SUPERMAN RETURNS Thread (Olde Spoiler Warnin' Ahead)

[AndyDursin]

Promising news ahead: the first reviews are in and they're all overwhelmingly positive...though some of the comments in these reviews are positively bizarre (Kevin Spacey employs a LIGHTER touch than Gene Hackman? The dig over Williams' SUPERMAN score in the Variety review is also laughable...must be a friend of Ottman or something).

About the only drawback seems to be Bosworth -- she's been mentioned as cold and a letdown in each of the three reviews I've read -- but kudos on all sides for the technical aspects. 157 minutes, too!!

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13389957/site/newsweek

"The movie follows form by making Lex Luthor a comic menace. Spacey, who can do ironic megalomania in his sleep, has a decidedly lighter touch than Gene Hackman."

http://www.variety.com/review/VE1117930 ... id=31&cs=1

"Topping off these aspects is the evocative, darkly lyrical score by John Ottman, continuing in his unique dual role for Singer as composer and editor (with Elliot Graham). The sometimes ethereal qualities of Ottman's work, amplified by significant choral strains, provide an emotional dimension -- and show up Williams' "Star Wars" thematic variation for the bombast it is.":evil:

"The only semi-disappointment in the cast is Bosworth. First off, she seems too young to have been working for the newspaper for more than five years and to plausibly have had her kid for the same length of time. More significantly, she comes off as flinty and cold for too long, denying Lois a beating heart beneath the brusquely professional m.o. You never get a strong sense of the woman inside the newshound with an unrivaled inside connection to the most famous man in the world."

[AndyDursin]

I should also mention most of Warner's SUPERMAN titles coming on DVD this week have a free ticket voucher in them for SUPERMAN RETURNS...so keep an eye out!

[mkaroly]

I watched the A & E documentary on Superman in TV and theatrical media, and I got pumped up! Seriously, I am very excited for this film. I am not so excited about how I'm going to react to the music (cautiously optimistic), but I am really looking forward to seeing this.

I think the first hour of SUPERMAN THE MOVIE is the absolute best and most moving stuff anyone has ever come up with about any superhero. The music is superb- I don't know how this film will measure up in any way, but I must say I am excited to go to theater and see it for myself. I am ignoring all reviews and refuse to read any type of review before seeing the film (unless it's you Andy!)

[Monterey Jack]

I should also mention most of Warner's SUPERMAN titles coming on DVD this week have a free ticket voucher in them for SUPERMAN RETURNS...so keep an eye out!

Indeed. I got free tickets in my copies of The Animated Series vol. 3 and Brainiac Attacks (unfortunately, Andy's right about the latter being really disappointing. Why on Earth couldn't they have gotten Clancy Brown back as Lex Luthor? ). Hopefully my brother or someone else will accompany me to see this on the 28th.

[AndyDursin]

I've heard the soundtrack album and, first of all, I think we owe Bryan Singer a big debt of gratitude for using John Williams' themes. It's tremendous to hear them again and Ottman does a respectable job utilizing them (not crazy about how he arranged "Can You Read My Mind," which he doesn't seem intent on performing as it's written [there's one flat "inflection" right in the middle of the theme whenever it appears]). I was surprised he didn't use the Kryptonian motif more -- one of the more haunting motifs you would have assumed would have worked well in a "modern" film version as they like to call it (perhaps there's more of it in the movie as opposed to this album).

I will reserve judgement until I see the movie on the rest of his music, but from first listen I'd say it's exactly what I was anticipating: Williams' music sings, and Ottman's original material is weak sauce by comparison. It's bombastic, loud, serviceable (and better than, say, his FANTASTIC FOUR work), but does not tend to linger long in the memory. In fact I found the album kind of dull, and then would perk up whenever one of Williams' original themes comes into play. I don't know what kind of crack the Variety reviewer was smoking but it certainly is not nearly as compelling a listen as Williams' original soundtrack (I can't even the compare the two, frankly).

Now, it may work JUST FINE in the film, and I'll take this any day over what we COULD have gotten (say, an entirely new, non-Williams based approach by Hans Zimmer), no doubt...but I would have loved to have heard what kind of orchestral score say someone like David Arnold, even James Horner could have come up with. Or how about just paying Williams to come back?? The budget was high enough (though I assume the motivation on his part surely wasn't there) to afford him.

Kind of reminiscent of what Don Davis did for JURASSIC 3 to some degree...it's serviceable and I think in the end that will be good enough for most folks (not as good as Beltrami's OMEN score on its own merits, just for comparison's sake).

However, what does it tell you about film scoring that 10 or 20 years ago this score might have been branded a disappointment, but given the state of the art form in 2006, it's one of the better efforts of the year?

[AndyDursin]

here's Roger Friedman's review from Fox -- pretty interesting with more about the audience reaction, and also more in tune with what Jeff Bond was saying over at FSM.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,200698,00.html

'Superman Returns': Superhero Broods, Breeds

Bryan Singer's "Superman Returns" got its big press airing last night in multiple screenings. Even though Warner Bros. has been keen to flack positive reviews from the trades and the newsweeklies, there’s a lot more to say about this $300 million epic that opens next Wednesday.

For one thing, I don't know why in the world this edition of "Superman" was adopted by the gay community. Director Singer is gay, and his point of view comes across fairly often, but neither Superman the character nor his new portrayer, Brandon Routh, seem especially sexual in any direction. Singer seems more interested in creating a Christ-like icon out of Superman, which is certainly unique.

But Superman, aka Clark Kent in "Superman Returns" is just as much of a dork as he was in the first two films that starred Christopher Reeve and were directed by Richard Donner.

The early revelation that Lois Lane has a child the same age as the amount of time he’s been away makes absolutely no visible impact on Clark. If he ever slept with Lois in "Superman II," he seems either to have forgotten or not realized the consequences.

The one thing Routh has going for him is that he looks a lot like Chris Reeve. Other than that, his acting hasn’t changed much since his short, cardboard-like stint on "One Life to Live."

Singer is content with using him as sort of a prop, and moving everyone else around him. It’s not that Routh is bad or embarrasses himself. He does neither. But dynamic is not a word that comes to mind, either.

Kate Bosworth as Lois Lane actually fares much worse. She is very bland, lacking any of the zip Margot Kidder gave to the role in the films or Teri Hatcher in the "Lois and Clark" TV series.

She is sass-less, but then again, so is the wearisome script by Michael Dougherty, Dan Harris and Singer. Their dialogue is either suffocating or absent. After all, Lois has supposedly won a Pulitzer Prize. But she's as witty or facile with words as a lump of Kryptonite.

Now, you might think I didn't like "Superman Returns." Not so: The first hour is magnificent, and there is a lot to like in the succeeding hour and a half. But the movie is way too long. Singer apparently thought "more is more," and you can see all $300 million up on the screen.

But a long sequence in the middle, with lots of CGI and some preposterous stuff involving Lois saving Superman, is repetitive and kind of joyless. A woman sitting next to me in yesterday’s screening kept making phone calls during that part.

But the first hour or so just soars, and all works with a real brilliance. It’s enough to offset the rest of the film for better or worse.

That first hour is essentially a remake of the first two Donner films. The only difference is that Superman has been away for five years. But Singer recreates Superman's original appearance on Earth — this time instead of being a baby in a rocket, he's an adult. The wonderful Eva Marie Saint returns as Clark’s mother Martha Kent, and the scenes in Kansas are gorgeously shot.

In recreating the Donner films, Singer has also used John Williams' original score and the original title design as well. In this case "Superman Returns" is really "Superman III." About 20 minutes in, Clark/Superman must rescue the Space Shuttle and a passenger plane that was boosting it into space. The whole movie is worth this episode, every part of it works.

But that's when a new story kicks in, involving Kevin Spacey as Lex Luthor colorlessly imitating Gene Hackman, and Parker Posey doing her damnedest to make a character out of his sidekick Kitty.

But Posey — who looks great and has some good introductory moments — never takes off. For a lot of the film she’s dressed up with no place to go, and you can feel it. Her role is full of missed opportunities for juicy one-liners and observations.

Spacey, sometimes looking like Uncle Fester, works overtime to find new paths away from Hackman's work. Sometimes, but not often, he is successful.

There are some nice touches: The first character you see in the film is a wealthy, dying widow whom Lex is conning into signing over her estate. The original Lois Lane from TV, Noel Neill, does a nice job with the part.

Later Jack Larson, Jimmy Olsen from TV, gets few good scenes as a bartender. Perry White (Frank Langella) does get to say, "Great Caesar's ghost," and in a cute scene the words, "Look, up in the sky, it’s a bird, it's a plane," are uttered.

In the end, "Superman Returns" is grand, and often aims to be a take on "Gotterdammerung" with the world exploding, flooding, collapsing and repairing itself. There is a lot of melodrama, and many gorgeous shots of Superman flying around the world, into space and brooding about his life's work.

I think the audience I saw the movie with was a little confused. They wanted some laughs, but when the few times came, they chuckled nervously instead.

There was succinct applause at the end, but not the feeling that we’d seen a jubilant triumph. My guess is the movie, which comes out June 28 and will "open" all the way through July 4, will make all its foundational money right away, and come out of the first week in good shape. But $300 million is a lot to earn back, no matter how impassioned comic books fans are about this latest iteration of their hero's saga.

[romanD]

I just think the album doesn't do the whole score justice. He recorded around 2,5 hours of music... so 50 minutes hardly gve you a good impression of what Ottman wrote, especially as Williams' stuff shows up so often. I have to say though, that I like his variations a lot and they give Williams' material a fresh and very needed spin. Ive never been a fan of Williams' original score and have to say with these many variations this is probably a much more interesting score than if Ken Thorne had done it or Williams himself had returned...

the movie opens almost worldwide...except Germany! I have to wairt until the end of August to see it!!! can you believe that? Well, that probably means they don't expect it to play well in Germany... we are not a bunch of comic freaks and especially Superman isn't very popular. They didn't even release Part 3 and 4 on DVD here...

[AndyDursin]

OK who's going tonight?

I'm off to the 7pm show.

FWIW, Roger Ebert RIPPED the movie today -- two stars I hope it fares better than Ottman's plastic soundtrack album, which hasn't worn well with me after a couple of listens.

[AndyDursin]

Review will be up shortly. All I can tell you is that Variety critic must have been either smoking the wacky weed or is a direct relative of Bryan Singer.

Sorry Roman (and I won't break out the tar and feathers, don't worry but the music is horrid. I couldn't stand the constant use of chorus and Ottman does a lousy, almost embarrasing job using Williams' themes...I know I won't be in the minority on that score once the flood of reviews comes rolling in.

I also could not believe how few people were there...not even 1/3 full at the 7pm showing! Now, granted BATMAN BEGINS had as few people a year ago locally, but I'm curious as to how this will do...probably the regulation $200 million but I have no doubt PIRATES 2 will blow it off the screen by next weekend. Repeat business is likely to be extremely limited.

[AndyDursin]

SPOILERS FOR WHEN YOU'VE SEEN THE FILM


OK the review is up...I didn't read Ebert's review until a few minutes ago (I only knew he didn't care for it), and I think in this instance he totally nailed the picture's shortcomings precisely.

Needless to say I hated Kevin Spacey and was basically disinterested by the rest of the movie. I think the worst part -- outside of the bland script -- is that there was no sense of humor or fun in the movie. Routh could have been better given a better story but he's basically bland...and I found nearly every scene in the movie to have an unremarkable sense of flatness. There's no joy in the film. It just kind of sits there.

Also, WHAT exactly was the big deal about using Marlon Brando? Harry Knowles on AICN has a link to a featurette about how special effects folks "brought Brando back to life," and all we heard about for months was how they were using Brando material from SUPERMAN II, like it was going to be a major something...and next to none of it seemed like it was in the movie. Heck, all they did was throw Brando's image up on the wall of the fortress of solitude, recycle footage from I, and throw what sounded like variations on his dialogue (at least in one point) while Superman was underwater near the end.

A couple of other things that bothered me just a bit here, not enough to mention in my review but rant on a message board

*If Lois knows she had a sexual relationship with Superman, and knows that she's had a kid with Superman...how does she NOT KNOW that Clark is Superman? This was made clear in SUPERMAN II, which I assume is the reference point for their "relationship"...and if he made her forget it at the end of that movie, how does she know only PART of it here?

Also, just how exactly does Superman manage to avoid the Kryptonite all over the mantle of Lex's new continent at the end of the movie and save the day?

*I don't know about you but getting ready for sequels about Superman Jr. isn't high on my list of priority viewing. (What are we going to get? SUPERMAN SPY KIDS? SUPERMAN'S CREEK? Eeeek...)

Why don't Peter Parker and Bruce Wayne have kids too? Oh that's right, their filmmakers have enough confidence in them to play them as they are and not feel the need to "reinvent" the franchise because they simply don't believe they're substantial enough to work in this day and age. How else to explain Superman Jr.?

[AndyDursin]

Corrected opening day should have it around $21 million or so according to Showbizdata (likely including the Tues. night shows). Not bad at all but not mind-blowing either.

Like I said the theater wasn't even half full for the 7pm show last night. Unlike BATMAN BEGINS I can't see the word of mouth being all that hot.

[MarkB]

Oh, boy. I agree in general with most of Andy's comments (but not all).

I thought the movie felt like it was shot from a first draft script. There are a lot of good ideas in there, but they just aren't developed or played out to their fullest potential. I really like the idea of a kryptonite-laced continent. (BTW, Andy, you wondered "just how exactly does Superman manage to avoid the Kryptonite all over the mantle of Lex's new continent at the end of the movie and save the day?" He doesn't; the kryptonite leaves him completely spent after sending the continent into space. Of course, one could question why Kryptonite has such varying effects on him throughout the movie. I wondered how he didn't notice the Kryptonite when he first arrived to confront Luthor, or at least until it was dramatically convenient ).

I really don't have a problem with the actors. All of them had some good moments which indicated their potential. Again, I would blame the underdeveloped script.

I wish we would have seen a final confrontation between Luthor and Superman. Instead, Luthor just slinks away after his plan fails. I missed seeing a more satisfying resolution to their conflict.

I actually liked the way they underplayed Lois' son and his abilities, and look forward to seeing how they deal with him future installments. I think there is a lot of potential there if they continue to deal with it the way they did here. (No SUPERKID, please!)

I would have liked to have seen more humor in the dialogue. There was a little here and there, but not nearly enough. The Lois in the first two movies had "snap"; this one doesn't. What happened to good, old-fashioned "banter", particularly between Lois and Clark? (In fact, there's little interaction between L&C. Why not? She's angry at Superman, not Clark.)

Did anyone else think the movie looked annoyingly dark? Every scene seemed to be overcast, or at dusk. They seemed to be afraid of showing any splashes of primary color, which I always found inextricably linked with Superman, starting with the costume itself. Everything just seemed gray and drab.

Andy, I do have to disagree with you on the music. I'm tickled to death with Ottman's score! (And I'm bored by most current superhero scores.) I've listened to the album literally dozens of time in the past couple of weeks (first streaming online and now the CD itself) and it completely captures the mood of the movie I was hoping to see, if you know what I mean. He uses the classic Williams compositions as pillars on which to hang his original music, and together I think they form a very sturdy musical structure. I truly don't understand your "plastic" comment, because that's how I've always thought of Thorne's SII score, and as far as I'm concerned, this new score blows that old disappointment out of the water. Frankly, I think this score (and its album) is about as good as it could have been.

I have plenty more to say (and probably will), but I'm going to end here for now. Overall, I'd probably rate it two-and-a-half stars out of four. Not bad by any stretch, but certainly a disappointment.

Mark

[AndyDursin]

Mark,
Excellent points all. I noted the "dark" appearance when I saw the trailers. Years from now -- when we break out of this cycle of dark-looking CGI-orchestrated films (and I'm sure we will at some point) -- this film will look very much like a product of its time. It was typical with the sun never being out (how often was it overcast?). The whole movie was a plethora of missed opportunities, and it went on forever without really developing all the things you outlined!

All of that reeks of Singer, especially visually. No primary colors, too much CGI rendering...basically he bled all the warmth VISUALLY out of the movie.

I just didn't like the orchestration of Williams' main title -- it didn't sound "right" for lack of a better term (Thorne at least had it arranged correctly, it was just poorly performed with a smaller orchestra). I hated what he did to CAN YOU READ MY MIND, it was like he squeezed all the melody out of it. And I just didn't care for the chorus, the near-constant temp-track influences (which sounded like I was listening to a "Greatest Hits" assemblage of the last 10 years of movie scores), or the general tone of it. It was too loud most of the time and I didn't care for his new thematic material -- what little there was there. He has never been good with melody and I found that to be a major problem -- for me only when he went into a full-blown quote of Williams' theme did the music work at all.

Anyway we can agree to disagree on the music but I'm totally in your camp on the rest. The lack of humor was a MAJOR problem for me as well. No witty banter, and I agree perhaps with better dialogue the actors would have fared better...but we may never know. The more I think about it, the more I'm not so sure about Routh. Bosworth was as good as she could have been given the script but again I was not overly impressed there either.

At least they didn't get me as annoyed as Spacey. He was overly smug for my tastes and I hated every moment he was on-screen...maybe it's a byproduct of that godawful BEYOND THE SEA but he strikes me as just being so obnoxious these days, and I felt it carried over to his Lex. I wasn't scared, or amused, or entertained by any element of the character OR his performance.

[Carlson2005]

Hey, count yourself lucky, Andy - we have to put up with Spacey running the Old Vic into the ground with his ego trips for the next ten years over here. The theatre's going dark for months after the Robert Altman fiasco ended early, and Spacey won't allow any independent producers tro book the theatre for other shows in case they're hits and make his mismanagement look bad!

Still, at least we haven't had any more "I fell over my dog in the park in the middle of the night" incidents lately...

[AndyDursin]

Hey, count yourself lucky, Andy - we have to put up with Spacey running the Old Vic into the ground with his ego trips for the next ten years over here. The theatre's going dark for months after the Robert Altman fiasco ended early, and Spacey won't allow any independent producers tro book the theatre for other shows in case they're hits and make his mismanagement look bad!

Still, at least we haven't had any more "I fell over my dog in the park in the middle of the night" incidents lately...

Trevor welcome back (were you on vacation or at a festival somewhere?).

I feel your pain about Spacey. Like Ms. Paltrow he's another celeb I'd gladly give you He was on Letterman the other night talking about the theater.....now I may not be able to judge his character from a distance, but frankly Spacey strikes me as not being very bright. Even his smirking SNL monologue where he grilled AMERICAN IDOL came off as cynical and telling -- after the ego-trip that was BEYOND THE SEA (which forever changed how I view him as a performer, and not in a good way!), you know as well as I that, if he were an unknown, he'd be the FIRST person in line for the Idol auditions!