Am I one of the few who loved Superman Returns?

[0roo0roo]

it was dreadful, the script was just bad.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

I thought it was ridiculous and just a pointless rehash of the first Reeve movie.

 

[her209]

The acting was terrible. The casting could have been better. The storyline sucked donkey balls. And the special effects were cheesy.

 

[Icepick]

Originally posted by: Agentbolt
I don't understand why everybody refuses to do a legitimate action movie based on Superman. Why do superhero movies always have to be campy? Flying around the planet to stop time? Shooting missiles at Superman flying down a canyon while the EXACT same sound effects from Asteroids play in the background? These aren't the kinds of scenes we want to keep in movies. Superman is the single best action hero out there, as long as they write him as the super-strong-yet-still-vulnerable version he was in the comic books starting in the 90's.

Seriously, the re-imagined Batman movie, the Superman animated series, the Transformers movie, they were all much more action-oriented than the orginals, and they were all very well received. Imagine a big-budget, live-action Doomsday vs. Superman movie where they punch each other through buildings in Metropolis. That movie would KILL at the box office and be decently fun to watch as well.

I think that a lot of the super hero movies are campy because they are based on comic book characters. The nature of comic books for fifty years was that they were campy and over the top. Really, they had to be in order to tell a story in a few pages with more graphics than writing.

Now producers have figured out that they don't have to capture the spirit of the comic books in the movies they're starting to get better. Batman Begins was a great example of a superhero movie done right. So was Spiderman 2.

 

[tfinch2]

Originally posted by: RossMAN

Originally posted by: Locut0s

Originally posted by: RossMAN
No Tom Welling = fail

Actually I liked it.

What is it with you and Tom Welling?

Search the archived threads for Tom Welling posts by CasioTech and you'll understand.

Unfortunately tomwellingomghi2umynameisdannyursohot.com is offline :brokenheart:

I think you're in love with CasioTech. He has nothing to do with this thread, yet you brought him up.

 

[yllus]

I didn't think it was very good - too much non-Superman material. At the end of the two hours or however long it was I couldn't recall a single memorable scene.

 

[Albatross]

i`m waiting for superman vs. batman vs. predator vs. mickey mouse vs. super mario.that will be the most badass movie from hollywood in a long time.

 

[Bateluer]

I went into it with low expectations and was very surprised with the movie. It wasn't as good at Batman Begins, but it was an entertaining movie.

 

[archiloco]

i liked the movie

 

[Q]

Originally posted by: Locut0s

Originally posted by: Quintox
It got good ratings, actually. I liked it.

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/superman_returns/

77%. That's only so so to me.

Well what I read in Time magazine, they loved it.

 

[Lyfer]

I found it interesting, but Batman begins pwns it.

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: her209
The acting was terrible. The casting could have been better. The storyline sucked donkey balls. And the special effects were cheesy.

QFT.

But with all that said, the movie still sucked.

 

[sandmanwake]

Let me get this straight. Kryptonian technology is supposedly thousands of years ahead of Earth and yet the Fortress of Solitude doesn't have any sort of security system to keep out uninvited guests? There's no biometric authentication system to keep people like Luthor from accessing the computer system?

 

[Fritzo]

I didn't like it. It was OK, but that crappy underwear model they got to play Superman was totally miscast. He was scrawny, looked kind of short, and had as much charisma as a dead rodent. Lois Lane was blah too.

Go get the new Superman : Doomsday DVD. THAT'S what the movie should have been like.

 

[Fritzo]

Originally posted by: Agentbolt
I don't understand why everybody refuses to do a legitimate action movie based on Superman. Why do superhero movies always have to be campy? Flying around the planet to stop time? Shooting missiles at Superman flying down a canyon while the EXACT same sound effects from Asteroids play in the background? These aren't the kinds of scenes we want to keep in movies. Superman is the single best action hero out there, as long as they write him as the super-strong-yet-still-vulnerable version he was in the comic books starting in the 90's.

Seriously, the re-imagined Batman movie, the Superman animated series, the Transformers movie, they were all much more action-oriented than the orginals, and they were all very well received. Imagine a big-budget, live-action Doomsday vs. Superman movie where they punch each other through buildings in Metropolis. That movie would KILL at the box office and be decently fun to watch as well.

I've always said they need to tame Superman down a bit to make a good movie. The Animated Series nailed it because physics applied to him- 100 rpm .50 machine gun rounds would push him back in his tracks and sting a bit. He had limits on his strength. He would also hold back to avoid collateral damage.

In the last movie, he lifted a feakin island the size of Manhattan into space while laced with Kryptonite. WTF??? Earlier he had a problem slowing down a plane. I'm pretty sure an island is 100000x heavier than a plane.

If they depowered him a bit, they wouldn't have to include kryptonite in every movie to bring him into danger. Jeeze, it's a simple solution, it's been done with success, and nobody is seeing it.

 

[userman]

If they would have made superman doomsday instead!

It sucked big hairy ones! Heck Smallville is better than Superman returnes.