returns
: Mike Carroll 22 April, 2005, 10:50:01 PM
The first pic of Brandon Routh in his Superman costume!

Hope this works...!
: Re: Superman Returns
: Mike Carroll 22 April, 2005, 10:50:39 PM
Ah, crap! Hold on a second...
: Re: Superman Returns
: Richmond Clements 22 April, 2005, 10:51:32 PM
Just post the link MIke.
Saw the pic earlier, and while he looks a bit thin, I reckon it's pretty good.
: Re: Superman Returns
: Mike Carroll 22 April, 2005, 10:52:45 PM
Okay... Another go!
: Re: Superman Returns
: Byron Virgo 22 April, 2005, 10:59:44 PM
Is that from the 1950's?
: Re: Superman Returns
: VampiraJen 22 April, 2005, 11:14:36 PM
looks stupid.  always does when brought into real world.  logo on chest should be bigger.  briefs are tiny, and ingeneral plain and boring.  what ever happened to taking a bit of artistic licence with super hero costumes?
: Re: Superman Returns
: Funt Solo 22 April, 2005, 11:23:31 PM
Where's his packet, then?
: Re: Superman Returns
: Conexus 22 April, 2005, 11:33:39 PM
looked far better in the original films
: Re: Superman Returns
: Conexus 22 April, 2005, 11:46:52 PM

compare and contrast:


: Re: Superman Returns
: mastertsan 23 April, 2005, 12:04:03 AM
let's face it, conexus just hit the nail on the head in 3 words.  'compare and contrast'.  does anyone not think christopher reeve was the perfect superman???  how can you live up to that, especially with a half assed attempt to update the costume.  he will be judged against christopher reeves and inevitably fall short.
jon
: Re: Superman Returns
: the other dredd 23 April, 2005, 12:09:35 AM
Routh looks great as Clark Kent but based on that photo, and the upward angle, he lacks the masculine look Reeve brought to the role. He looks like some young guy pretending to be Superman rather than Superman, if you get my drift.

I doubt Routh will be as good as Reeve but you never know.
: Re: Superman Returns
: Conexus 23 April, 2005, 12:09:57 AM
Actually I was just talking about it costume wise, but you're point is valid as well
: Re: Superman Returns
: Conexus 23 April, 2005, 12:10:21 AM
*your, even
: Re: Superman Returns
: the other dredd 23 April, 2005, 12:45:38 AM
So we've seen this photo of a guy at a fancy dress party, when will we see Brandon Routh as Superman?:)



: Re: Superman Returns
: Byron Virgo 23 April, 2005, 02:31:37 AM
"I always had the general idea of the suit. However, when the conceptual art was evolving around the same time that I cast Brandon, I privately had paintings rendered with Brandon's face, which certainly brought it to life," Bryan Singer told USA Today.
: Re: Superman Returns
: Bico 23 April, 2005, 03:02:20 AM
The reds are too dark, the logo is too small, the blue looks garish, he doesn't have the build or the face for the character and his pants look wrong.

Catwoman, anyone?
: Re: Superman Returns
: Swearengen 23 April, 2005, 03:15:58 AM
he just doesnt 'look' like Superman cant put my finger on exactly why he just looks wrong.

: Re: Superman Returns
: Noisybast 23 April, 2005, 03:54:45 AM
In that photo, he looks like the Welsh guy off T4 Sunday...
: Re: Superman Returns
: gnilleps 23 April, 2005, 03:54:54 AM
The other Dredd got it, I reckon. He looks like someone trying a superman look while in a costume rather than looking like Superman.
Don't really have a problem with the blue (though on the larger photo you see it has a movie Spider-man like texture) but agree with the Bear on the red. Looks like the logo is semi-rigid, which would explain why it's smaller, but why make it 3d like that? larger & flatter would look so much better.
And that repeated logo on the belt? It seems redundant to question the ego of someone who dresses with his on logo emblazoned across his chest, particularly if he's called "Superman" but still...
Oh, and I don't like the collar/cape arrangement. The Reeves version handles it much better.
Of course if the movie's great and Routh acquits himself as well as Reeves did then the costume will work.
But still...

j

Link:
KNEEL BEFORE ZOD!

: Re: Superman Returns
: Dudley 23 April, 2005, 07:16:47 AM
Linton sums up my feelings perfectly: Where's his packet, then?
: Re: Superman Returns
: Adrian Bamforth 23 April, 2005, 07:29:09 AM
I always had a strange curiosity of what David Shwimner would be like as Superman - okay, a bit Jewish but then so were the Superman creators which adds an interesting dimension, plus we know he would be able to play a suitable dorky Clark Kent if they went the Christopher Reeves route.

ADE
: Re: Superman Returns
: Noisybast 23 April, 2005, 03:31:12 PM
Bizarrely, I could see that actually working!
Obviously, they'd have to force-feed him his bodyweight in steak and lock him in a gym, but it's a start...
: Re: Superman Returns
: Adrian Bamforth 23 April, 2005, 07:07:57 PM
I don't think he's much skinnier than Reeve - you can never make him as bulbous as in the comic so you just have to give him stature.

(Not sure what's happened to his arms here though)

ADE
: Re: Superman Returns
: therev 23 April, 2005, 07:28:58 PM
Not impressed by new costume. Is it me or is it too "dark"?
: Re: Superman Returns
: Swearengen 23 April, 2005, 07:31:24 PM
>Is it me or is it too "dark"?

reminds me of the colour of the 'bad' Superman costume. Cant remember which film it appeared in but just remember a fight scene in a scrap yard.

: Re: Superman Returns
: Richmond Clements 23 April, 2005, 07:37:02 PM
Yeah, you're right!

It was in Superman III, when he got done by the kryptonite.

I think it looks alright though.
Remember, Singer did the same with X-Men, and it workrd out alright.
: Re: Superman Returns
: Byron Virgo 23 April, 2005, 07:47:47 PM
Was it really, though?

[Little known fact: Richard Pryor got paid more than Christopher Reeve for appearing in Superman III but recieved second billing.]
: Re: Superman Returns
: SamuelAWilkinson 24 April, 2005, 05:01:46 AM
> (Not sure what's happened to his arms here though)



He's got 'em folded across his chest so it looks like he has malformed manboobs.
: Re: Superman Returns
: Woolly 25 April, 2005, 10:10:34 PM
Give it a chance! Weve not seen how it looks on film yet, depending on the tone the film takes the costume might just fit in perfectly.

Personally im pleased they havent redesigned the costume too much and have kept it simple.
: Re: Superman Returns
: Oddboy 25 April, 2005, 11:36:23 PM
The question which should have been asked is this:

"Do we really need another Superman film?"

(Unfortunately, they should've asked that before they made Superman IV)
: Re: Superman Returns
: The Amstor Computer 25 April, 2005, 11:39:19 PM
"Unfortunately, they should've asked that before they made Superman IV"

Or, indeed, before they made Superman III...
: Re: Superman Returns
: Tweak72 25 April, 2005, 11:46:15 PM
those pants are the kind you see at G. A. Y. on a good night and those kind of pants get a LOT of action
: Re: Superman Returns
: Carlsborg Expert 27 April, 2005, 04:17:55 AM
Right. I say that Superman only has to defy gravity.

His superstrengh making it affable to work with the earths spin,tilt and orbit.

Not *fly* as in thruster himself.
: Re: Superman Returns
: ESCUBRIA 27 April, 2005, 04:36:12 AM
The old 40's /Kingdom Come costume sans yellow colour is far better. I men yellow, red & blue -far to gaudy.
: Re: Superman Returns
: Mr C 27 July, 2005, 06:35:01 AM
First pic of Kevin Spacey as Luthor.
And he looks exactly like Gene Hackman. Weird.
: Re: Superman Returns
: Bico 27 July, 2005, 07:00:10 AM
He's got that look on his face like he's just walked off Clapham Common, hasn't he.



















By which I mean he looks like he's just been mugged after walking his dog, obviously.
Hem.
: Re: Superman Returns
: Satanist 27 July, 2005, 04:57:27 PM
"He's got that look on his face like he's just walked off Clapham Common, hasn't he. "

As I've never been I wouldn't know
: Re: Superman Returns
: Dudley 27 July, 2005, 04:59:16 PM
His face is screwed up and he's walking funny.
: Re: Superman Returns
: Matt Timson 27 July, 2005, 05:41:42 PM
Add a pair of glasses and he could be your twin, Duds!

;)
: Re: Superman Returns
: Bico 27 July, 2005, 05:44:10 PM
"Kevin Spacey bummed by Bungle in mistaken identity shocker"

Only in your super soaraway SUN!
: Re: Superman Returns
: Dudley 27 July, 2005, 05:44:12 PM
That reminds me - what happened to that Frankenstein pic again?
: Re: Superman Returns
: Matt Timson 27 July, 2005, 07:22:43 PM
Oddly enough, I asked myself the same question as I was posting that- and actually felt bad for a few seconds.

I'll get around to it eventually...

;)
: Re: Superman Returns
: Carlsborg Expert 27 July, 2005, 09:25:01 PM
The hairdo is so Hairdont
Re;new superman.
: Re: Superman Returns
: Senor Apellido 03 August, 2005, 03:36:56 AM
The Brandon Routh pic looks like it's from a spoof movie.
Super Spinal Tap anyone?
(This isn't a swipe at Spinal Tap. That film rules!!)

p.s. hello everyone, this is my first post.
: Re: Superman Returns
: Richmond Clements 03 August, 2005, 04:04:58 AM
Hello!
: Re: Superman Returns
: Lord Running Clam 03 August, 2005, 04:23:38 AM
Welcome to the board,Senor.
: Re: Superman Returns
: Max Kon 03 August, 2005, 04:27:16 AM
allo
: Re: Superman Returns
: Quirkafleeg 03 August, 2005, 05:25:13 AM
Are you Spanish?
: Re: Superman Returns
: Senor Apellido 03 August, 2005, 10:42:07 PM
Not really..... It just sounds cool.
: Re: Superman Returns
: Emperor 20 June, 2006, 01:19:29 AM
Well who'd have thought it:

Critics wowed by Superman return


The first reviews for Superman Returns have given the new movie, which stars newcomer Brandon Routh as the legendary superhero, a resounding thumbs up.

Variety magazine's critic said it was "grandly conceived, sensitively drawn [and] never self-consciously hip".

"It is sincere, with an artistic elegance and a genuine emotional investment in the material," he wrote.

The Hollywood Reporter, meanwhile, saluted "a heartfelt Superman movie that plays to a broad audience".

Routh, it continued, plays the comic book character "with honesty [and] winning fortitude".

And Newsweek's David Ansen wrote: "From the start of this gorgeously crafted epic, you can feel that Singer has real love and respect for the most foursquare comics superhero of them all.

"Newcomer Routh may or may not be a real actor, but he effortlessly lays claim to the iconic role."

His comments were echoed by Harry Knowles on the Ain't It Cool News website, who described Superman Returns as "the film I was hoping and dreaming for".

"Just as Batman Begins relaunched an ailing Batman, it sends Superman into the stratosphere," he wrote.

The film - which stars Kevin Spacey as Lex Luthor and Kate Bosworth as Lois Lane - is released in the US on 28 June and in the UK on 14 July.

It is the Man of Steel's first big-screen appearance since 1987's Superman IV: The Quest for Peace starring the late Christopher Reeve.

Singer's previous films have included The Usual Suspects and the first two instalments in the X-Men franchise.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/entertainment/5095436.stm

Published: 2006/06/19 14:46:25 GMT

? BBC MMVI

Link: News repott

: Re: Superman Returns
: Bico 20 June, 2006, 03:11:24 AM
: Re: Superman Returns
: scutfink 20 June, 2006, 08:21:05 PM
Posted in one form or another by just about everyone:

he just doesnt 'look' like Superman

Could be worse

: Re: Superman Returns
: scutfink 20 June, 2006, 08:22:46 PM
Try that image link again
: Re: Superman Returns
: scutfink 20 June, 2006, 08:23:21 PM
Dammit, I give up...
: Re: Superman Returns
: scutfink 20 June, 2006, 08:35:49 PM
One last go...

: Re: Superman Returns
: Buttonman 20 June, 2006, 08:57:24 PM
Be the spider scutfink! Try, try, try again and then go watch the football.
: Re: Superman Returns
: Noisybast 22 June, 2006, 07:26:28 AM
Amusingly, Lex Luthor has taken over the official Superman Returns site and, er, redecorated...

Link: Check out he Wallpapers!

: Re: Superman Returns
: ThryllSeekyr 26 June, 2006, 12:10:55 PM
Though I am impressed with what was done, this time around.

I still think Brandon Routh, as he is can't be the Superman that Christopher Reeve was.

He lacks the definitive superman strong square jawline. Though, with todays spiecal effects wizardry you could still combine that with the same actor and get away with that, I reckon.

I have noticed that the costume is darker. I looks subtly more evil. My father describes it as metallic looking. ( A new Kryptonian Fashion.)
It has gone the way of Batman having a dark rubberfied costume and I don't think that was ever nessasary.  I thought the older and brighter costume colours were good enough. It was never broken, so why fix it.

Oh the subject of the Richard Donner version.  have few queries about the mythology behind Superman as it has been presented on the big screen.

firsty, when Mr and Mrs Superman ( I forget the screen names.) foudn out that thier sun was gonna go nova and destroy their homeworld. So they decided to build small spaceship so their son soon to grow up to be Superman could escape safely. With their superior intellect, why not build a fleet of ships or many of those pods.  (Slightly larger for adults or a small family) so they could all survive. It doesn't seem like the sort of thing that may have been beyond them.

Though right at this moment I do believe that they did survive through the green crystal ( Given to baby Superman.)and the actions of Superman himself ( As he established himself on Earth.) I would however like to hear few other opinions offering more that just the fact that just it seeemd like a great idea at the time and it's not meant to that realisdtic.

Secondly, That Green Crystal. Isn't that techically Krytonite and when teenaged Clark Kent discoveres it in his own barn yard. He's not adversely effected by it at all. Though It's never really pointed out and I have before now always taken this for granted. Of course, it's probably cuase that it was not part of Krypton when it the plent exploded anwas not exposed to the same element that may have made it dangeruos to Superman.

Thirdly, I had always though it strange how Superman family crest or signature emblazoned on his chest resembles the letter 'S'. S for Superman.


: Re: Superman Returns
: scutfink 26 June, 2006, 03:34:53 PM


Posted By ThryllSeekyr:

Secondly, That Green Crystal. Isn't that techically Krytonite and when teenaged Clark Kent discoveres it in his own barn yard. He's not adversely effected by it at all. Though It's never really pointed out and I have before now always taken this for granted. Of course, it's probably cuase that it was not part of Krypton when it the plent exploded anwas not exposed to the same element that may have made it dangeruos to Superman.

Peas are Green, So is Lime Jelly, both originate from Earth.

Lime Jelly is not Peas.

: Re: Superman Returns
: Steve Green 26 June, 2006, 03:39:55 PM
I thought the whole thing about kryptonite is that it is fragments irradiated by Kryption's exploding sun.

Since that green crystal is placed in before Krypton goes boom, it's not irradiated.

i.e. peas

- Steve
: Re: Superman Returns
: scutfink 26 June, 2006, 03:48:40 PM
Also, on the Spaceship escape craft thing:

Jor-El (Supes' Dad) was the only guy on Krypton who actually believed the place was in any danger, (IIRC most folks considered him to be something of a crackpot.) so basically the size of the ship was a funding issue.

No-one's willing to front up the cash to avert a disaster that's not going to happen...
: Re: Superman Returns
: Dudley 26 June, 2006, 03:59:55 PM
...as Lembit Opik (the British Jor-El) can attest...
: Re: Superman Returns
: paulvonscott 26 June, 2006, 04:07:21 PM
"Jor-El (Supes' Dad) was the only guy on Krypton who actually believed the place was in any danger, (IIRC most folks considered him to be something of a crackpot.) so basically the size of the ship was a funding issue."

In the film the council would have done their nut if they'd found out he had a ship, so presumably secrecy was a big isue as well.  Give the guy a break, he built a fully working space pod capable of saving his son and transporting him to another world in his spare time.

The original superman film is my favourite superhero movie ever.  It has its faults, Clark is too clownish for me, and why did they feel the need to get someone else to play him as a young man, but I've never really read any Superman comics and think the film is great fun.  We say it at junior school as a treat on the film projector and I remember everyone running around the fields trying to go impossibly fast during the interval.

Like any sequal, it needs to convince me I guess.

I'd be interested in seeing a 'directors' cut of the second film with all the missing bits restored.
: Re: Superman Returns
: JOE SOAP 26 June, 2006, 08:03:36 PM
Donner's new cut for Superman 2 is coming to dvd in November.
: Re: Superman Returns
: Woolly 26 June, 2006, 11:36:03 PM
'Donner's new cut for Superman 2 is coming to dvd in November.'


I might be wrong, but i thought the Donner version was only going to be available as part of the 14-disc-bollocks-out-massive-boxset version? Lets be honest now, who wants that?!?

-Wul (hoping he's wrong!)
: Re: Superman Returns
: Buddy 27 June, 2006, 07:27:34 AM
Going to see Superman Returns on Thursday, if I can get a babysitter organised!
: Re: Superman Returns
: Carlsborg Expert 27 June, 2006, 12:39:02 PM
Well I think he should nd its just a shame that a few stupid writers like Brian Coyle ruined the continuity of him, especially when he of all people developed Superboy,superdog, the Superbike for Chrissakes.


Dissapointed,Moss~Side
: Re: Superman Returns
: ThryllSeekyr 27 June, 2006, 02:39:55 PM
Fair enough, those first two queries seem alittle silly now since I posted them.

BUt imaigne what might have happened if they arrived enmass on Earth.

Just another thought, Isn't it ironic that they imprisoned General Zod and his two croniesin the phantom zone just before ( Moments, hours.) the big bang.

Saving their lives.

While they themselves all perished.
: Re: Superman Returns
: scutfink 27 June, 2006, 03:17:05 PM
Posted by ThryllSeekyr:

Fair enough, those first two queries seem alittle silly now since I posted them.

Not at all, things that seem obvious to one person can often be confusing to others and vice versa...

Especially when you put so much time and effort into setting up the 'Green stuff from Krypton: Lethal to Superman' idea only to have him go chucking green Kryptonian crystals about in the Arctic circle...
: Re: Superman Returns
: Buddy 27 June, 2006, 05:31:31 PM
Sorry. that's NEXT Thursday.
: Re: Superman Returns
: Doggy Carrots 27 June, 2006, 07:02:00 PM
still it could have been worse than brandon
: Re: Superman Returns
: Doggy Carrots 27 June, 2006, 07:27:58 PM
i could see it

Link: schwimmerman

: Re: Superman Returns
: Doggy Carrots 27 June, 2006, 08:13:08 PM
what always annoys me about supes costume is when he gets shot or anything like that it never rips when it should it's suprs thats bulletproof not his costume so the bullet should leave a hole in the costume, is it only me that gets pissed off with tiny little details like that or is there anyone else.
: Re: Superman Returns
: Bico 27 June, 2006, 09:17:06 PM
"Well I think he should nd its just a shame that a few stupid writers like Brian Coyle ruined the continuity of him, especially when he of all people developed Superboy,superdog, the Superbike for Chrissakes."

Eh?



I've more wondered how an advanced (space-faring) race can be extinct when their home planet goes boom.  Apart from that city full of Kryptonians in the Supergirl movie, there must be loads of other colonies out there.  There was a lengthy and drawn-out explanation for why Kal-El was one of a kind in the comics a few years ago, but the film is a different kettle of fish, I'd imagine.
: Re: Superman Returns
: scutfink 27 June, 2006, 10:32:43 PM
Doggy Carrots:

IIRC there was som kind of dodgy explanation at some point (Comics or TV incarnation, I don't know, I'm more of a Batman fan really...)
That he radiated some kind of weak Kryptonian Aura or something, until it would look really cool if his costume was all ripped, I'm sure it made sense to someone (Or it may just be another fragmented figment of my Memorimagination.).

Bumsex:

With regards the films, although Kryptonian science was certainly advanced I always got the impression that their restrictive society wasn't big on the whole expansion into space concept.

But I was, what, four when the movie came out  (1978?), so, again I could be remembering things wrong...  
: Re: Superman Returns
: Doggy Carrots 27 June, 2006, 10:39:03 PM
thats a lame excuse they could have atleast said he wove the costume out of his own hair and thats why it dosn't rip, when will they learn to make good excuses tut
: Re: Superman Returns
: Darryl 28 June, 2006, 12:33:36 AM
Ah, but is it faithful to the core concept?

After seeing the trailers, I'm looking forward to it - but I'm wondering why they're using some unknown rock track rather than the iconic theme tune on the tv trailers....
: Re: Superman Returns
: Richmond Clements 28 June, 2006, 01:02:04 AM
Superman's costume is made from the blankets that he was wrapped in when he arrived on Earth. That's why they don't get damaged by bullets or flying at extreme speeds or the incredible heat at the Earth's core.
: Re: Superman Returns
: Dark Jimbo 28 June, 2006, 02:25:19 AM
Superman's costume is made from the blankets that he was wrapped in when he arrived on Earth. That's why they don't get damaged by bullets or flying at extreme speeds or the incredible heat at the Earth's core.

And yet his aunt was presumably able to use scissors and a needle on it when she first made the blankets into a costume...
: Re: Superman Returns
: Richmond Clements 28 June, 2006, 02:42:03 AM
His Aunt? That's Spider-man you're thinking of, I suspect- it's his mammy Kent.

She probably used kryptonite needles. Or something.
: Re: Superman Returns
: Jim_Campbell 28 June, 2006, 02:54:36 AM
Not a Supes fan by any stretch, but I thought the costume issue had been explained away by the fact that it's not his skin that's diamond hard, but that he's enveloped by a field a few millimetres deep that conveys his invulnerability ...

No idea where I dredged that up from, but it does kinda makes sense ...

Cheers

Jim
: Re: Superman Returns
: Art 28 June, 2006, 02:57:01 AM
IIRC The costume was indetsructible until John Bryne decided it wasn't. In the earlier version the Kents unraveled the kryptonian material of the blanket Superman had in the capsule, and then when they needed to cut it that got the young Superman to use his heat vision on it.

That whole "unravelling" thing always makes me think of wooly jumpers knitted by someones nan.
: Re: Superman Returns
: Jim_Campbell 28 June, 2006, 04:26:29 AM
"IIRC The costume was indetsructible until John Bryne decided it wasn't."

Of course it wasn't, you FOOL! Anyone who thinks that an indestructible costume is part of the CORE CONCEPT of Superman is an ASSHOLE.

Away with you to the corner, where the followers of the false prophet Moore are chastised by flagellation with copies of Byrne's masterly work on Starbrand [1].

Cheers

Jim

[1] Which I never read, but a review of which in Speakeasy [2], I think, stuck in my mind. It opened along the lines of "Hoo-boy, I've read some stinkers in my time. No, really, I've read some old bollocks, but compared to this, Turok Son of Stone is a masterpiece ..."

[2] Really showing my age, now ...
: Re: Superman Returns
: ThryllSeekyr 28 June, 2006, 06:46:06 AM
I haven't seen the movie yet, but I have seen the part where some guy points a gun at his face and shoots him point blank right at his left eyeball.

The bullet crumples on impacts and bounces off.

That's tough kryptonian eyeballs.
: Re: Superman Returns
: ThryllSeekyr 28 June, 2006, 06:47:29 AM
I haven't seen the movie yet, but I have seen the part where some guy points a gun at his face and shoots him point blank right at his left eyeball.

The bullet crumples on impact and bounces off.

That's tough kryptonian eyeballs.
: Re: Superman Returns
: scutfink 28 June, 2006, 06:30:11 PM
Humourous Superman shennanigans...

How's my Web-fu today?
: Re: Superman Returns
: Floyd-the-k 02 July, 2006, 06:19:02 PM
Jim, not having read something is no obstacle to reviewing it providing you're John Byrne.
    I think it's illegal to discuss the Superman fillum on the JB Forum because JB finds the idea of people who enjoy a good movie without sharing his concerns about wether it's true to CORE CONCEPT too depressing.






SPOILERS











He (JB) refers to Superman having a 'bastard son'.

anyway, I saw the movie today with Roy and loved it. Not the best movie ever, but good fun. It was funny enough (in the Lex Luthor bits), Supes was likable and good-looking and the story moved along well.  I never got used to that costume though, but that's not important.  Kevin Spacey was good. He looked exactly like Gene Hackman but was less over the top and annoying.
: Re: Superman Returns
: Art 03 July, 2006, 12:27:32 AM
SPOILERS








I agree with John Bryne about the kid being a crap idea. Shockomundo! Other than that the first two thirds of the film are flawless, with the business with the plane being especially good. However the last third the film kind of loses it's way, which is a bit of a shame. Still, high hopes for a sequel!
: Re: Superman Returns
: Radbacker 03 July, 2006, 08:18:45 AM
its OK but after the rev up it gives you in the first half the second half just seems boring.  I think its a problem with Superman in general, he's so Super who can you get to actually fight him?  its the one thing Supes III did right gave him someone to fight who could kick his ass(even if it was a duplicate him).

Oh and 2 1/2 hours is too long for the big guy.

CU Radbacker
: Re: Superman Returns
: ThryllSeekyr 03 July, 2006, 09:38:24 AM
Yeah, in terms of power Superman is unbalnced.

Everyu crooked person should carry around a lump of Kryptonite just for the sake fairness.
: Re: Superman Returns
: Buddy 07 July, 2006, 07:18:40 PM
Well I didn't get to see this last night, childminding duties more important, aparently. Tisk!

But from what my mate says it a bunch of crap.

I'll see it anyways when it opens proper.
: Re: Superman Returns
: WoD 08 July, 2006, 05:23:38 AM
I love the way he lands..with such force...not the gentle way that they used to land superman...nice that....real strength.
: Re: Superman Returns
: paulvonscott 08 July, 2006, 05:56:59 AM
To have those powers and use them without killing anyone, you'd need *exceptional* control.  Some sort of power thud landing isn't very controlled, it's either lazy or just showing off.

Plus, the eyeball thing just seems daft, whatever substance it is, it would sting a bit.  Unless it's not actually superman that's all powerful, but some weird field he's projecting. (which looking up the thread is what Jim said about the costume).  So essentially if you could negate this field, you could kill him.

My name is Lex Luthor, I claim my ?5 million pounds.

This isn't from a fan perspective, just idle cider based thoughts.

Bloody hell, more work tomorrow.  Arguing with kids why they shouldn't play with my paperclips or wear rollerblades in the library.

Join with me in communal prayer that my premium bonds and lottery numbers come up so I can be saved from thinking such idling thoughts to distract myself from the real world.

Anyway, I'd love to go and see the movie if it's good.  Has anyone actually seen it?
: Re: Superman Returns
: ThryllSeekyr 08 July, 2006, 08:21:15 AM
Yes, I have.

I tried to like it, but I see it as something that doesn't offer anything to earlier films.

I remember reading somewhere that Brian Singer wanted to make a movie that would a be great addition to the first movie.

No, I saw the movie, and I don't think so.

All my worst fears about the actors appearance, the altered costume and even the look of the city of metropolis turned out to be true.

It's the Superman movie trying to imitate a Batman movie and succeeding in just doing that. But that bad thing because it doesn't really fit. Not without incuding Batman and that still wouldn't improve things.

The movie doesn't stand alone, nor should it be seen to be standing with the other Superman films.



: Re: Superman Returns
: Buddy 08 July, 2006, 04:04:51 PM
Terrence Stamp said on the radio the other day that General Zod was going to be in it at one stage in the films development. This turned out not to be as Brian Singers preferred actor said he wouldn't do it, so the character was droped.

The preferred actor? Well, that was Jude Law.

Hmmmm.... now who else could have played General Zod?
: Re: Superman Returns
: Carlsborg Expert 09 July, 2006, 08:51:08 AM
Superman Retards

Hear that JB?

I mean can you feel that?

Can Yer?
: Re: Superman Returns
: Floyd-the-k 09 July, 2006, 06:23:44 PM
I agree with Art (and JB) that the kid wasn't a great idea, but still loved the movie.  However I have a quibble






spoiler










Luthor's evil scheme involved, yet again, beachfront real estate. That was his evil plan from the first movie. It was a cute joke then (especially given that he would have wiped out all the West Coast Sound types in one fell swoop) but not THAT funny. Couldn't he have come up with something more original?

I still loved it though
: Re: Superman Returns
: Radbacker 10 July, 2006, 02:49:08 PM
Yeah Lex's whole plan wass downright pathetic, the land he was going to make would be all Barren and icey hardly prime realestate, maybee they shopul've put him inside his Krypton power suit or what ever the hell it is you see him in th ecomics all the time(yiou know with the simon says panel on the front).
I did like it I just think my problems are more with the character of Superman than the movie.

CU Radbacker
: Re: Superman Returns
: Mike Carroll 15 July, 2006, 09:48:23 AM
Okay, just saw the movie tonight...








Look away now if you don't want any spoilers.








In fact, if you don't want any spoilers, what are you doing reading this thread?







All righty, then...

Some good points, some not-so-good.

The not-so-good first: the movie actually drags a little in the first hour or so. There are a couple of incredibly fake-looking shots, and not the great big spectacular ones: there's one with Lex & Co [hey, weren't they dancers on Top of the Pops?] on the deck of the boat that's so fake it looks like it's something I might have done). Perry White is woefully underused. Kate Bosworth is a little too young for the role.

The good points: The cast - especially Brandon Routh - are excellent. Most of the special effects are top-notch. There's lots of little homages to the two good previous Superman movies. Superman has no additional "made-up for the movie" powers like he does in Superman II (tearing the S off his chest and using it as an expanding celophane envelope to trap the Kryptonian baddies... What the hell were they thinking?). The kid works pretty well. John Williams' score is nicely sprinkled throughout the movie.

The climax is lots of fun, but the resolution of said climax comes across as a little... er... imaginative, given the context.

And speaking of climaxes to Superman movies: this might not be the right place, but I have to get this off my chest (and no, it's not a Kryptonian-trapping expanding cellophane envelope)...

You know in Superman The Movie when Supes fails to save Lois so he flies around the world really fast and the Earth's rotation changes direction and everything runs backwards for a bit? You know how that's just, well, dumb, because setting the Earth spinning in the other direction wouldn't actually turn back time, it'd just kill everyone? Well, when I saw this back in 1978 it was very obvious to me that what Supes was actually doing was flying so fast that he goes back in time. Am I wrong? Anyone else ever come to the same conclusion?

Anyway... Superman Returns, and I'm glad that he does. It's not the best superhero movie ever made, it's not even the best Bryan Singer movie ever made, but it's good fun and there were a few moments here and there where it made me feel like I was a kid again. And that, my friends, is all that I wanted.

-- Mike C
: Re: Superman Returns
: Dudley 15 July, 2006, 04:22:12 PM
Astonishing and profound, with some awesome performances.

The entire film can be read (in fact, definitely should be read) as a meditation on the question "Why didn't God intervene in the 9/11 attacks?".  The director's (and writers') answer is that it's not for us to question that, but that we can say that to respind to evil with evil is wrong.  I really think that Superman Returns is one of the most subtle yet powerfully moral films I've ever seen, without for a second giving up on its intention to be a popcorn thrill.

10/10
: Re: Superman Returns
: JOE SOAP 15 July, 2006, 05:34:35 PM
It's all about Lois Lane, the most expensive chick flick ever made.
: Re: Superman Returns
: Woolly 17 July, 2006, 08:17:20 PM
Opening titles were the best part for me.

I enjoyed the film alot (for reasons that are pretty much covered already on this thread) but the popcorn-eating, wide-eyed, effects-loving moron inside me wanted more action!
LOTS more action!
: Re: Superman Returns
: paulvonscott 17 July, 2006, 09:10:08 PM
"Well, when I saw this back in 1978 it was very obvious to me that what Supes was actually doing was flying so fast that he goes back in time. Am I wrong? Anyone else ever come to the same conclusion?"

Yeah, the Earth appears to slow down and then  rotate in reverse because we are travelling through time.  Time slows to a stop and then starts going backwards.
: Re: Superman Returns
: Carlsborg Expert 18 July, 2006, 02:06:38 AM
Try this film on IMAX.

Fun for everyone except a little kid. On being totally blown away by the opening credits you could hear him whining, " I don't like this, it's scary." Bless. I know how he feels. The opener is truly magnificent on these Big, big screens.

Hopefully he chilled by the time the farmboy fun started to kick off the 3D bits, which drop in every so often. Took me a while to shake off the stoopid feeling but after finding some enjoyment in the novelty, I managed it.

Yeah. Good film. I like the idea of going into a large auditorium and flicking the V's to reality for a bit. And the 3D glasses got quite an audience participation feel to it.

Felt very traditional and let's face it Superman is as old as the Golden Age of cinema. I bet they had his series on a Saturday Matinee in some areas of Amreica, in "the good old days ".

Lots of trad maybe even retro fun.
: Re: Superman Returns
: Buttonman 18 July, 2006, 09:46:47 PM
Didn't really like it at all. I thought it was soulless and completely devoid of any wit and charm.

It started too slowly and never really upped the excitement quotient. The plane rescue was the highlight for me but even that was spoiled by the frantic jump cutting and (un)steady-cam shots.

The threat element seemed minimal - in the first we had nuclear bombs and then three super villians - what do we get here? A large crystal growing enterprise and some unexplored EMP stuff? Excitement she never wrote!

Routh was pretty good but Lois was too young, the cute kid a pain and Cyclops doing his usual pain in the arse routine. Speacey's Luthor had no real menace and why has he still got a soppy, plot hindering (his not the film's) woman in tow? Missed Ned Beattie's comic asides.

As for the plot it was way too thin and way too long. Too much soul searching and relationship issues - get on with some action, it's not Merchant Ivory you know.

Also beggared belief that Clark and Superman go missing for five years, turn up simultaniously and no one even mentions the fact!

A couple of decent sequences, but for the most part I found this really dull and uninspiring.
: Re: Superman Returns
: Rob Spalding 18 July, 2006, 10:32:37 PM
I found the middle too slow.  It's like it started to get going, then stopped.  It needed, like so many of the films I've seen recently, more effort spent in the editing suite.
The ending was good.
I was only annoyed at how Richard, the most decent person in the film, including Supes, gets shat on.
: Re: Superman Returns
: longmanshort 18 July, 2006, 10:39:08 PM
Really, really enjoyed it. Genuine warmth and affection for the source material - it was only after re-watching the original to see this is as much a tribute to that as it is a continuation of the franchise! Routh's likeness to Reeves in certain shots is uncanny and Spacey is very fun as Luthor.

Haven't enjoyed a superhero film this much since Spiderman.
: Re: Superman Returns
: Woolly 18 July, 2006, 10:39:51 PM
Heres how i see the plot.....

Lois: "So where've you been, you arsehole?"
Supes: "Um... I went to see if my planet, and indeed my ENTIRE F*CKIN RACE are still around, you selfish bitch!"
Lois: "Oh, okay then...fair enough, but... WE DON'T NEED YOU!!"
Supes: "Er.. yes you do! Theres allsorts of crazy shit going on! Crashing planes, etc.."
Lois: "Hmmm. Good point. Oh yeah, say hello to... YOUR SON!!."
Supes: "Yeah... I'd already guessed that..."

Oh well, its a Bryan Singer film so it'll probably win a few oscars... (sigh)
: Re: Superman Returns
: W. R. Logan 18 July, 2006, 11:20:26 PM
Liked parts, disliked others but overall it didnt thrill me as much as I hoped. Best part for me was when the kid looked at Clark and instantly knew he was Superman and had a look of disbelief on his face that no one else could see it.
: Re: Superman Returns
: Al_Ewing 20 July, 2006, 08:45:39 AM
SPOILAAAAARRRGGGHHHHS





"So Lois, we've had some super-unprotected sex, and my super-swimmers are heading for your egg with all speed. I guess this might be a good time to give you a pregnancy test of steel, which I can do with one glace at your womb, before I PISS OFF TO SPACE FOR FIVE YEARS to look at some corpses. Without saying goodbye or even leaving a note i.e. DEAR EARTH, GONE TO SPACE, PLUG YOUR OWN DAMN VOLCANOES SIGNED SUPERMAN. P.S. WON'T BE GOING BACK IN TIME WHICH I CAN DO SO THIS WILL TAKE FIVE WHOLE YEARS. SPACE CORPSES INTEREST ME STRANGELY. Actually the real truth is I'm on an important mission to listen to Sympathy For A Down and cry, and I can only to that in the dark depths of the Emo Galaxy. Have fun with Cyclops until I come back and make you forget his weeny girlface by flying you around like a super-stud. Hope he doesn't kill himself when your kid leaps his daycare centre in a single bound and he realises that you'd been telling porkies of steel. Oh wait - I do."

Actually I had a great time watching that.
: Re: Superman Returns
: longmanshort 20 July, 2006, 04:23:09 PM
I do remember once reading a feature that explored the issue of Superman having sex. The conclusion was that, since he has incredible superstrength and an orgasm is an involuntary muscle spasm, his sperm would be ejected at such superspeed that they'd either blow Lois' head off or leave microscopic holes in her abdomen and she'd die of peritonitus ...
: Re: Superman Returns
: Eric Plumrose 21 July, 2006, 01:42:25 AM
It's a bit of a mess, to be honest. I actually preferred the second half when it stopped pretending it was a sequel to the first two Christopher Reeve films. Of which, it's far too reverential, even if Martha Kent is now back from the dead.

Superman's motivation for buggering off isn't adequately explained. It's not enough to say that remnants of his homeworld have been discovered. Kal-El was brought up on Earth, he has no connection to Kryton bar those crystal shards that daddy packed for him. Luthor's far too much of a buffoon to be taken seriously for most of the film. Lois looks too young.

Someone should have been on hand to remind everyone involved that, y'know, Superman is, first and foremost, a comic, not a film.

Ah well, never mind. As Logan says, the best part of the film is Bastardboy's asthma attack when he realizes that Clark Kent IS Superman.
: Re: Superman Returns
: The Amstor Computer 21 July, 2006, 01:48:53 AM
LMS --

That would be "Man of Steel, Woman of Kleenex" by Larry Niven. An amusing (and slightly grotesque) little thought experiment.

Link: Man of Steel, Woman of Kleenex

: Re: Superman Returns
: Wils 21 July, 2006, 01:49:05 AM
I do remember once reading a feature that explored the issue of Superman having sex.

I've read something about that as well. IIRC, it was accompanied by a drawing of Superman sporting a come grimace and Lois' internal organs shooting out the top of her skull.
: Re: Superman Returns
: Eric Plumrose 21 July, 2006, 01:56:08 AM
There's a cartoon also of Superman lying on a bed looking up at the holes he's made in the ceiling. Lois is calling out to him, saying summat along the lines of "You should really see a doctor about your premature ejaculation".

I'd imagine it's been argued that it's Superman's will power, not just Earth's yellow sun, that makes him what he is.
: Re: Superman Returns
: Mr C 21 July, 2006, 01:58:37 AM
I think the yellow sunlight explanation is keyed to the "Kryptonians don't fly of Krypton because of their Red Sun" explanation.

And for Superman sex scenarios, check out the Pro by Ennis for Ejaculate Airplane ownage hilarity.
: Re: Superman Returns
: Matt Timson 21 July, 2006, 02:50:53 PM
Watched it last night and thought it was great (if a little bit long).  A few bits niggled, but nothing that spoiled my enjoyment.  Lex Luthor was great too- just the right mix of comedy and genuine menace/unpleasantness...
: Re: Superman Returns
: monty-- 22 July, 2006, 12:42:43 AM
I thought it was fantastic for one reason alone. It made me feel like a kid again. Just like when I first watched X-Men. You can't buy that kind of magic.
: Re: Superman Returns
: Bico 23 July, 2006, 05:37:34 AM
What that movie needed was a few more Christ-allusions, as I don't think there were enough.
: Re: Superman Returns
: Art 23 July, 2006, 09:49:34 AM
: Re: Superman Returns
: johnone 23 July, 2006, 01:52:12 PM
Saw it last night , just UTTER CRAP from start to finish , yeah the bit where the kid realises clark kent looks a lot like superman is brilliant but thats a minute in two and a half hours of utter Drek!!!!!! Singer has been going on for years what a fan of the original movie he is , unfortunately he obviously thinks the original is perfect (which it is far from)so he just decides to remake it...why? why remake a 30 year old film ...why claim it as the sequel , its been 30 years thats too long!!!! there is nothing there to connect the audience  to the previous film , and dear god the plot is the exact same right down to parker poseys character deciding that too many people will die if lexs plan succeeds oh and as for kevin Spacey , Iknow hes won an oscar but there pigs out there with less ham in them, for the life of me I don't know why they just didn't film JBS version instead, it led to the best superman adaptation ever, done by bbc radio 4 back in 1989
Fianl opinion of this film : AWFUL, AWFUL  AWFUL!!!!!!!
: Re: Superman Returns
: JOE SOAP 23 July, 2006, 05:20:48 PM
Get that man in the picture a cod piece.
: Re: Superman Returns
: GeorgeBernardShaw 23 July, 2006, 07:05:41 PM
all of the criticisms here have some point. Nobody mentioned the film's heroic efforts to suggest that there is a world beyond America. This was done in a tokenistic fashion by employing a montage of various non-American newsreaders, but it's always worth reminding Americans that they are not the entire world, however much of it they may control.
 However, I found the movie a delightful, if childish entertainment.
 As for super-sex, isn't it possible that Superman has super-powers of restraint? Perhaps his sperm are capable of taking their time and deciding in a civilised way which of them will be the one to fertilise the egg?
: Re: Superman Returns
: Mike Carroll 23 July, 2006, 08:10:21 PM
> As for super-sex, isn't it possible that Superman has super-powers of restraint? Perhaps his sperm are capable of taking their time and deciding in a civilised way which of them will be the one to fertilise the egg?

In Superman II, Supes loses (or gives up) his powers before he bonks Lois. Therefore, the Super-sperm shouldn't be a problem... Yes, it's a gross rationalisation, but then it's featured in a movie where his S-shield can be used as a weapon...

-- Mike C
: Re: Superman Returns
: Woolly 23 July, 2006, 08:44:22 PM
"In Superman II, Supes loses (or gives up) his powers before he bonks Lois."

But the kid's got superpowers, hence he is derived from super-spoink, hence Lois Lane must be quite a gal!
: Re: Superman Returns
: JOE SOAP 23 July, 2006, 08:51:23 PM
There's a small market for Kryptonian Kondoms.
: Re: Superman Returns
: Adrian Bamforth 26 July, 2006, 06:31:08 AM
Left me completely cold.





SPOILERS...



Superman returns, but I was kind of expecting them to tell us more about why he went to see Krypton again and how it affected him - they seemed to be using it to close the book on any Kryptonian mythology and backstory, which seems to me to be one of the most interesting things about the character and the source of future challenges. When he gets back it's as if he's just been on holiday. Aside from the obvious fact no-one noticed Clark came back at the same time, when Superman meets Lois again - and I don't know if this is intentional - Superman immediately loses our sympathies by telling her he wants to "show her something" before just flying her around as if to just dazzle her with his powers like before, knowing she's married to someone else. His life-saving spree seemed like he was just going through the motions since he never really got the chance to demonstrate himself as a moral force. Perhaps he needed someone to talk to - there's very little dialogue for such a long film. Furthermore, it didn't seem clear how the world sees him now, other than Lois' article which seemed more to do with her personal feelings (though of course we can't read the article ourselves). Why exactly would the world not need Superman?

It seemed to me that when Superman defeats Lex it was only through using his own superpowers and determination. In the first Superman film he wins by confronting his dilemma between loyalty to his father and to his new home planet - an identity crisis, in the second he uses his cunning and intelligence to defeat Zod without powers, while in the third he has a not-so-internal battle with his 'bad' side. There wasn't anything pivotal happening here except summoninmg up just enough super-strength to throw the island into space.

The biblical ending just made me groan - it seemed to me like they had just got to the end of the film and decided to throw in a profound reference because there wasn't anything else interesting happening. There didn't seem to be anything in particular that brought Superman back to life other than it being some kind of power he has - unless they are trying to tell us he is actually sent by God. Speilberg did it in a far wittier and less ham-fisted way with E.T, and, well, perhaps I'm missing the point here but...SUPERMAN ISN'T ANYTHING LIKE JESUS!

The whole thing felt like an opening episode, which is exactly what it is though I'm sure there's more character development in an episode of Smallville. As a film alone though it just didn't go anywhere - the boy's story has barely begun and none of the characters seemed to really be very different any the end as they were at the beginning, except that Lois had written a new article - though surely that's not a very satisfying way to show how someone has changed. Although wisely aiming for a darker take than the earlier films, the moodly style just emphasised the style over substance.

However, saw it a week and a half ago so I could be mis-remembering things.

ADE
: Re: Superman Returns
: Floyd-the-k 26 July, 2006, 09:40:54 AM
yes, you are mis-remembering things Ade, it was terrific
: Re: Superman Returns
: Art 26 July, 2006, 11:11:11 AM
The Bruce Timm cartoons piss all over it really.
: Re: Superman Returns
: Adrian Bamforth 26 July, 2006, 08:22:29 PM
Well perhaps I just wasn't in the mood that day, but I definitely stand by my claim that the biblical stuff was a terrible ending.

ADE
: Re: Superman Returns
: Art 26 July, 2006, 09:40:37 PM
The thing that rubs me up the wrong way about the biblical stuff is that it doesn;t actually *mean* anything, other than "Look, he's sort of like Jesus!". Mythic resonance is fine, but when it;s there just for it's own sake it's rather hollow and pointless.

Alos theres a complete lack of clever plotting for that portion of the movie: He saves the world, gets a bit knackered, then gets better - AND THAT'S IT. It'd work much better for me if someone had the the clever idea of putting him in the cunlight, or something, or if he saved the world AFTER falling down and getting up again.

It's a movie I really wantd to love, but teh more I think about it teh more utterly flawed I find it.
: Re: Superman Returns
: Bico 26 July, 2006, 09:59:30 PM
Seemed like an effort to distance the character in the film from any previous incarnations, rather than a continuation of them.  It was a good exercise in strip-mining the first two movies for imagery, but didn't have any ideas of it's own.  The kid was an odd inclusion, Lois was simpering and petulant where she was once ballsy, Superman seemed like someone doing a Christopher Reeve impression - ditto Clark Kent, and I stand by my assertion that people who can't think of a reason to include the words "and the American Way" at the end of the words "truth, justice" shouldn't be writing a Superman story.  Or working in the realm of fiction at all.
It was too long, too.
Nice plane bit, though, and opening credits.

Like X-Men, it was just a setup for the sequels/franchise to follow, and I'm appalled that quite a few people are willing to settle for that.  I pay to see a movie, not a trailer for the sequel.
: Re: Superman Returns
: Dunk! 26 July, 2006, 10:11:36 PM
'Nice plane bit, though, and opening credits'

Those were the two highlights for me.

The rest? Meh.
: Re: Superman Returns
: Carlsborg Expert 27 July, 2006, 12:12:38 AM
I enjoyed seeing it in 3D. It made it very comiccy. But on a big screen. With dolby sound at its best. And a light image that if it wanted, could be shown on the moon. Imagine. (The porn movies)

So what is good?

It's a comic character who has had many incarnations.
Its core concept.
An excuse to shoehorn a massive space travelling scene.
Flying men planes and baseball pitches.

Bad things;
The writers, the directors and paying to see it.
: Re: Superman Returns
: JOE SOAP 27 July, 2006, 04:06:50 AM
The whole return to Krypton scene was cut out, won't be released as a deleted scene on dvd either & actually cost $10 million to shoot.
: Re: Superman Returns
: JOE SOAP 27 July, 2006, 04:09:11 AM
>and I stand by my assertion that people who can't think of a reason to include the words "and the American Way" at the end of the words "truth, justice" shouldn't be writing a Superman story.

I don't think the words "the american way" have the same meaning they once had for the world anymore.
: Re: Superman Returns
: Leigh S 27 July, 2006, 05:00:47 AM
Richie HAvens does a great little monologue about "truth, Justice and the American Way" - he pinpoints its origin to the 50s TV show rather than the comics - is that true?
: Re: Superman Returns
: The Amstor Computer 27 July, 2006, 05:05:47 AM
AFAIK, yes.
: Re: Superman Returns
: Leigh S 27 July, 2006, 05:27:57 AM
"So they put him on TV - that was really to mess us up.  superman on Television - they had a fat man play him; destroy the image, that was the name of the game. They forget the curl...
Then they proceeded to tell us in the dialogue exactly how it was on the Earth where Superman now lived:  

"and who disguised as Clark Kent, fights the never ending battle for Truth, Justice...and the American Way?"  I always thought Truth and Justive WAS the American way."
: Re: Superman Returns
: House of Usher 27 July, 2006, 06:15:11 AM
Just got back from seeing it tonight. Boring. Slow. Ugly. Rubbish. A really terrible movie. No colour - all yellow ochre and battleship grey.

I was excited for the first 10 minutes. I really enjoyed the title sequence and the old theme music, and I hoped we might even catch a glimpse of other DC worlds, like Apokolips or War World.

Then when we saw Lex Luthor inside the Fortress of Solitude, which was all colourless and grim, I could see the film was going in a direction I didn't want to follow it.

Boooooooooo!!!!!!!!!
: Re: Superman Returns
: Floyd-the-k 27 July, 2006, 06:23:30 AM
Quite agree Art. Superman's Jesus moment was meaningless. He just got really tired and hovered a bit in a Christ-like pose. Who knows, maybe that's the optimum Kryptonian 'taking a breather' position
: Re: Superman Returns
: House of Usher 27 July, 2006, 04:59:19 PM
My toaster from the Cyberstein thread can be seen in the background in Lois Lane's kitchen. The design is called Metropolis...
: Re: Superman Returns
: Bico 27 July, 2006, 07:37:43 PM
'I don't think the words "the american way" have the same meaning they once had for the world anymore.

Does a story about an alien in red latex underpants and a cape throwing islands into space really need to be bogged down by real-world American politics?
If you can't put a spin on the *idea* of the American Way as a metaphor for democracy and equality under the law, then you shouldn't be writing fiction.  It's like changing the Star Trek opening monologue from "where no MAN has gone before" to "where no ONE has gone before", in that it changes a componant of popular culture to fit the politics of the era surrounding it, but for no good reason beyond that seems the done thing.  Are the words "where no MAN has gone before" actually sexist?  Did they actually need changing in the first place?
Ditto the American Way.  And I can't shake the feeling  that slagging off Americans is just a culturally-acceptable analogue for racism.