Unfortunately, Superman Returns Is Just Super-Bad. Here's Why.

I think the movie was amazing and i completely disagree with Dr. Zauis's comments. Lex Luthor wasn't "dumbed down" in this film but rather he didn't have the central role that villians usually get in movies. The movie wasn't about him or his plans, that was a subplot and because it was a relatively unimportant subplot the details of his dyabolical schemes frankly don't really matter.
I think this was a great choice by Singer and the writers because like the title of the movie Superman returns in this film, that's what it's about. It's not just about the story of superman and the villians he faces, it's about Superman being reintroduced and having to deal with the problems that are associated with his return.
And again i'm going to disagree with Dr. Zaius on the issue of the kid, Jason. I think including the kid in the movie was a great idea and a perfect way to add a twist to the epic superman story. And although the kid was a great touch to the film, that's all he was, a little touch to make the film "complete" (if that's the right word). Singer put the kid in the right amount of scenes and didn't let the kid steal the movie away from the other, more important characters. I think only a few directors could have pulled that off and Singer is one of them.
And as my final rebuttle in Dr. Zaius's original post he spent a lot of time making fun of the character of Richard, Lois's fiance and how he basically has no penis (in Dr. Zaius's view). Well i'd like to completely challenge that notion by saying A) WHat makes Richard not a man? Because he helps Lois out in times of need (aka turning the plane around to save Superman) or because he doesn't walk around with an "i'm all that" attitude. IMO Richard is more of a man than most the people in that film and most people in the world we live in. It was actually really refreshing to see Richard not portrayed as an ******* (as people no-doubt expected) because pretty much every film ever made the main characters love interest is always dating a complete douchebag. It's a long played out character setup and boring. Singer, however took a chance and made Richard a stand up guy. Not only does this make for a more interesting story because it creates a dilemma for Clark/Superman because he can't tell Lois to leave Richard and Lois herself really is stuck and doesn't know what she wants. And it's also makes more sense because no one as smart as Lois Lane (her intelligence could be argued) would be engaged to a complete douche.

Originally posted by C-Dic

You'd warn someone for suggesting a troll is trolling, which he obviously is, having been warned previously, and asked not to post said retorts?

Don't have to explain that, just seems a little bogus. 😕

Thank you 👆

The moderators around here publically slap down trollish behaviour for all to see, so others know it's not allowed.

There's 3 posts in a row in this thread of trollish behaviour, and nothing is said by the moderator who posted in this thread. How was anyone to know he was warned via PM?? It looks like you just looked the other way.

Don't get me wrong, I'm glad you warned him, but don't get defensive if others complain about it, because as I said it looks like nothing was done. And it gives other trolls the green light to behave in the same way.

Dr. Zaius's "pointless rants" are all based on his observations and conclusions from the movie. His formulated opinion is then that the movie was bad. Very logical.

so explain again how it's not an opinion??? 🤨

Originally posted by GODOFALL1
Well, I think you're an IDIOT! And should have no business in any forum..........................................ANYWHERE!

this coming from a guy who likes that crappy rocky 4 the best over the first classic Rocky movie 😆 shows you the bad taste he has and why people should not listen to him. 😆 You and this guy should become best friends cinn. 😆

Superman fans are vengeful creatures... (even those that are mods.)

Any Superman fan would think the movie was great. They've been starving for Superman cinematic, so whether the film was great, ok, or bad, they're satisfied, and you'd better not dare give the film negative criticism, or face their wrath. The guy might as well have said "Superman (the character) sucks" judging the responses he received.

Dr. Zaius stated his opinion, and I'm pretty sure that when he made this thread, he knew there would be some opposition, (though I did expect the moderator of this forum to be a bit more impartial,) but I think calling him an idiot is excessive, and such behavior should be corrected by a mod.

In my opinion, the action was great, but the story of Superman Returns was lackluster. X-Men's story sucked too. Maybe Brian Singer makes sucky movies?

I thought it was great movie. Story didn't make sense in alot of ways, but it's a typical comic book movie.

Kevin Spacy as Lex Luthor was gold, however. Best Lex Luthor ever. Even if he was completely different from the comic book version. Which I liked.

Brandon Routh was an amazing Superman..and Clark Kent. I think Christopher Reeves is really alive and in a cloned body. He just renamed himself Brandon Routh...

..and he'll probably go on to only be remembered for one movie, just like Reeve, ironically, it won't be "Superman".

Originally posted by C-Dic
..and he'll probably go on to only be remembered for one movie, just like Reeve, ironically, it won't be "Superman".

What else does he have?

Undressed from MTV? Nobody watched that show...

Routh will be about as remembered as Superman as Pierce B. for James Bond in my opinion.

Noone forgets who plays the Man of Steel. Hell, people remember Dean Cain as Superman even though it was a only soap-opera TV show.

Once you play Superman, you're Superman for life. Which is why Dean Cain will never get another good role again....and he hasn't.

Dean Cain was a failed actor even before "Lois and Clark". He's best known for hosting "Ripley's Believe It or Not". 😂

Originally posted by C-Dic
Dean Cain was a failed actor even before "Lois and Clark". He's best known for hosting "Ripley's Believe It or Not". 😂

Um. No. It's definitely Lois and Clark. He even STATES he played Superman in Lois and Clark in Ripley's. So that should tell you something.

Not to mention L&C was on network television while Rip. was on an obscure cable network.

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
This isn't an opinion...it's a bunch of pointless rants. 👇

No it's not. What a mean thing to say...

Originally posted by Draco69
Um. No. It's definitely Lois and Clark. He even STATES he played Superman in Lois and Clark in Ripley's. So that should tell you something.

Not to mention L&C was on network television while Rip. was on an obscure cable network.

TBS is hardly obscure, and if he has to remind people what else he's done before Ripley's, doesn't that suggest nobody knew who he was?

Food for thought.

How can anyone that has seen superman II or even an episode of smallville NOT think this movie wasnt quite what it should of been?
Ive seen more action, GOOD action, in a single episode of smallville. Smallville has done an outstanding job of showing supes powers in extremely cool an unusual,visually-stunning, ways. This movie did VERY little along those lines when compared to smallville. An for Christ sake superman II had more action how can the movie after it have LESS?!? Did the director not see the 2 previous spiderman movies? You HAVE to at least EQUAL that amount of action, there was no struggle at all as I see it.
I was expecting brainiac or darksied or lobo, but nada, nothing. I thought I saw a pic about a month before the movie came out showing a giant robot with supes flying infront of it? I fully expected to see that, again nothing.
The only thing this movie was missing was 20-30 min of pure ass-kicking action, then it would have been acceptable. Honestly did the people making this film even know anything about the comic book or cartoons? Why is spiderman so true to its comic origins an source material an this film wasnt? Fire those morons an hire the spiderman people to get this right! You can clearly see the spiderman films are a labor of love, but superman obviously wasnt it was not done the justice it deserved. You need people that are FAMILIAR with the characters history thru the comics an ect. an know the source material in order to bring out the best most interesting story lines. CLEARLY the fools making this movie didnt know jack about the cool ass things supes has done over the years in the comics an cartoons. There is just no excuse what so ever!
By 1978 standards that was a great movie, by todays standards they should be ashamed.
When a trailer for a movie a year away(spiderman3) is the most exciting part of seeing the movie something is seriously wrong.

It's a SUPERHERO movie. Again. It's meant to be silly.

Why people were expecting Schiendler's List is beyond me.

Moviephiles are almost as a harsh as musicphiles on movies. Movies aren't...movies to them. They're not entertainment. If they were, they wouldn't be taken so seriously and be subject to essays enumerating on the numerous flaws of the movie. Which is sad...

Originally posted by C-Dic
TBS is hardly obscure, and if he has to remind people what else he's done before Ripley's, doesn't that suggest nobody knew who he was?

Food for thought.

ALL shows like that say something on the lines of "You may remember me from..."

Yay, the food you suggested doesn't exist.

Haven't seen the movie yet but if Lex is as good a villain as Star Jones, Spacey has done his job.

Originally posted by Draco69
It's a SUPERHERO movie. Again. It's meant to be silly.

Why people were expecting Schiendler's List is beyond me.

Moviephiles are almost as a harsh as musicphiles on movies. Movies aren't...movies to them. They're not entertainment. If they were, they wouldn't be taken so seriously and be subject to essays enumerating on the numerous flaws of the movie. Which is sad...

"Cinephiles", not "moviephiles", just to make a point. Some movies' flaws are so apparent, they don't have to be dissected, and naturally, we do it to the ones we didn't like, and even more so when the majority of people like it, because it's fun to debate points and opinions. Even more so if those points and opinions are valid, not biased, and those who give it, willing to take criticism and critique.

A lot of you obviously aren't. There's just an overwhelming amount of absurdity in "Superman Returns" that people are failing to grasp, and while it's not a fact, it's almost stronger, because it's a widely shared opinion.

By all means, if non-menacing bald librarians that like rocks, a Mom who can't fess up about paternity, and a cardboard cutout newbie actor taking on an iconic role make for your idea of good cinema, by all means, enjoy it. Bask in it, watch it over and over. Enjoy it. Meanwhile, there will be those that will try to understand how those persistant flaws can go ignored, and others find something tangible in said movie.

I enjoy a lot of movies. A lot of those same movies are far from flawless, but they don't insult my intelligence, don't pose stupid questions, don't include ridiculous, unfathomable plots or the like. I'm a movie elitist, granted, but I'm also a realist. I like and dislike movies for valid reasons. "Superman Returns", again, was just too haggard for me to enjoy even remotely. Namely because I don't like backstories that overshadow a main characters role, villains that pose no threat, and movies that run longer than necessary because they focus on an already established element.

Originally posted by Draco69
ALL shows like that say something on the lines of "You may remember me from..."

Only ones with actors that are only good enough to have done television shows all their lives.

Dr. Zaius, I have to agree with many of your points, but I can't agree that it was a complete flop. It definately needed more action to be a comic book movie and Louis and especially her husband's performance brought the movie down a few pegs. Spacey was great though in my opinion.

Having said that, I'm going to watch it a second time just because it is Superman. Hopefully in the next film they give the characters a bit more depth and pack on the action. Brainiac would be the best villian for a sequel, they could tie him in with Superman's trip to find krypton.

here are reasons why i didnt like the movie:
1. brandon routh is gay
2. lois lane looked like a sorority girl (should've chosen a more classic actor)
3. that whole superman ending up in hospital part is rediculous
4. lex wasnt evil enough
5. not enough crime fighting scenes
6. the director sucks at directing (he directed x men 1 & 2, which sucked also)

here's why i liked the movie:
1. that part where he saves the people of the city was pretty cool
2. they used the classic song and end from the original movie
3. excellent cgi
4. flight scenes were cool
5. i plan on squatting 450 at the gym tomorrow so that part where he lifted the organic land mass was very inspiring

overall, i'd rate the movie a b+
nuff said...peace to all...