[MOPO] SUPERMAN a bad remake?
I just received this review from a friend... it seems oddly divergent for the industry reviews, which have been very positive. Anyone have any comments after having seen SUPERMAN (I haven't yet... and now I'm wondering if I should bother)? First, everybody in the cast is brilliant... somewhere else. Dialog? Odd to imagine that in a 2.5 hour film, there really wasn't much dialog, which I blame on problem two: the director. Bryan Singer blows as a director. Good X-Men, not great X-Men. Good documentary editor (AE's Superman story, although he excludes all comic book references that he swipes from: read on). The script, co-written by Singer, has almost nothing new past the original Chris Reeve film 25 years ago. In fact, some of the same lines are re-delivered in this redeux-doo. Hiring the best cast is one thing; giving them literally no wiggle room to use their stuff is another. Go back 25 years and marvel at the effects, then jump to 2006 and tell everybody that the $300 million budget is all on the screen? Hrumph: we must've been at a smaller screen, because nothing got past the point of teasing us that something better was about to happen. It never does. Hype revolved around Singer, his sexual orientation, Routh's package, Spacey's method acting, and anything other than what the film was about. Shades of Seinfeld! It's about two and a half hours long... that's what it's about. Hype aside, it NEVER delivers. If you've seen the trailers, you've seen the movie: no more surprises at all. All of Singer's hype, all of the build-up leads one to think that you're in for a major event. Nope. This is why it didn't play Cannes: it was a WB remake of the original Reeve film, and this Krytonian fan is mighty disappointed. -- Marcus Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com ___ How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
Re: [MOPO] SUPERMAN a bad remake?
Jr, Its worth the bother, as my friends have reported. I am waiting to go to Imax to see the 2 0 min 3d presentation during the second half. I think your friend would have enjoyed the film but alas he failed to remove the stick up his ass. freeman fisher8601 west knoll drive #7west hollywood, ca90069 Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com ___ How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
Re: [MOPO] SUPERMAN a bad remake?
Freeman:
Plainly put, if you liked the Christopher Reeve
Superman films you will probably like this new versionor is it
really new??
Director Brian Singer manages to emulate just
about everything from the Reeve films (--you'd swear it was shot on 1970s Kodak
Film stock--)includingLuthoronce again moving heaven and earth
(--especially earth --) to secure lucrative beachfront property, too much
Lois Lane (Kate Bosworth) and yet another reprise
ofSuperman carrying the lovely Ms.Lane on another moonlight glide
around the Big Apple...
It's not Superman Returns, it's
Superman Re-Hash.
Newcomer Brandon Routh is suitably stoic -- though
a bit young -- as Krypton's sole survivor and offers an effective
imitation of Reeve's bumbling, dorkyClark Kent. The physical resemblance
is downright eerie at times. If you were hoping for a Kentwith
commanding presence -- ala George Reeves -- you'll be sorely disappointed.
Not that therearen't some nice touches.
Both Noel Neill and Jack Larson make cameo appearances,there's a nod to
the Superman pose on the cover of Action Comics #1, and director
Singerliftslighting, shots andat least one scene fromthe
Fleischer Superman cartoons.The Christ
symbolismis also in full focus this time around
("I am sending you, my only, son to Earth") and Superman is referred to as a
"savior" on more than occasion.
Special effects have come along way since the
Reeves films and the flying sequencesare eye-defying.
Still, the senseof wonderment so integral to
the character seems to have been leftback on Krypton
Earl Blair
CAPTAIN BIJOU
No stick here.
- Original Message -
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU
Sent: Saturday, July 01, 2006 1:14
PM
Subject: Re: [MOPO] SUPERMAN a bad
remake?
Jr,
Its worth the bother, as my friends have reported. I
am waiting to go to Imax to see the 2 0 min 3d presentation
during the second half. I think your friend would have enjoyed the film
but alas he failed to remove the stick up his ass.
freeman fisher8601 west knoll drive #7west hollywood,
ca90069
Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com
___
How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
The author of this message is solely responsible for its
content.
Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com
___
How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
Re: [MOPO] SUPERMAN a bad remake? Why I love Anthony Lane
KRYPTOLOGY by ANTHONY LANE “Superman Returns.” Issue of 2006-07-03 Posted 2006-06-26 A passing demographer, faced with a crowd lining up to watch “Superman Returns,” will find much cause for reflection. There, in heady profusion, will be the flower of American youth, all of them waiting—with that blend of sullenness and agitation peculiar to teen- age boys—to see whether the special effects will meet their fastidious standards. With them will be parents of both sexes, affecting tedium but actually in the throes of a hidden thrill, hoping for a nostalgic return to the Christmas of 1978, when they necked in the back row to the surge of the John Williams score and the voice of Christopher Reeve. Dotted here and there will be Supermaniacs—some of them sporting red underpants, others in panty hose of royal blue, none of them happily married. Last, and quite alone, will be a weary cinéaste, submitting himself to two and a half hours of blockbuster because, and only because, it represents a final chance to witness the union of Eva Marie Saint and Marlon Brando. They do not physically meet onscreen, but, for fans of “On the Waterfront,” simply to see them together under the auspices of a single movie will be enough. Saint, her beauty still rendered mysterious by that faint air of distraction, plays the mother who adopted Superman when he first fell to earth, and to whom he now pays a return plummet, travelling back to the family homestead by fireball. Brando resumes the role of Jor-El, which sounds to me like a failed airline but is in fact the Kryptonish name of our hero’s father. What this entails is a posthumous holographic rerun of Brando’s meringue-haired turn from the original movie; as Jor-El drones instructions to his son (“You will see my life through your eyes”), moviegoers will be asking why, if the director, Bryan Singer, was hellbent on resurrecting a Brando performance, he had to pick this one. Why not bring back Terry Malloy, from “On the Waterfront,” mumbling reassurance from a bloodied mouth? Who wouldn’t take advice from Stanley Kowalski? Or Colonel Kurtz? One scene with him and even the Man of Steel would snap. Superman, we learn, has been AWOL for five years. He claims to have been visiting his native planet, now a ruinous wasteland. Having dropped in on Mother, he travels to Metropolis in the guise of Clark Kent and retrieves his old job on the Daily Planet. Its editor is Perry White (Frank Langella), whose nephew Richard (James Marsden) combines the tasks of assistant editor and swain to Lois Lane (Kate Bosworth). Lois herself, far from lying idle during Superman’s absence, has by now amassed (a) a son and (b) a Pulitzer Prize, for her essay titled “Why the World Doesn’t Need Superman.” Hell hath no fury like an earthling scorned. Also back in the saddle is Lex Luthor (Kevin Spacey), who has been refining his vocation as an anti-Robin Hood: stealing from the rich, giving to himself, and not even considering the poor. With his band of merry thugs, he grabs magic crystals from Superman’s arctic hideout, which is wondrously framed as a kind of frozen cathedral. What these are I never really gathered, but their potency is plain: just add water, and bang goes the power supply of the Eastern United States. Add more crystals to more water, and up from the seabed rises a fresh landmass, on which—if you are Luthor—you plan to build a whole new continent of your own devising. Picture my disappointment as I realized that, for all the pizzazz of “Superman Returns,” its global weapon of choice would not be terrorism, or nuclear piracy, or dirty bombs. It would be real estate. What does Warner Bros. have in mind for the next installment? Superman overhauls corporate pension plans? Luthor screws Medicare? Spacey certainly enjoys himself in the part, there being nobody else for him to enjoy, and he sprinkles a few grace notes over the basic maleficence. “Krryptonite,” he trills, in celebration of Superman’s least favorite substance. Our villain’s dress sense, too, like that of Parker Posey in the role of his disposable sidekick, has a lustre and a fussy correctness that are tailored to within a quarter inch of camp. Spacey must be one of the few men in the business who can slip into chocolate corduroy and get away with it. I saw him onstage last year, when he played Dexter in a revival of “The Philadelphia Story,” and the arch tone of his delivery gave some of his speeches the swing and kick of a song; all that suavity came to naught, however, when you noticed the wrinkles in his tuxedo—not his fault, just a cinched theatrical budget. Here, in a film that cost more than two hundred million dollars, the clothing is without flaw (save for a polar-white overcoat, which Dick Tracy should have refused to lend out), but the character beneath is in tatters. Spacey
Re: [MOPO] SUPERMAN a bad remake?
i saw it...would characterize the movie as watchable with a few choice entertaining moments but not much else...spacey was very good...Reeves had an ability to show us different emotions which routh lack's...what could have made this movie better?...more interaction between luthor and supremangeeez supreman nevers lays a hand on lex,gets his but kicked in one scene and thats about it folks...happy holidays-MoPo List mopo-l@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU wrote: -To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDUFrom: JR [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent by: MoPo List mopo-l@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDUDate: 07/31/2006 01:54PMSubject: [MOPO] SUPERMAN a bad remake?I just received this review from a friend... it seems oddly divergent for the industry reviews, which have been very positive. Anyone have any comments after having seen SUPERMAN (I haven't yet... and now I'm wondering if I should bother)?"First, everybody in the cast is brilliant... somewhereelse. Dialog? Odd to imagine that in a 2.5 hour film,there really wasn't much dialog, which I blame onproblem two: the director.Bryan Singer blows as a director. Good X-Men, notgreat X-Men. Good documentary editor (AE's Supermanstory, although he excludes all comic book referencesthat he swipes from: read on). The script, co-writtenby Singer, has almost nothing new past the originalChris Reeve film 25 years ago. In fact, some of thesame lines are re-delivered in this redeux-doo. Hiringthe best cast is one thing; giving them literally nowiggle room to use their stuff is another. Go back 25years and marvel at the effects, then jump to 2006 andtell everybody that the $300 million budget is all onthe screen? Hrumph: we must've been at a smallerscreen, because nothing got past the point of teasingus that something better was about to happen. It neverdoes. Hype revolved around Singer, his sexualorientation, Routh's "package", Spacey's methodacting, and anything other than what the film wasabout. Shades of Seinfeld! It's about two and a halfhours long... that's what it's about. Hype aside, itNEVER delivers. If you've seen the trailers, you've seen the movie: nomore surprises at all. All of Singer's hype, all ofthe build-up leads one to think that you're in for amajor event. Nope. This is why it didn't play Cannes:it was a WB remake of the original Reeve film, andthis Krytonian fan is mighty disappointed.-- Marcus"Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com ___ How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing ListSend a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com ___ How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
Re: [MOPO] SUPERMAN a bad remake?
Only the Hulk could kick Superman's butt.
Maybe also The Mighty Thor ('cause he's a God, you know!).
Saul
- Original Message -
From:
Alan Heimann
To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU
Sent: Saturday, July 01, 2006 3:50
PM
Subject: Re: [MOPO] SUPERMAN a bad
remake?
i saw it...would characterize the movie as watchable with a few
choice entertaining moments but not much else...spacey was very good...Reeves
had an ability to show us different emotions which routh lack's...what could
have made this movie better?...more interaction between luthor and
supremangeeez supreman nevers lays a hand on lex,gets his but kicked in
one scene and thats about it folks...happy holidays-MoPo List mopo-l@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU wrote:
-
To:
MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDUFrom: JR
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent by: MoPo List
mopo-l@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDUDate: 07/31/2006 01:54PMSubject:
[MOPO] SUPERMAN a bad remake?I just
received this review from a friend... it seems oddly divergent for the
industry reviews, which have been very positive. Anyone have any comments
after having seen SUPERMAN (I haven't yet... and now I'm wondering if I
should bother)?"First, everybody in the cast is brilliant...
somewhereelse. Dialog? Odd to imagine that in a 2.5 hour film,there
really wasn't much dialog, which I blame onproblem two: the
director.Bryan Singer blows as a director. Good X-Men, notgreat
X-Men. Good documentary editor (AE's Supermanstory, although he
excludes all comic book referencesthat he swipes from: read on). The
script, co-writtenby Singer, has almost nothing new past the
originalChris Reeve film 25 years ago. In fact, some of thesame
lines are re-delivered in this redeux-doo. Hiringthe best cast is one
thing; giving them literally nowiggle room to use their stuff is
another. Go back 25years and marvel at the effects, then jump to 2006
andtell everybody that the $300 million budget is all onthe screen?
Hrumph: we must've been at a smallerscreen, because nothing got past the
point of teasingus that something better was about to happen. It
neverdoes. Hype revolved around Singer, his sexualorientation,
Routh's "package", Spacey's methodacting, and anything other than what
the film wasabout. Shades of Seinfeld! It's about two and a
halfhours long... that's what it's about. Hype aside, itNEVER
delivers. If you've seen the trailers, you've seen the movie:
nomore surprises at all. All of Singer's hype, all ofthe build-up
leads one to think that you're in for amajor event. Nope. This is why it
didn't play Cannes:it was a WB remake of the original Reeve film,
andthis Krytonian fan is mighty disappointed.--
Marcus"Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web
Site at www.filmfan.com
___
How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo
Mailing List
Send a message addressed to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
The author of this
message is solely responsible for its
content.
Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com
___
How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
The author of this message is solely responsible for its
content.
Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com
___
How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
