Bryan Singer's Superman

Why are these discs so expensive? $28 is high for a two-disc set, but a one-disc set?

No. He told his mother that he wanted to marry Lois. He had to give up his powers to do that. Honestly, do you even understand the character of Superman?

When do either mention the word marriage? Can you refer me to an exact quote so I can check that? And, yes, I understand Superman well enough, I understand that he married Lois in the comic book without giving up his powers, and the same in Lois and Clark: The Adventures of Superman.

 

those are suggested retail prices. the most you'll see the 2 disc set opening week is 19.99 at best buy probably and the 1 disc 16.99

 

OK, good to hear. What's on disc 2?

 

We've heard what the deleted scenes are going to be too. Assuming that Region 2 is the same as 1 as this is from the BBFC


Running Time Title
00:01:05:12 ("SUPERMAN RETURNS" - DVD - DELETED SCENES - "THE DATE")
00:01:45:02 ("FAMILY PHOTOS")
00:01:33:15 ("CRASH LANDING/X-RAY VISION!)
00:02:43:01 ("OLD NEWSPAPERS")
00:02:33:05 ("ARE YOU TWO DATING?")
00:01:33:16 ("MARTINIS AND WIGS")
00:00:59:08 ("I'M ALWAYS RIGHT")
00:00:41:04 ("JIMMY THE LUSH")
00:00:11:20 ("LANGUAGE BARRIER")
00:00:23:12 ("CRYSTAL FEET")
00:00:26:03 ("NEW KRYPTON")
00:01:08:07 (EASTER EGG - (AKA: "HOW WRONG CAN YOU BE?"))

 

Here is the back cover of the DVD that gives more of the features
[image=http://www.supermanhomepage.com/images/superman-returns10/sr-dvd-2disc-b.jpg]

 

Ah, good to see! Especially the documentary with Kevin Spacey

Now, as promised, my long-winded but incredibly thoughtful treatise on why I think Brandon Routh is great in this film:

First off, I want to say (though it shouldn't be a surprise), that I absolutely LOVE Christopher Reeve's performances and wouldn't change a thing about them. They were brilliant, skilled. His Superman is a real, classic hero. His Clark is hilarious, classic comedic relief. What I have to say about Routh in no way diminishes what I feel about Reeve. Just so that's clear.

I feel Routh has put forth an equally skilled performance. It's different, to be sure, but I think it's just as good. Maybe it's blasphemy to say that, but I don't believe in deifying something just because it's older or the one you grew up with. Routh has done a great job, and moreover, has put together a performance completely consistent with several important aspects of the character in this film. I will break them down.


The tone of the film

It?s readily obvious that this film, while somewhat a sequel to the first two Reeve films, is also somewhat of a re-imaging. This can be attributed to Singer and the writers (and probably the studio), who took verisimilitude to a new level. No one can doubt that Donner?s philosophy is what kept the first film and parts of the second film grounded. But, to be fair, there was still always that measure of cheeky humor, that winking at the audience.

SR, however, takes a different tone. It?s still fun, still exciting, still humorous, but in a much more realistic way. This is partly due to the fact that the special effects here are so incredibly realistic. I am a film nerd and there?s nothing I hate more than excessive, bad CGI. But this is the best, most responsible use of CG I?ve seen in a film to date. Everything you see on the screen is believable, but it?s still fun and it?s still a hero movie.

So Routh?s performance fits in really well in such an environment. He, too, is completely believable. Reeve was amazing, but if you took his characters out of the film and put them in the real world, they wouldn?t be believable. The Reeve films are very much seeing the superhero genre through a comedic, playful lens. Hence, each actor?s interpretation is perfect for the script he?s working with and the tone their directors are asking for.



The situation of the character

In SR, Superman is in a vastly different emotional state than in the previous films, one that helps dictate the tone of the film and the direction Routh takes with the character. He?s just spent 5 years of his life alone and the only fruit of that labor is to? find out he?s alone. He?s finally seen Krypton and it?s a graveyard. Not exactly the sort of thing that puts one in a great mood. But he?s still Superman, and he?s still out there saving the world regardless. He?s just not doing it with the quips (?going down??). Routh brings a since of gravity to the character?s demeanour, but still manages to make him a light and savior.

As to Routh?s Clark, well, obviously the last 5 years have affected him, too. In addition to the weight he feels about Krypton, his relationship with Lois and thus his place at the Daily Planet have changed. Not only does Lois have a kid and is engaged to someone else (which would be enough), but she?s too busy to really have time to talk to him much. Now she never paid him much real attention, but at least they were friends. As it is now, she is too engrossed in her work and family to have time to chat with Clark anymore.

All of this leads to a Clark who is less able to keep up the incredibly outrageous, bumbling persona he had before. Oh, he?s still a complete geek, make no mistake about it. I?m sure anyone at the Planet would still think so. But there are many more cracks in the façade. Which is really the thing I love the most about Routh?s performance. We get to see more of the real Clark behind the act. A lot of times it?s subtle, but quite intentional. Meek though he may pretend to be, we at

 

Well the Smallville thread was closed, but is anyone else pumped for the season 6? I have now seen every single episode of the previous 5 seasons.

 

I think it was just prunned. I'm sure if you PM'd Zaz or Boogie they'd unlock it for you.

We also have one over in SFF F&TV that you might be interested in:
OFFICIAL~SMALLVILLE Discussion thread. (Spoilers Galore) there is a NS thread there too if thats your cup of tea.

 

If you'll notice, as much for my own sanity as anything else, I respectfully stayed out of this thread at the time of ?Superman Returns'? release, and kept my thoughts on the finished product to myself. Based on past experiences elsewhere and in this very thread, when one utters criticism towards ?Superman Returns? in any way, shape or form, a hundred other people are all over you like a bad rash. Well, quite frankly... screw that! In short, I found Bryan Singer's ?Superman Returns? a failure on almost every level, and completely unworthy of the Superman name. Everything about this film was dismal, ineffective or plain wrong, from my perspective. The cinematic experience, as a whole, was so meaningless, so trivial, so slight, so facile, that I felt I had wasted my money, even though I was always going to see a new Superman film on the big screen, no matter the quality of its construction. But Singer let the character and the medium of film down in a big way, in my opinion. I really don't know how to structure my review beyond what I've just said, but I?ll try.

For a film that cost upwards of $200 million, ?Superman Returns? sure doesn?t look it. George Lucas was able to bring each of his new ?Star Wars? pictures in for half of SR's budget, or less, and, for all their deficiencies, they look, sound and feel significantly more lavish and epic. Of course, they also all generated vastly greater sums of money, both domestically and worldwide, so, in addition to the artistic successes I find them to be, which is subjective, they are overwhelming financial successes, too, which is an objective and inarguable fact. ?Superman Returns? is the complete opposite, both in my opinion with respect to artistry, and in objective fact, with respective to frugality. Money issues aside, from top to bottom, the film was filled with bad decisions. Take, for example, the costume. Just what the hell was that? A wetsuit? A BDSM outfit? I can't decide. Either way, it wasn't remotely "Superman", in my opinion. Not only was the fabric cold, kinky and inhuman, but the shield was raised, almost in a parody of the character, an "S" magically found its way to the belt, furthering the clunky feel, and the colours themselves, aside from the deep blue of the suit, were dulled, killing the literal embodiment of American virtues that Superman is supposed to be (supported by the opaque removal of "the American Way" in Perry's newsroom speech). Combined with extremely dark and wholly insufficient photography (the Genesis camera + extensive digital rendering and compositing + Newton Thomas Sigel = disaster), not to mention the flapping-like-a-freshly-caught-fish-gasping-for-oxygen effort of a score by John Ottman, a man barely fit to shine John Williams' shoes, and extremely suspect CG in various places, resulted in flying scenes, especially the central sequence where Superman flies with Lois, that were utterly lacking in scale, grandeur and whimsy. Not once did this film stir something in me close to resembling the feelings repeatedly generated by magnificent pictures like Richard Donner's original ?Superman? and George Lucas' ?Revenge of the Sith?. Singer's entire film, and at two and a half hours, Singer?s entire long film, felt like a dead weight, with little innovation, visceral punch or emotional intrigue.

I am willing to put any of ?Superman Returns? elements up against the original -- ANY -- and wager that they all fall short. Yes, that's a puzzling statement, since the aesthetics and grammar of filmmaking, while rooted in rules, are largely subjective in nature. But I know ?Returns? weaknesses to be true to the very core of my being. The insipid, steely blueish, dark, dreary, close-up heavy photography of ?Superman Returns? pales next to Geoffrey Unsworth's dreamy, pastoral, bright, colourful, magical, surreal panaromic work on the original (Geoffrey Unsworth previously lit ?2001: A Space Odyssey?, a titan of a film, and earnt an Oscar nomination for his lighting on ?Cabaret?; Newton Siegel lit ?The Usual Suspects? and ?X-Men? -- you decide). Th

 

Why are you comparing Superman Returns to the Star Wars prequels?

Also, the Donner Superman films were pretty brutal to Superman. Look at Superman The Movie when Lex puts a Kyrptonite necklace on Superman and kicks him into a pool.

 

Thanks for proving my point.

 

No one is going to read that thing you homp.

 

Cryogenic, I think you've completely missed the point of this movie. This is a restart of the Superman franchise. As such, Singer had to reintroduce the character in such a way as to please long time Superman fans, yet not completely bewilder everyone else nad besides, if Superman Returns was so abismally bad, why is there is talk of a sequel in 2009?

 

According to IESB the sequel is "officaly" a go:

IESB.net are reporting that Bryan Singer and Warner Bros. signed a deal this past weekend to make a sequel to "Superman Returns", with production to start some time around September 2007. Here's an excerpt from the IESB.net article...

We have been told that a couple of things are for certain. For one, the sequel will have a slightly smaller budget. Returns budget was approximately $208 million dollars with P&A (prints and ads) of about $50 million putting it at around $260. The sequel is expected to be around $140-175 million plus marketing.
Second, more action, tons more action is expected this time around. The studio was quite happy with the way Supes was reintroduced to the world and next time around expect to see him in full action battle mode. We?ve been told that Superman will have the battle of his life in the sequel and audiences can expect one of the ultimate baddies in the D.C. universe to come to Metropolis to pick a fight with the Man of Steel.


Read the complete IESB.net report.

 

Some thoughts:

Cryo; what Soontir said.

Solojones; spot on.

Re: a sequel? That's fantastic news.

E_S

 

We missed this in the theaters.
Our first chance to watch it was the DVD rental last night.

It was amazing. I have always been a fan of the Christopher Reeve versions since I saw them in the theaters the first time.

This one captures the essence of those movies perfectly.
They couldn't have found a better actor to follow Christopher and he has the mannerisms down to a T.
The world was immersive and gave the same feeling the original did.
We loved it. Can't wait for the sequel with Superboy.

My only complaint would be that Lois seemed to be too young at the beginning.
I got used to her as the story went on, but she seemed younger than Jimmy when she was on the plane.

 

The casting of Kate Bosworth as Lois Lane is the only quasi-legitimate gripe I have with the film. Outside of that issue, I thought the film was poetic.

 

I liked her as the movie went on.
It was just a shock at first sight of her, for her to be so young.
Especially winning the Pulitzer.

 

Why, Lois is supposed to be in her late 20's. Age shouldn't have to do with who well one writes.

 

Ok, I stumbled upon this thread and I have some stuff I want to say.

There are several reasons why I Dislike this movie and factors that contributed to this film's box office failure. Tying it in to a twenty year dead franchise in a very loose way didn't help. The Superman character has evolved from what he was in the late 70s. The choice of villain didn't help either. Lex Luthor, besides being a non super powered villain who Superman can't have a fight with, is no longer a wacky mad scientist with a penchant for land. In modern times he is a cold, calculating business man, seen as a hero to the people of Metropolis. Lex is a challenge to Superman not because he can beat him in a fight but because he can do anything he wants and get away with it.

The film also had several controversial changes to the Superman story that didn't go over well with the fans. Superman leaving without a word for five years, Lois being with Richard, the "super stalker" scene and, above all, the inclusion of Superman's illegitimate son, who by the way crushes a man to death with a piano.

However, the one big thing that hurt this movie the most was that it simply was not fun. Singer seemed to pump so much energy and effort into making this a dramatic love story that he seemed to forget that Superman is a comic book super hero that premiered in ACTION Comics. The most exciting thing to happen in the movie was the plane rescue, which happened 40 minutes into a near three hour long movie.

So if you want the biggest reason that the movie didn't work, that's it. It wasn't fun.

 

Fun? Maybe not. Emotionally dramatic, an interesting restart, well done story; yeah I think so.

 

I'm sorry but seeing the best superhero there ever was stalk women and
father an illegitimate son isn't exactly emotionally dramatic.

Batman Begins is an interesting restart. Superman Returns was a lame, uninspired
love story. Superman's first appearance was in ACTION COMICS, not
GUY WHO CAN'T CATCH A BREAK, GETS HIS ASS WHOOPED AND CRIES COMICS.

 

Oops, double post.

 

I've read Action Comics. The words spoken by David Carradine in Kill Bill come to mind. "Not a great comic, and not particularly well drawn."

"gets his ass whupped and cries"??? He got beaten down and stabbed. I guess he was supposed to laugh? What are you, one of those bashers that thinks anything even remotely emotional is to be labeled as emo and hated to the highest degree? Seems like it.

 

Nope, not well drawn, and not particularly well written, Bill hit it on the mark.

And relax there pal.

I have no problem with emotion. Spider-Man 2 handled action and emotion excellently,
as Batman Begins. And I'm certainly not a basher because
I dislike the movie you like. But this movie didn't have that "emotional impact"
that is has on you. Why? Well I guess seeing one of my favorite literary hero entranced
in a story where he, the protector of planet Earth, stalks a woman in her home while she's with her family, tries to steal said woman from her boyfriend for the past 5 years, and sneak into his illegitimate son's bedroom to watch him sleep, isn't exactly "emotionally gripping", it makes me roll my eyes.

And no , I didn't want him to laugh while getting whooped, but I wanted to see him
let loose a little. Imagine Superman 2's fight scene with today's special effects.

But no, we didn't even see him punch a guy, we got SUPERman catch a plane and pick up a rock.

Allow me to repeat.

SUPERman.
Catches a plane.
Picks up a rock.
In a 2 1/2 hour film.