06-30-2006, 07:27 AM
I'm with Occhi and Drasca - this movie was mediocre and nothing more. Somewhere in the range of 3 to 3 1/2 stars our of 5. I think the biggest thing that struck me was that not a whole lot happend, especially considering that the movie was 2 hours 45 minutes long. It also hurts that I have always considered Superman to be one of the most overrated, uninteresting and boring superheros ever.
Kevin Spacey was excellent, as per usual. Brandon Routh was fine I suppose. Kate Bosworth was decidedly ho-hum and I completely concur that she was much too young for the role. She's 23 (and looks it) for chrissake and we're supposed to believe that it's been five years since the events of Superman 2 and she's had a kid? No way. Lois Lane in general was a pretty poor character in the flick.
I felt as though the kid was just not needed - completely superfluous to the plot and just used as an "awwwww" machine throughout the film.
They did a pretty good job with the Richard character I felt. Singer definitely makes the audience question whether Lois reallys "needs" to be with Superman since Richard is so great too. Is it bad that I kept chuckling at how this is the second time that James Marsden has been cast into a love-triangle-participating character in a superhero movie? I just can't look at the guy and not see Cyclops. I'm sorry James if you're reading this (most likely not)!
There were a couple moments in the movie which completely broke my suspension of disbelief (basically all of which have been mentioned so far):
[BIG SPOILERS]
(1) Lifting an island up while stabbed with Kryptonite with Kryptonite crystals in your face... huh?
(2) Lois Lane being injury-free after her tumble around a plane in a deadspin from the upper atmosphere
(3) No one except Lois following up on or even caring about the blackout
[/BIG SPOILERS]
(4) How Superman keeps going into the upper atmosphere and then falling unconscious directly back into Metropolis consistently is just absolutely amazing. This one I can let slide I suppose due to the comic book origins of the movie, etc. but it still bugs me.
(5) I know it is part of the whole Superman mythos and such, but I will say it anyway... HOW CAN NO ONE RECOGNIZE HIM? Alright, I got it out of my system. Have I mentioned that Superman is a lame superhero? In any case, I appreciate that Singer played around with it a little bit in this movie atleast with the kid, Clark Kent avoiding standing next to pictures of Superman, etc.
The short version of my opinion:
Mediocre movie. Superman is a lame superhero. Great SFX. Worth a see in theaters anyway most likely. I wish Singer had stayed for X-Men 3. Spider-Man 3 is going to be a whole hell of a lot better.
Kevin Spacey was excellent, as per usual. Brandon Routh was fine I suppose. Kate Bosworth was decidedly ho-hum and I completely concur that she was much too young for the role. She's 23 (and looks it) for chrissake and we're supposed to believe that it's been five years since the events of Superman 2 and she's had a kid? No way. Lois Lane in general was a pretty poor character in the flick.
I felt as though the kid was just not needed - completely superfluous to the plot and just used as an "awwwww" machine throughout the film.
They did a pretty good job with the Richard character I felt. Singer definitely makes the audience question whether Lois reallys "needs" to be with Superman since Richard is so great too. Is it bad that I kept chuckling at how this is the second time that James Marsden has been cast into a love-triangle-participating character in a superhero movie? I just can't look at the guy and not see Cyclops. I'm sorry James if you're reading this (most likely not)!
There were a couple moments in the movie which completely broke my suspension of disbelief (basically all of which have been mentioned so far):
[BIG SPOILERS]
(1) Lifting an island up while stabbed with Kryptonite with Kryptonite crystals in your face... huh?
(2) Lois Lane being injury-free after her tumble around a plane in a deadspin from the upper atmosphere
(3) No one except Lois following up on or even caring about the blackout
[/BIG SPOILERS]
(4) How Superman keeps going into the upper atmosphere and then falling unconscious directly back into Metropolis consistently is just absolutely amazing. This one I can let slide I suppose due to the comic book origins of the movie, etc. but it still bugs me.
(5) I know it is part of the whole Superman mythos and such, but I will say it anyway... HOW CAN NO ONE RECOGNIZE HIM? Alright, I got it out of my system. Have I mentioned that Superman is a lame superhero? In any case, I appreciate that Singer played around with it a little bit in this movie atleast with the kid, Clark Kent avoiding standing next to pictures of Superman, etc.
The short version of my opinion:
Mediocre movie. Superman is a lame superhero. Great SFX. Worth a see in theaters anyway most likely. I wish Singer had stayed for X-Men 3. Spider-Man 3 is going to be a whole hell of a lot better.
--Mith
I would rather be ashes than dust! I would rather that my spark should burn out in a brilliant blaze than it should be stifled by dry rot. I would rather be a superb meteor, every atom of me in magnificent glow, than a sleepy and permanent planet. The proper function of man is to live, not to exist. I shall not waste my days in trying to prolong them. I shall use my time.
Jack London
I would rather be ashes than dust! I would rather that my spark should burn out in a brilliant blaze than it should be stifled by dry rot. I would rather be a superb meteor, every atom of me in magnificent glow, than a sleepy and permanent planet. The proper function of man is to live, not to exist. I shall not waste my days in trying to prolong them. I shall use my time.
Jack London