Why is Superman Returns better than the original? I wouldn't say it's definetly "Better" per se. Ultimately it's more enjoyable in my opinion. But the original definetly had more heart. Christopher Reeves was the ultimate Superman. Though I do think that Brandon Routh excelled in the job and filled the shoes well. If I had the choice though I would watch the movies in this order. Superman Returns, Superman II, Superman. The original is better in several aspects and the new one is better in several aspects. Of course I'd watch Batman Begins before any of them. It's kind of sad when you compare Begins and the original quadrilogy. The only one of them I ever really enjoyed was Batman Forever, and that was just because Jim Carrey, Chris O'Donell and Val Kilmer made that movie.
The All About Comic Book Movies Thread
- Thread starter Planet-man
- Start date
-
- Tags
- all about
J. Agamemnon
Well-Known Member
I really enjoyed Batman begins. But what ruined it for me was the rooftop car chase scene. THAT was stupid. I'm sure there were morerealistic routes that could have been taken instead of rehasing some retarded scene from Batman and Robin.
Joe Kalicki
Well-Known Member
Except in 2 he gave his powers away "forever," and got them back in a completely unexplained fashion. One scene he doesn't have them, the next one he does.
And then he and Lois laugh their heads off MURDERING three helpless people.
Superman II sucks.
Superman III and Superman Returns are far and away the best Superman movies.
Planet-man
Well-Known Member
That statement makes so little sense it killed three people.
Superman gets his powers back after holding the power-crystal, kills three genocidal maniacs, etc = unforgivably bad movie.
Superman leaves Earth for years for selfish, non-sensical reasons(why would he want to leave his friends and family and live on a planet he didn't even know about until a few years ago?), Luthor gets out of prison after nuking a State with no explaination, Superman kills three of Luthor's henchmen, lifts an entire island made of kryptonite, then spends the remaining 20 minutes of the movie in a coma(oh no! Will he die?) and then sneaks into Lois' house and gives a fatherly speech to a kid because despite never meeting him, not knowing about his existence or having anything to do with him and the kid already having an involved, loving father, he might have the same DNA so he's the REAL father and gets to do whatever he wants = "far and away the best Superman movie ever, except for maybe the one where Richard Pryor makes a weather satelite create a tropical storm and make the little "walk/don't walk" men fight each other, which isn't a plot hole at all".
Superman gets his powers back after holding the power-crystal, kills three genocidal maniacs, etc = unforgivably bad movie.
Superman leaves Earth for years for selfish, non-sensical reasons(why would he want to leave his friends and family and live on a planet he didn't even know about until a few years ago?), Luthor gets out of prison after nuking a State with no explaination, Superman kills three of Luthor's henchmen, lifts an entire island made of kryptonite, then spends the remaining 20 minutes of the movie in a coma(oh no! Will he die?) and then sneaks into Lois' house and gives a fatherly speech to a kid because despite never meeting him, not knowing about his existence or having anything to do with him and the kid already having an involved, loving father, he might have the same DNA so he's the REAL father and gets to do whatever he wants = "far and away the best Superman movie ever, except for maybe the one where Richard Pryor makes a weather satelite create a tropical storm and make the little "walk/don't walk" men fight each other, which isn't a plot hole at all".
Last edited:
So someone agrees with me that Superman III was utter ****.
Planet-man
Well-Known Member
No, as I said earlier I think Superman III is a good movie in general, especially for the Clark/Lana stuff which is fantastic. But I completely disagree that it and Superman Returns are "far and away" better than Superman: The Movie and Superman II, especially for the reasons Joe gave.
Zombipanda
My Boom-Boom's mostly gay
just saw The Incredible Hulk.
Awesome.
Awesome.
Joe Kalicki
Well-Known Member
Superman is in the coma because he lifts the Kryptonite island. It's something that could have killed him, but he was good enough and strong enough to do it anyway and he almost died. And at least he wants to know the kid. I hate the kid so much, but Superman wouldn't and didn't abandon him. And he took off because he wanted to see about Krypton. Nothing wrong with that. He probably didn't expect to take five years.
And Superman III is a Silver Age story, so of course there's some wacky science. That's what makes it awesome.
Superman giving up his powers has no impact if he can get them back whenever he pleases. And Superman certainly wouldn't kill/condone killing/laugh about killing three helpless people.
And Superman III is a Silver Age story, so of course there's some wacky science. That's what makes it awesome.
Superman giving up his powers has no impact if he can get them back whenever he pleases. And Superman certainly wouldn't kill/condone killing/laugh about killing three helpless people.
He shouldn't of been able to do that. Especially when you consider the fact he had a chunk of it stuck it him that they only removed at the hospital. That would be like seeing Batman get shot in the head and the bullet go through to the other side but yet the next scene he's ok
Iceshadow
Well-Known Member
Didn't Lois take out the chunk that Luthor stuck him with before he lifted the island?
Joe Kalicki
Well-Known Member
But he's not okay, he's in a coma in the hospital for a long time.
Yes.
No they pulled a peice out in hospital as Lois had pulled out some but there was still some in him.
Yeah after doing something he shouldn't. In all the other movies including this one one little piece and he's weak. It has nothing top do with over the coming the odds to save people as he would have done it in movies I or II.
And before any one says "yeah well he flew to the sun and recharged" HE SHOULDN'T OF BEEN ABLE TO FLY.
Superman returns is just Movie I with more plot holes , worse acting and Better effects. But good effects do not make the movie good it just makes it look pretty. What's the saying, you can polish a turd but all you have is a shiny piece of ****, That is what returns is. A shiny piece of ****.
Planet-man
Well-Known Member
I know why. It's just bad storytelling. The last 20 minutes of the film are suspenseless. We know he's not going to die, so why would having him in a coma be engaging at all?
Like Mole says, I refuse to accept this. It's a shoddy, cheap way out of a plot. Lex comes up with arguably his most unsolvable-by-Superman plot EVER, and as you wonder what clever way he's going to solve it, he just solves it however he normally would by lifting it up and throwing it away. The whole plan hinged on him NOT being able to do that! It's terrible storywriting, and akin to having Batman actually fall off the cathedral at the end of Batman '89, land flat on the ground, and then get up and kill the Joker anyway, or Eisenhower saving America by catching a Soviet nuclear missile in his bare hands because IT HAD TO BE DONE! FORCE OF WILL!!! JESUSNESS!!!. You're not allowed to give your character a set limitation and then just break it impossibly and have that resolve the story.
But he still has no right to act like his father. None. And that could've made a great, pained scene of longing. But no, it's just everything's all right and Superman can do as he pleases and **** that Richard guy, it's not like he matters as a person despite raising this kid.
"Probably". But not actually said or implied in the movie, so it doesn't count. And I still don't by Superman abandoning Earth and its people to go to a strange planet he's never known and didn't even know existed until he was an adult.
But when Superman II does it, it's makes it awful and plot-holed?
Which he didn't know he could do.
Except for that time in Superman Returns when he kills three of Luthor's henchmen and almost kills Luthor and Kitty Kowalski and her dog.
Exactly.
And then perfectly okay.
No.
She broke off most of the chunk but they still remove more of it from him in the hospital scene.
And again, THE ENTIRE ISLAND WAS MOSTLY MADE OF KRYPTONITE.
So how was Fantastic four 2? :lol:
Sorry that was a low blow. just trying to say both have bad both have good
Gothamite
Well-Known Member
Fair enough, the Marvel movies don't really have stuff in their movies that 'ruin the whole film' because of some scientific or psychological improbability, but it doesn't change the fact that 90% don't try to be anything other than fun Summer blockbusters. Even though there's far fewer DC movies and they're often riddled with irksome plot points, they're still more emotionally-engrossing than most of the Marvel movies.
About as good as Venom was in Spider-Man 3.
:lol: But I'm pro-either so
What does that mean by the way?
