Review of Superman Returns (2006) by Kean Hooi T — 14 Jul 2013

I've hesitated putting up a review for a while on this film for a while, simply because I really hated it and was so disappointed by it I honestly rather forget it was made or that I eagerly awaited it from summer 2005 to its release in summer 2006. Why do I hate this film so much, well keep reading and you'll find out why.

Biggest problem off the bat is the film is an homage to the Superman films of the 70s and 80s. Now an homage film isn't necessarily a bad film, but in the case of Superman, why the hell would you want to remind audiences that Superman III and IV existed; granted the film disregards III and IV, but even that causes problems to arise, but I'll get to that in a bit.

Now the statement above may sound like I hated it off the bat, but that's nowhere near the case. The teaser and trailers made it look to have some promise and if not pretty good. Also, coming off Batman Begins it looked that WB finally figured out DC. I knew going in this was in the same universe as III and IV, but again prior to its release audiences were told those films were left out, which foolishly lead me to believe the film would be good.

Well that's enough backstory about me lets get into this film shall we.

Superman Returns opens to the classic Superman intro and music, which I was really happy to see and liked; but that feeling of happiness didn't last long. The next scene the film right off the bat ruins Lex Luthor. So apparently Lex got out of prison on account of Superman not showing up to court ( pretty sure the courts of the US don't work like that ) and he then marries a widow, fucks her really good, and inherits her fortune. Am I the only person who found this awful; for god sakes this is Lex Luthor for crying out loud. Have him start a Ponzi scheme, do something the SEC would classify as illegal, or anything that sounds much better and more evil.

Since were on the subject of Lex, let me just review his character and Kevin Spacey's performance right off the bat. Why you may ask, because this film is centered around him for the most part. You read that right, a Superman movie where Superman is not the main focus point. However, we'll get into that a bit later as well. As for Lex, he's both good and bad. Spacey gives a fairly well done performance and I think he was better than Hackman. Yet, like Hackman, the most iconic villain in comic book history that ran for president, had a badass robot suit that could f up Superman, was pure evil, is reduced to a real estate shark. His scheme is pretty fuck up so it goes with his character, but for god sakes couldn't they have done something much better; like the shit listed above. Plus, couldn't they have put someone else in to fight Superman like Doomsday, because by himself Lex can be pretty boring. Overall as the films main attraction, Luthor is mixed.

Back to the films plot, so Superman left for five years to find any remains of his race; jeez apparently Marlon Brando telling him the planet was destroyed wasn't good enough.

Quick break to talk about the problem of setting from the beginning. So Superman II was set in either 1979 or 1980, this film takes place five years after the events of that film, so logic says this film should take place in 1984 or 1985, right? Well no, kind of. The computers, televisions, and papers in the film are clearly as of 2005. Yet, some people dress and act like it's the 80s. Plus, ( SPOILER ALERT )well not really since you see it coming in the first act, Superman has a kid who is clearly six or seven and Superman left for FIVE years. What did Lois secretly have a kid and hide it from everyone for two years after Superman left and was she married then, cause she wasn't married in Superman II, or does this film decide Superman left for five years, years after the events of Superman II, say 2000? Well no that can't be true, because there's still the problem of Lois's kid and marriage status as well as......you no what fuck it, I'm sorry I don't like this film enough to care about this. All I can say is, this film has a huge and very noticeable setting problem.

Well that wasn't a quick break, sorry, lets try to focus on the story now. So Clark Kent returns to the Daily Planet and finds out about Lois and her life and shit. She apparently won a Pulitzer for a single article about how Superman can just go away. As Cinemasins said best, isn't that impossible? They do give rewards for journalism but it's for a series of articles and usually something important like convincing the powers that be to reduce.....you no what nope, I'm playing this damn films game. At this point, not thirty minutes in, I sat in a theater with most of this going in my head and just confused as holy fuck.

So Clark Kent comes back and Lex some how finds the damn Fortress of Solitude. He then asks Marlon Brando, Superman's dad, about how the crystals work and he then causes a blackout; Christ this film sucks. So during the blackout Lois is on a plane that's carrying a space shuttle, it's some new transportation thing just go with it. So the blackout cause the plane to go down which forces the title of the movie to occur. So Superman returns, that was not intentional by the way, and saves the day and people cheer that Superman has returned, still not intentional. To the films credit this scene is pretty nicely done and suspenseful; only if the rest of the film were like that.

At the same time Lex's henchmen rob a museum to steal some Kryptonite. That for me was the final nail in the coffin as I knew it would go down hill from there, and it did. So Superman saves a car then walks into machine gun fire and does something I forgot in all honesty. Then, Lois suspecting the blackout is something sinister and takes her kid to the damn boat she believes the blackout occurred on. There Lex captures her and the kid, reveals his dumb plan, and the audience learns the kid is Superman's kid; yet, strangely the film doesn't say right away even know it made it completely obvious in everyway possible. So Lex sinks the boat with Lois and the kid, Superman and Lois's husband come to rescue them, and Superman goes after Lex.

Now this is where I just lost it. Kryptonite, Superman's only weakness that takes away his powers as he's exposed to it, no matter how big or small it is, and where he could be feet away from it and it will effect him, fucking flies between giant pillars of Kryptonite and isn't at all effected; dear fucking god what the hell was Bryan Singer on when he gave that the green light. Then he lands on a landmass full of the stuff where Lex and his henchmen beat the fuck out of him and Lex STABS HIM WITH A PIECE OF KRYPTONITE!!!! That should kill him, honestly it really should of. So he falls into the water, Lois saves him, the girl Lex was with foils his plan, then out of nowhere.....FUCKING SUPERMAN LIFTS THE GOD DAMN CONTINENT OF KRYPTOINTE, HIS ONLY FUCKING WEAKNESS, INTO SPACE; BUT WAIT, THERE'S MORE, THE ENTIRE TIME HE DID THAT HE HAD SHARDS OF KRYPTONITE, AGAIN HIS ONLY WEAKNESS THAT TAKES HIS POWERS AWAY WHEN EXPOSED TO IT!!!!!!! Then he falls to Earth and is declared dead, thank god. No, that's a perfect world sadly, Superman's in a coma and wakes up and talks to his kid and Lois and promises to stay; and that's the film. Sounds like shit when you really think about, right?

I mean the basic plot is this: Superman comes back, Lex has some plan, they fight, Superman almost dies, and the film ends. The majority of the film is not only filler, but barely focuses on Superman. The film puts the majority of screen time on Luthor and Lane, Superman never hits anyone or does anything heroic for the most part, and after the plane scene there's zero action. This is clearly a disaster in the direction and writing department.

For direction, Singer drops the ball big time. The film is incredibly dull and feels like an eternity of pointless scenes that are just pointless arcs. There are so many pointless arcs an scenes that add basically nothing to the story, that if you cut them out, the runtime would easily be less than an hour. Lastly, the dialogue is horrible, uninspired, dull, and flat.

Yet, the biggest problem is on the characters and acting. With the exception of Spacey and Langella, everyone else is just horrible. The worst are Brandon Roth and Kate Bosworth as Superman and Lois Lane. The film manages to ruin to of comics most recognizable characters so bad, it's amazing Singer or the studio even green lit this. Routh's problem is he's uncharismatic, dull, flat, two dimensional, and a boy scout. Now Reeves, since the film is an homage to Superman I and II this comparison is a hundred percent fair, was a dork and cheesy, but for the time it worked and he had a charm. Routh posses none of this. You'd think making the character leave for five years he could be updated or have a new direction, but no, this film doesn't do that and takes away the charm of Superman and makes him a huge tool. Bosworth as Lane is the same and horribly miscast. She was twenty three when the film came out, but looks like a high schooler in the drama club. The same can be said for Routh, but he had a slight resemblance to Reeves so he got the part, which is dumb, but I hate to say it, slightly understandable since the film is an homage. Every other character is portrayed by someone old enough except the main characters and it shows in the worst way possible.

These are my biggest problems with the film, well all I can remember; I haven't seen this film since 2006 and the review probably shows that. Superman Returns for me is ungodly bland, two dimensional, with a horrible story, awful acting, and horrendous direction and writing.

I get it, it's an homage, but I don't see why it had to be this way and not update the character or plot. Superman, the costume, looks so outdated and horrible it's laughable. The problem with the homage is that, and I have to say it, Superman and Superman II while they're a pretty fun watch, to me at least, don't live up to todays comic film standards. Now I'm not saying it to be dark or gritty by any means, but at least it could of started fresh. As stated numerous times in this review they cut out the events of Superman III and IV so they had an unbelievable clean slate, but ended up really screwing it up in a horrible way. Hell they could of started over entirely and not do an homage, but didn't, and sadly this is the result.

I'll give credit to WB for choosing this over 1998's Superman Lives, but am really shocked they chose this half-assed film to try to revive Superman.

All they did was work so hard to revive Superman, just to kill it again; basically adding truckloads of salt to an open wound.

To conclude, I hate this film so much. If you like it, well note I don't understand why, but will try to understand you point of view if you can mine. I haven't watched this since 2006 and don't plan on it any time soon. This film made me lose faith in Superman on the silver screen, until 2013's Man of Steel surprised me. I'll probably always view this film with hate, but will still give it a 1/5 since the first act is decent, but the majority of the film is filler and dull as dull can be.