Has any one seen Superman Returns yet?

Question

And do you think Brian Singer's version is a homage to Christopher Reeve's potrayal of Superman?

I've watched the clips at http://movies.yahoo.com/movie/1807839024/trailer
It looks GRRRRRRRR...EAT!

Answer 1

I've seen it last Thursday & it was great! Bryan Singer did such a wonderful job with the film as it does pay homage to the past Superman films ( I & II, respectfully) & it does pay tribute to Christopher Reeve's portayal of the Man of Steel & the vision along with it. I was also glad to see at the end of the film that it was dedicated to the memory of Christopher Reeve & Dana Reeve. That is something that would always be cherished this part of this film.

Answer 2

I thought it was very good, it is Brian Singer's version, which is a little different. But if you've seen the original, you will see that a lot of stuff that happens in the dialects goes back towards the original. The only part that I thought was not really needed was the kid part, which I don't want to get into and spoil the movie if you haven't seen it. The movie kind of goes back and deals with Superman's humanity (for lack of a better phrase) and makes him more like a messiah (as in the bible), although he is a fictional character. Brian's does try to connect with the original movie, and all in all, it was really good. Not perfect, but worth watching.

Answer 3

You know what.....

I'm a huge Superman fan, but I didn't like the movie too much.

it was too much of a "chic flick" for me. Too much drama, and not enough action. Brian Singer's "X-Men 3" was a much better movie.

Superman in a hospital bed? IN A HOSPITAL BED!! C'mon now.....That's NOT Superman! let alone Superman fathering a child.....who thought of that nonesense!

Like a said......Superman Returns is a chic flick! (how sad...)

Nothing wrong, IF you happen to be the type of person who LIKES chic flicks....I'm not crazy about 'em.

What would have saved this movie for me would have been the addition of another villan that Superman could have fought, besides Lex Luthor.

By the way.....both Superman AND Clark Kent have been "away" for 5 years, and then they both show up at the same time.....and "ace reporter" Lois Lane STILL CAN'T put 2 & 2 together??? Is she THAT stupid???

Answer 4

Yes I thought it was amazing. The fact the Superman has a child brings the story around full circle. Superman tells his son the same things that Jor El tells Kal El when he was in the Fortress. The difference is that he is not alone. The Son becomes the Father - for those of you wondering how Superman has a child, SUPERMAN RETURNS takes place 5 years after SUPERMAN 2. In Superman 2 Superman gives up his powers to be with Lois Lane. They sleep together and by the time this movie takes place Lois has a 5 year old son who is able to throw large pianos and see through Clark Kents disguise.

This movie does have a more human feel but thats because Superman is a reflection of our place in the world. Superman is a reflection of our hopes and dreams and who we want to be just like Batman is a representation of our capacity for wrath and anger and vengence our desire for retribution. This movie show us that its not about being all powerful and invincible its about overcoming obsticles.

One scene that really dives that point is after Superman was viciously beat by Lex Luthor and his men and then Lex broke off a shard of Kryptonite in Superman's back he still went back to stop him. Lois's son (also Superman's son) saw him barely able to stand and still go back to stop Luthor.

Its also a romance story but not on the sappy lines of Lois and Clark. It places Superman in the role of the jealous boyfriend but ultimately anyone who has any knowledge of the Superman Mythos would know that Superman and Lois belong together just like Spider-Man and Mary Jane or Batman and Catwoman or Cyclops and Jean Grey etc. Thats the only part of the movie that bothered me. Throwing in a love interest for Lois. Thats like saying Superman/Clark is interested in someone else its just not how it works.

So after all the rambling Id say it was a good movie and I actually want to see it again.

Answer 5

Brandon Routh played a great Superman and reminded me a lot of Christopher Reeves

Kevin Spacey played a better Lex Luthor than Gene Hackman.

Kate Bosworth was not a very good Lois Lane I thought Margot Kidder played her better.

all in all I thought the movie was very good. I thought Kevin played Lex much more ruthless like he is in the comic books.

Answer 6

I've seen the Yahoo clips, and compared to the lame, drippy TV 'The New Adventure of Superman' (Why did they bother?)
Superman Returns, looks like a Cecil B.DeMille Epic.
All I can say is, thank KRYPTON Brian Singer got his hands on the project.

Answer 7

Yes it was very good and I think he tried to keep it as close to Christopher Reeves portrayal as he could

Nice homage to Chris and Dana Reeves at the end of the movie

Answer 8

Good movie, good homage. The guy even sorta looks like Reeve, with some imagination. Beautiful visuals. Watch it.

Answer 9

I theory it became once ok, that's Brian Singer's version, that is fairly mind-blowing. yet once you've glaring the person-pleasant, you'll see that multiple stuff that takes position in the dialects is going back contained in the route of the person-pleasant. the finest aspect that I theory became once now no longer fairly needed became once the baby aspect, which i do no longer want to get into and spoil the movie in case you haven't glaring it. The movie sort of is going back and promises with Superman's humanity (for lack of a more acceptable word) and makes him more suitable like a messiah (as in the bible), besides the actual incontrovertible truth that he's a fictional human being. Brian's does look at to attach to the person-pleasant movie, and all in all, it became once fairly properly. no longer perfect, regardless of the indisputable fact that worth searching.

Answer 10

I think it's a great movie. Brian SInger has done a brilliant job and I'm only a casual Superman fan.