A long time fan of Smallville and having grown up with the whole series of Superman movies, I'd been excited to hear of this movie. Over recent years we've seen many comic figures reappear on the silver screen, reinterpreted in such a way as to provide character dimension often absent inmovies produced throughout the 70's and 80's (even the early 90's). Take movies the likes of Van Helsing, The Hulk, and Batman Begins. These portray characters who are multi-faceted, often flawed - and most of all, believable. These are movies which successfully stripped away the 'plastic' glam of old and gave as movies of true depth.
Compare this with Superman Returns - a movie which essentially took all the cliches of old and wrapped them up in all new special effects. It even managed to throw both logic and simple physics out the window - since when did Clark wear glasses as a kid?
Should real fans have to suffer another dose of this, or at least demand a different director (Stephen Sommers)??
2007-03-18 12:55:44 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Entertainment & Music ➔ Movies
Quote - "dude u suck". Yup, here we have it ladies and gentlemen - an example of the inellectual capacity to which this movie aspires ...the masses of the average dimwit! I'm guessing the Hulk annoyed you because you found it difficult to comprehend??
2007-03-18 13:11:31 · update #1
well i agree to an extent.
but the best way to do a sequel is to go back to Plan A: DOOMSDAY.
since 1995 when they killed superman, it was in the talks.
it was canceled because it was too large a project to put into a reasonable time frame of a movie.
i think they should try again even if its more then one movie.
2007-03-18 13:00:38 · answer #1 · answered by clomtancy 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I believe Joshua. There could be a sequel ok yet with Dean Cain or Tom Welling in the starring function. Brandon Routh ought to be the worst Superman ever. If Kristin is to be Lana in spite of the shown fact that she could positioned on a pink wig to truly extra healthful the area.
2016-10-02 08:35:55 · answer #2 · answered by serravalli 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Just because they make it, there is no reason to spend your money on if you don't want to. It's your money, you decide what to spend it on.
Hopefully, Warner Brothers (DC's parent company) will take a page out of Marvel's handbook and not put all their eggs in one basket. In other words, they shouldn't focus on just one or two characters or groups for all their movies. A Green Arrow, Aquaman, or Green Lantern movie might be the better project to go with right now. I realize that DC has been more active on creating cartoon series based on their titles than Marvel, but that is a different form of entertainment.
2007-03-18 13:15:38 · answer #3 · answered by Kevin k 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
dude u suck and so did the hulk it annoyed me with all that comic book sequence. what the hell were they thinking? super man returns is an awesome movie and id love if the did a sequel with the same director. as for clark kent wearing glasess he may of. what id like to know is why jonathan kent is dead in smallville but alive in lois and clarke with dean caine and terri hatcher? thats a big screw up
2007-03-18 13:04:00 · answer #4 · answered by jamie28981 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Or at least a better story instead of the usual malarkey
2007-03-18 13:05:31 · answer #5 · answered by Experto Credo 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
smallville sucks hollywood will ruin any character to make a buck. Bastards
2007-03-18 14:46:28 · answer #6 · answered by Ryan O 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Should they call it, Superman: Still Going ??
2007-03-18 13:05:31 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋