Superman Returns : A review
In today' article I will try to follow the textbook definition of a film review. Call it practice...I have to sharpen my claws for the future!
Plot -You obviously know the background to Superman's story or you have no place being here...Superman has been absent for 5 years and the world has moved on. Even Lois Lane, she is married and also a mom now. Luthor has been freed from prison due to lack of evidence/testimony against him. A rocket ship crashes into the Kent farm again and out steps Superman. He had gone to explore the remains of his dead planet. In the mean while Luthor finds important Kryptonian technology which leads to his 'brilliant' plan...expenditure of 300 Million Dollars ensues...
Critique - Before I begin with that let me reveal to you a few things. First and foremost, although the official budget fo the film has been declared as 260 Million,in reality it is well above 300 million. They spent close to 50-60 Million on publicity and product placement.So officially, barring Spiderman 3(which has a budget of 270 Million exclusive of publicity,and it is being made still so it doesnt count yet) Superman Returns is the costliest film in the history of cinema. A comparative idea will tell you,in this budget James Cameron could have made Terminator 2: Judgment Day 3 times over. Thats right,the total expenses for T2 was around 110 Million. Now ,before I digress further let me retrace my steps. For me,Superman has always been a second rate superhero. Dont lynch me yet, let me explain. Superman comics for me, was always over the top. Whereas my all time favourite Batman, tried to be more based in reality. Whenever I encountered a versus situation in my mind, I allways rooted for Batman(and I suspect I will till the day I die). Its not because of him being an alien. Its just that Superman always seemed unreal. Nothing seemed to affect him, nothing seemed to cut him deep. But later when I got my hands on more Superman comics I realized, not all was well in his world. Even he suffered. Superman did not seem so stupid to me anymore. The more I read, the more I liked him. Admittedly, he wasnt as great as Batman still, and he never will be but he is still pretty damned good. The most irritating factor of Superman was the punchline that was used for him-Truth,Justice & The American Way. Thankfully, in the film they avoid the last line. Anyway, lets get the review out of the way first. I had seen the first Superman film with very little expectations. But along came the great Christopher Reeve. He didnt look stupid inspite of the dated special effects. In fact he looked like THE Superman. Wide jawed, eyes the color of unearthly blue and still having enough acting chops and charisma to pull off a role of this proportion. When I saw what they had done with the new Batman film, I was more or less sure that the Superman film would be the same. There you see,I am deviating again. Sorry, I will be to the point this time.But with Bryan Singer helming this I still hoped for something good.Sadly,it was not to be so.
The film starts with a true homage to the original film. The credits are in the exact same style as in the original film. This I liked a lot. Let me first outline whats good about the film. Around 10-15 minutes of CGI action. Thats about it. This movie has it all, expensive costumes, the whos who of technical experts, bottomless budget...you name it, its got it. The only thing it lacks is heart. The movie fails in almost every way imaginable. I am not counting the special effects because a film of this scale always boasts the best in the business. The romance,the chemistry between Routh and Bosworth is almost non-existent. I will deal with Routh in the end because to be frank he is the cherry topping in this abortion of a work. Kevin Spacey delivers a performance which doesnt demand much from his considerable talent. He is a good Lex Luthor, but again hardly explored. I dont remember any comics where Luthor seemed idiotic...he seldom boasts of his genious but his plans proved to be extremely effective. This is the quirkiness of the film version of Luthor. From the very beginning,Luthor has seemed as a two bit villain suffering from delusions of grandeur. But admittedly thats a problem with all Superman films.This is something that has always bugged me.
In one particular comic that I own, Batman and Superman are fighting together against a host of super villains who have been sent by Luthor. Batman is thinking to himself and he comments that inspite of having dealt with people like the Joker, it still makes his skin crawl to be in the same room with Luthor. This is just to show you how deadly Luthor actually is. The dialogues in this film attempt everything from humour to seriousness and fails miserably. The jokes arn't funny. The emotional dialogue is too lacklustre. Luthors oh so briliant plan is so lame that words cant describe it. It seems like an alternate version of the first film's plan. The supposed 'twist' about Lois' son is quite predictable, I for one figured it out when he first appeared. I will admit one thing though...the suit as I had later guessed was color enhanced and later turned into red for the film. So on screen it looks ok. Another irritating factor was the quick cuts that plagues this film, along with the constant moving shots to showcase big budget sets. Now for Brandon Routh. Oh god, he cant act. As the film progressed I was thinking that he looked decent as Clark Kent, but he looked horrible as Superman. Why was that? Kent is supposed to be meek and sheepish and with the lack of dialogues for Kent it wasnt very difficult for him to pull it off. As Superman, he has even less dialogue but to pull that off one needs a certain amount of screen presence. Needless to say, Routh doesnt have that an iota. In a long shot he looks faintly like Christopher Reeve, but up close we see that his face is vastly different from that of Superman. So basically you have an actor who is stiff, can't act, can't emote, who looks like a twinky/gigolo playing arguably the most famous comic book hero of all time who doesnt even look like him. Great. Just brilliant. Imagine this, these people had 19 years to develop Superman Returns. And they came up with this script? Was this really the best they could manage? Its hard to believe that this is the culmination of 19 years of development hell. One could say that its near impossible to bring a comic book successfully on screen, but I could argue that the original Superman, Batman , X-men, Hulk and Hellboy(and I still say that its one of the most faithful comics to film transition ever) did that quite successfully. And to think, the Batman film had actors who looked nothing like their comics counterpart. But they still made it work.
You are probably thinking that I am being too harsh on a summer film. But let me describe 2 scenes. First, Superman travels back to earth on a crystal ship and whats more, crash lands on the Kent farm. Whatever happened to sattelite imagery? Is Superman not worried that the sattelites would take photos and find out his identity? Why does he even need a space ship when he enters the Solar system? The second one is where he recharges himself full of solar power and heads down to pick up the Kryptonite continent. I am sorry but why didnt he take precautions? Superman isnt a genius, but considering the times he has faced radiation poisoning, dont you think he would have put on some lead suit or a hazmat suit of sorts? One would say there wasnt enough time, but apparently the cataclysm clock stopped ticking while he was down...oh well...
So let me summarize this film for you. If you havn't grown up on healthy doses of Superman comics and/or films, if a good plot isnt your thing and you have always wanted to see a crossbreed between a twinky and a gigolo try to look like Superman, if you go ga ga over Brandon Routh then Superman Returns could not possibly get better. I for one, dont fall in this category. Christopher Reeve,we miss you, now more than ever. You are still the only man who could make us believe that a man could fly.
posted by Tamal @ 11:55 PM
10 Comments:
I can't comment on the specifics of the film just yet... perhaps in a few days.
I saw the Superman films when I was a kid... at Aman's 10th birthday, in fact. I never got to see the end... and I still don't know what happens.
In my opinion, you're reading too much into acting abilities. The Superman films were iconic for people not for Reeve's acting abilities, or even the story, or even the film itself. For a lot of people, this was their glimpse of the idea of Superman... someone who has greater abilities inside his mild mannered persona. Someone who gets shouted at by the boss and doesn't (or can't) do anything about it. He grew up on a small farm, lived the simple life... the American way of Life. I know you're gnashing your teeth at this, but a lot of people identify more with Superman than with Batman. Bruce Wayne has loads of money, he's successful, big house, success... everything the average joe can only dream of. For the average person, Batman is a guy they can't identify with. He's too far removed from their world. He appears to have everything they spend their entire lives working towards... and then you see Superman, who seems like a simple country boy who's just trying to protect his Momma. Take it as you want, but the idea of Superman appealed to people, not the film or the story itself.
I don't want to compare Batman and Superman... they're very different. They both appealed to different parts of my growing mind. In the end, I prefer not to read too much into either of them. They are eventually both rather unrealistic concepts which started out totally bogus, but after years of storylines, make some level of sense. Which begs the question: why are we reading so much into figures who are reinterpreted at the drop of a mask/cape?
It is still a work of literature you are looking at.Whether you acknowledge it or not,comics are a part of literature and Batman & Superman have been around for almost 70 years..years and years of writing has gone into creating them.Any character when transported from the written word to the screen requires a certain amount of acting ability to do that successfully...Dont you think a well written character becomes very hard to portray if the person trying it has no talent to back it up?Or are you saying that any joe is capable of that,all that is required (in this case) is good makeup and CGI? I have never questioned Superman's popularity,and i certainly understand why he is loved by all.neither am i trying to defend Batman.My favouring towards Batman is just that,its my choice.Nothing more,nothing less.I doubt this post of mine is a rant against Superman's popularity.It is my criticism of the film.With a few personal touches.And as for your point that people like the idea of Superman,not the film or the story,i would ask you this-name one film/play/book/poem in which people didnt like the idea and yet it is popular and loved. Behind every successful novel,poems etc there is an idea which appeals to people.It applies to everything, not just Superman.Again,this post is my criticism of the immense failure that this film is-nothing more,nothing less.
Work of literature is a bit of a stretch. I define literature as something that dwells within the zeitgeist, and frankly, comic books are not one of them. The zeitgeist by definition is popularist, and is not open to interpretations of merit or quality. Some things appeal, some don't. They may have been around for 70 years, but for the vast majority of people, their first exposure was through the films. All they will ever see of the characters is what they see in the films. Most people will never pick up a comic book beyond the age of 10. For many people comic books were not a part of their childhood, and neither were these characters. Consider them iconic, but many people only knew them through the films. The identification of these characters in the zeitgeist is through the films, not through the comic book.
As for the idea thing... it's a comment. Don't read so much intent into it. For most film goers, acting abilities count towards very little. If he looks like Superman, sounds like Superman, and flies around, he's Superman. That's it for most people. People today don't care about Reeves, or the legacy of the character. The age of the character counts against him.
With this film an entire new generation is discovering Superman. That can only be a good thing.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
One thing.In todays generation,many and I do mean many people wont pick up books beyond what they are forced to...so does that mean the classics arnt literature anymore?All I am asking is this-what is it exactly that you are defending here?I reviewed the latest superman film,not debated on whether superman was more famous or not.Just because people did not read comics of superman somehow makes it beneath the level it takes to become literature?One thing finally-the films werent made before the comics.when studios realized that one comics was selling so much all around the world that comics,novels and max Fliescher cartoons wernt enough they invested in films.And here you are now trying to make a discourse about how comics doesnt dwell within the zeitgeist.If it wasnt popular,then it would have vanished long back.
You sound exactly like Adi saying- Because this film has been made,tolkien's work is being made famous...Even he acknowledged the already prevalent poularity of LOTR.
The point I was trying to make, if there was one, is how the idea of Superman perpetuates beyond the original source, to the extent that very few people will now make the direct connection.
Classics may exist in the zeitgeist, but rarely in direct form. Even I have read only the abridged version of the Merchant of Venice. I've known the story forever, but the actual text? Nope. I wouldn't know the specifics of Shylock even if he bit me on the Tukas.
Case in point: I discovered Superman through the films, or rather, what I heard people saying about the films. When I finally saw the films for myself, that was an experience. The suspension of disbelief was already in place before I saw the film... and not dependent on acting skills, or how Christopher Reeves looked the part. To me as a kid, that didn't matter. I had no way of knowing how much the story might be straying from the canonical baseline, or errors in logic. It could have been Hulk Hogan instead of Reeves, and I wouldn't have known the difference.
Adnmittedly, Reeves will forever be identified with Supe. Just like Lucy Lawless will forever be Xena to me, it's impossible to think of Supe without Reeves. I'm just glad the stories are being told, however they may be. I loved all the Dune/LOTR films, regardless of how much they might have sucked. It's a joy to see those characters on the screen... they can never be as magnificient as in your mind, but so what? Love it for what it is.
Love it for what it is? Half hearted attempts at making a film all for the reason of earning money? You say that you love the Dune/LOTR Films,but i couldnt watch them again.I guess that might make me sound as a snob of some sort but to be frank,i dont want to insult the books. Read my last paragraph in my review,that summarises the film quite well.Again,my review is intended to reflect what I make of the film with my outlook and knowledge,not anyone else's.Dont you think?
Perhaps the films do insult the books... I dunno. Probably. At first the Dune films made me wonder... why?!?! Why change anything?
But I remember when I was in Madurai, and things got a bit too oppressive, I could count on watching one of those films and feeling better. Perhaps it's a sense of connection with my old life. I dunno. I felt almost like Odrade floating in the ocean...
And for me, the connection grew from the books... Period. The films were just booster shots.
ok!
my eyes are watering after reading the exhaustive blog. Have'nt you heard of paragraphs?
I just didnt have enough left to go through the comments, so I am trying to post mine independently Tamal.
You are being too critical. At times in an attempt to be pointedly sarcastic, I felt, you went way overboard. I had seen superman and yes there were a number of question marks when I left the movie. Why does the kid kick the piano and not help open the damn door? Why does superman have to use a spaceship (and crashland more over)when he seems pretty comfortable in space? But the flick doesnt deserve to be trashed.
The first thing in the movie which impressed me was the opening sequence, dont remember the style of credits in the first one. I fell in love with the music, I had forgotten what was the music superman had. This piece according to me stands up with the likes of Indiana Jones Theme Music, The Last of the Mohicans and Star Wars.
No matter how much money you pour into a movie, it is never quite visible to me. IF special effects were made to look like ermm - Special - then it sort of beats the purpose huh?
Anyway, I liked the "love" situation superman was in and the treatment of the same in the movie (my judgement is not clouded by the current state of my affairs!)
Good movie, but just not quite up there with the, you know what..!
Affairs, Aditya?!?! How many are there? You dog, you!
Post a Comment
<< Home