Superman Returns

[EnriqueH]

Was there supposed to be a CGI villain that was left out? Was Doomsday supposed to be in it and those thugs were accidentally left in like that fat actor that played Jabba that Lucas CGI'd in the real Jabba afterwards?

Cause Superman got his ass kicked a lot in SR.

[eccentricbeing]

Singer has some regrets about Superman Returns...

LOS ANGELES (Hollywood Reporter) - The 2006 movie "Superman Returns" was supposed to reignite the comic-book character for big-screen audiences and make a star out of unknown actor Brandon Routh. While critics praised the film, it underwhelmed at the box office, earning $391 million worldwide.

Now, with another Superman film in the works -- Zack Snyder's "Superman: Man of Steel," which stars Henry Cavill in the title role -- "Superman Returns" director-producer Bryan Singer says he made some mistakes with his own film.

"I think that 'Superman Returns' was a bit nostalgic and romantic, and I don't think that was what people were expecting, especially in the summer," Singer said in an interview with VoicesFromKrypton.com.

"What I had noticed is that there weren't a lot of women lining up to see a comic book movie, but they were going to line up to see 'The Devil Wears Prada,' which may have been something I wanted to address. But when you're making a movie, you're not thinking about that stuff, you're thinking, 'Wow, I want to make a romantic movie that harkens back to the Richard Donner movie that I loved so much.' And that's what I did."

Many moviegoers criticized the third act, in which Lex Luthor (Kevin Spacey) stabs Superman with a shard of kryptonite, but then the two characters don't appear onscreen again for the rest of the movie. In defending the scene, Singer said he tried to insert a religious analogy his storytelling, which was probably too "heavy" for a summer movie.

"I've always felt that the origin of Superman is the story of Moses -- the child sent on a ship to fulfill a destiny," said Singer, a producer on the upcoming "X-Men: First Class." "And this was a story about Christ -- it's all about sacrifice: The world, I hear their cries. So what happens? He gets the knife in the side and later he falls to the earth in the shape of a crucifix. It was kind of nailing you on the head, but I enjoyed that, because I've always found the myth of Christ compelling and moving. So I hoped to do my own take, which is heavy s--- for a summer movie."

Singer said if he were to take on another Superman film, he would do a reboot of the franchise by remaking the original and would make it a more "balls-to-the-wall action movie" with a different pace from "Superman Returns."

Despite the disappointing performance of "Superman Returns," Singer still says he's "proud" of the film.

"There are a bunch of movies I've made where I'm, like, 'Yuck, that was weak' or 'That could've been better,' and I can see why. But with 'Superman Returns' ... If I could go back, I would have tightened the first act."

movies.yahoo.com/news/movies.reuters.com/superman-returns-director-offers-mea-culpa-reuters

[Jimbo]

Odd that it made news yesterday. That interview was released a few weeks ago.

[Rod]

i dont like SR.

but singer should not apologise or regreat for anything.

he did the movie he wanted to do at the time. end of story.
everyone else can bite themselves.

[stargazer01]

Apr 18, 2011 22:41:15 GMT -5 Rod said:

i dont like SR.

but singer should not apologise or regreat for anything.

he did the movie he wanted to do at the time. end of story.
everyone else can bite themselves.

Agreed. I wish he just shut the feck up.

I do love his movie, though.

[Deleted]

I find it all fascinating, personally. Singer is such an interesting case study.

[mavcon75]

The part I find funny.....How many times will we EVER hear a director apologizing for a movie that made close to $400 million LOL

Mavcon

[Valentine Smith]

I don't believe him. I think he was told to make a Superman movie on the cheap, and that's exactly what he did. WB told him, "look, we've already sunk over 100 million into movies which never got made, we need you to make us a Superman flick for under 100 million", and Singer said, "Alright, I know how to do this! I'll make a romantically based, introspective Superman movie!"

And it sorta worked.

But, I realize now my biggest gripe with Superman Returns. (well, 2nd biggest...Bosworth is the JarJar of the Superman mythos) Superman Returns feels like it was written by people who knew NOTHING about Superman OTHER than STM and S2. I'm all about the tributes and homages and everything else. But there is nothing in SR to indicate that anybody involved with that production (other than Brandon) ever read a single comic, or watched a single episode of STAS (arguably the finest all around translation of Superman to another medium) or anything else.

And that's a damn shame. There is such a rich history in the Superman myth that to not even TRY to tap ANY of it, even as a little background thing, is really inexcusable.

[stargazer01]

But, I realize now my biggest gripe with Superman Returns. Superman Returns feels like it was written by people who knew NOTHING about Superman OTHER than STM and S2. I'm all about the tributes and homages and everything else. But there is nothing in SR to indicate that anybody involved with that production (other than Brandon) ever read a single comic, or watched a single episode of STAS (arguably the finest all around translation of Superman to another medium) or anything else.

And that's a damn shame. There is such a rich history in the Superman myth that to not even TRY to tap ANY of it, even as a little background thing, is really inexcusable.

Perry: Great Ceasar's ghost!

"Look cheif up in the sky. It's a bird, it's a plain, it's.."

Action Comics #1



Yeah, I think they knew something about other Superman incarnations.

The part I find funny.....How many times will we EVER hear a director apologizing for a movie that made close to $400 million LOL

Exactly. And that got a lot of good reviews and even won some awards. Singer should have more self-confidence.

[MerM]

Apr 19, 2011 4:54:47 GMT -5 mavcon75 said:

The part I find funny.....How many times will we EVER hear a director apologizing for a movie that made close to $400 million LOL

Mavcon

Well... the guy put his heart and soul into a big movie with high expectations, and for his trouble has received a level of internet criticism generally reserved for George Lucas. I wouldn't be terribly confident in that position either.

Apr 19, 2011 10:03:18 GMT -5 @stargazer01 said:

Perry: Great Ceasar's ghost!

"Look cheif up in the sky. It's a bird, it's a plain, it's.."

Action Comics #1



Yeah, I think they knew something about other Superman incarnations.

But those were surface-level shout-outs - things that would have taken thirty seconds on google to research. Val's got a point, the bulk of their Supes knowledge was clearly the Donner films.

[stargazer01]

That still proves that they knew something about other Superman incarnations. The film also has some Fleisher (sp?) inspired material.

I remember Bryan saying in some interview or docu that he liked the George Reeves show as well.

Any way, SR was pretty much a sequel to the old movies, so it had to be heavy on it. But yeah, he could have added more new stuff from other version. I understand that.




So, I just saw this post somewhere else and I SO agree with a lot of it.

So are they making the new Superman dark and gritty with slo-mo fight scenes? Because that is what I think when I see Zack Snyder's and Chris Nolan's names attached to the new film. I'm tired of these reboots. What's the point in taking time to cast actors who fit the role anyway when they're just going to be replaced a couple years down the line.

You can't even get attached or invest much when you go watch a superhero film nowadays because if you end up liking the film you're screwed since the actors will all be replaced and the story rebooted next time they make another one.

Superman Returns is what actually got me interested in the character. I've never liked that character until that film. I've been waiting for a sequel since 2006. What a f##king waste.

[ye5man]

Superman Returns is what actually got me interested in the character. I've never liked that character until that film

Clearly not a Superman fan then

[stargazer01]

Apr 19, 2011 12:32:45 GMT -5 ye5man said:

Superman Returns is what actually got me interested in the character. I've never liked that character until that film

Clearly not a Superman fan then

Cleary he/she wasn't. UNTIL this film.

I can understand that, Superman Returns is a very special film, imo.

[Valentine Smith]

Saying they knew their sources because they referenced Action Comics #1, "Great Ceasar's Ghost", and "Look, Up In The Sky" is like saying you expect to get an A on a Math test because you know how to count.

Assuming I'm correct about the edict from on high to deliver a low-key Superman movie (and I'm willing to be that I am), then how do you, if you know your character AND YOUR AUDIENCE, not at least TEASE something more. A line of dialogue, a background character, a prop...ANYTHING to let your audience know that, "yes, there is more to this universe then what we're showing you right now, yes we realize you want to see it, and yes, we will at least pretend to know how we're going to address it in the future."

Someday, the full story WILL come out about how WB manipulated Superman Returns. Who knows, maybe I'll write it.

[Deleted]

Yeah, they referenced the cover of a comic and a line a character uses a lot. Not very in depth, additionally, do people other than fans know Perry says "Great Caesar's ghost!" anyhow?

A perfect example of how to do it right:

The helicopter scene in STM. Clark looks for somewhere to change. He sees a phone booth. It won't work.

Why was this in the movie? Because in the collective unconscious EVERYONE who heard of Superman knew back then when STM came out that he used to change in phone booths. Comics, TV show, whatever. I'm sure there was consistent laughs at screenings.

[ShogunLogan]

Apr 19, 2011 10:03:18 GMT -5 @stargazer01 said:

Perry: Great Ceasar's ghost!

"Look cheif up in the sky. It's a bird, it's a plain, it's.."

Action Comics #1



Yeah, I think they knew something about other Superman incarnations.

Umm...yeah...those were never said in Action Comics #1, btw.

And he worked at the Daily Star then, and he couldn't fly then.

Have a read, it's only 13 pages long:

xroads.virginia.edu/~ug02/yeung/actioncomics/cover.html

Also, look at page 64...done by the "Star-gazer".

[Valentine Smith]

I believe Star meant the "hoisting the car overhead pose" from Action Comics #1, not those lines.

[ShogunLogan]

Apr 19, 2011 16:53:48 GMT -5 Valentine Smith said:

I believe Star meant the "hoisting the car overhead pose" from Action Comics #1, not those lines.

Ahh...I see what she meant...my bad.

BS...they got it from this:

[ye5man]

Kind of odd (though I thought it cool as heck) Perry said the GCGhost line when that was one line that was never uttered in the "Donnerverse"

Though I guess they'll fall back on the "hazy backstory" BS to justify it


Kev hit the nail on the head with the telephone booth reference, I still think its brilliant.

[jak321]

www.supermanhomepage.com/news.php?readmore=9624

What do you think about this?

[MerM]

Probably get a lot of "we're sick of origin stories!"-type comments.

[Costa del Lex]

Apr 19, 2011 7:41:58 GMT -5 Valentine Smith said:

Superman Returns feels like it was written by people who knew NOTHING about Superman OTHER than STM and S2. I'm all about the tributes and homages and everything else. But there is nothing in SR to indicate that anybody involved with that production (other than Brandon) ever read a single comic, or watched a single episode of STAS (arguably the finest all around translation of Superman to another medium) or anything else.

I couldn't agree more, that was my initial reaction as well (though not as fleshed out at the time). The movie spent so much time giving a cinematic bj to STM while trying to borrow as much magic from that film as it could... but in doing so, it failed to create any magic of it's own.

That's why SR has become more and more forgettable to general audiences as the years pass (not to Superman geeks like us obviously). Even friends I have that claimed to "love it" when it was released, admit now that it's a pretty bad film. I doubt the average film goer who went to see it 5 years ago even remembers the experience. It would be like me trying to recall anything special about xXx: State Of The Union.

I respect any actor or director when they can admit they went a little too far, or didn't go far enough to the point where if they had the chance to do it all again, they would do things very differently. I respect Singer and I believe he really set out to make a great Superman movie. In retrospect, it would have been better to have a director who didn't have such strong emotional ties to Donner's film. Oh, and hiring a seasoned screenwriter as opposed to kids who probably worked on the cheap would have been good too...

I don't want to slam the film too hard (been there, done that), I get that a lot people here still have affection for it... and most of that has to do with Routh's performance... whether you guys think he was a great Superman/Kent, or just think he's all around dreamy. I don't share any of those sentiments, but I respect them.

[Valentine Smith]

Seriously? Why the fuck is anyone even ASKING Singer what he would have done differently? He made his movie, and now, he's backpedaling. This is a guy who, historically, I like...but lately he really just comes off like a douchebag.

[crazy_asian_man]

Well... the guy put his heart and soul into a big movie with high expectations, and for his trouble has received a level of internet criticism generally reserved for George Lucas. I wouldn't be terribly confident in that position either.

Agreed 100%. It would have been incredibly easy for Singer to stay with 20th Century & not jump over to do Superman at WB, not to mention use another actor for Jorel, NOT reuse the Williams theme, not retain anything from the Donner films- (as the current film is doing)-

But for trying to do a sequel to the Donner films AND be an intro film, AND try to do something as ambitious as tell (what was essentially) a religious story via a summer comic book movie, he got next to no respect on the net.

I loved enough of the movie that it's definitely right next to STM and SII (in fact I do consider it an extension of sorts) in my book.

After reading so many differing opinions on the subject, I do see where other Superman fans are coming from who hated it, but it's irritating when I read about the filmmakers not caring about what they did on this particular project, when I can see so many choices that showed that they DID care (even to a point of almost being too much for fans)--- it's almost as if fans would have preferred someone who wasn't a fan of Superman would just take the paycheck, deliver lots of action, and cast Nicolas Cage in the lead.

*sigh*

[crazy_asian_man]

Seriously? Why the fuck is anyone even ASKING Singer what he would have done differently? He made his movie, and now, he's backpedaling. This is a guy who, historically, I like...but lately he really just comes off like a douchebag.

I don't see it as backpedaling so much as being honest. I find it refreshing, versus directors who are so insecure about their standing in Hollywood that they have to put up a front that NO decision they make is questionable or worth second-guessing.

Also, consider the fan editors here who've gone back & forth and back & forth over decisions of what to keep/ what to cut out to make the best hybrid Donner cut endlessly.

George Lucas may have done a lot of things that people (and rightfully so, I think) question creatively, but I do think he's said one thing that was brilliant: (and I'm quoting from memory, which gets fuzzy in old age, so excuse if it's off) "Films are never really finished, but abandoned."

As for the writing, outside of maybe a couple of lines I thought that maybe went too far in replicating the Donner films, I'd say compare the script to the script for Xmen 3 that came out at the same time-
I thought the screenwriters delivered a lot of information very subtlely and effectively in SR, versus X3, where they didn't just hit you over the head with things, that they pummeled you to the ground with it.

(ie. In SR, it's NEVER said, "Superman, Jason is your son."- and the relationship between Lois and Supes is definitely complicated (and I thought fascinating because of the gray moral area of it) because Richard and Lois aren't married--- and everyone wants to do the right thing. )

Anyhow, moot point, but it's a movie that impressed me greatly, and I had giant expectations for both SR and STM, from being a Superman fan BEFORE the movies went onscreen, and I think my expectations were just as high as anyone here- but different things disappointed (I was underwhelmed by the plane rescue and lack of superhero action), but different things I didn't expect to surpass expectations (the character story and the complex relationship between Lois/Clark/Richard/Jason).

Personally, I want to hear more of what Singer would have done & more details- before/after.

Donner criticized his own choices on Superman and Superman II when time had passed (and he WELCOMED an audience preview that he couldn't get with STM), so second-guessing isn't necessarily the sign of a bad director after something is in the can, so to speak.