Before I start in with the feature presentation, I wish to write about the Spider-Man 3 trailer.
Okay, actually the trailer is pretty awesome. My problem, and it may just be a nit I'm picking at here, is the black costume. In the comic, (I swear I just heard the world groan.) the black costume was created to give Spider-Man a new look. He went from, mainly, red and blue to just black and white. It was solid black with two white Spider-Man eyes, white patches on the back of each hand where the costume spun his webbing, and the giant white spiders on his front and back. It is, simply, one of the most stunning, elegant, and beautifully designed costumes in comics. (To see it for yourself click on these links to some covers: Spectacular Spider-Man 101, Web of Spider-Man 1, and Amazing Spider-Man 252.) Also, the black costume was able to shift between normal clothes and the costume, so there was no need to worry about wearing it under another set of clothes.
Now, I understand that the costume from the comics may not have been able to translate to the movie screen very well, but just coloring the regular costume black doesn't work for me. It should be more different from the original. Fans of the comic, or the cartoon that was on in the 90s, know what the black costume is and how it effects Peter, which I think should be shown on screen by changing the look of his costume more than by just changing the color. Also, the trailer shows that he has to wear it under his clothes. That's no fun. And finally, what's Venom going to look like? In the comic, he wears the black costume with some minor alterations, which really makes him an anti-Spider-Man. What's he going to do, have Spider-Man's costume, but in black? That'd be really lame, and confusing. Film is a very visual medium; his look should be completely distinct when fighting Spider-Man, which is why in the comics Spider-Man has never worn a black costume again.
Okay, I'm done with bitching about Spider-Man 3
(One more trailer related thing before I move on, what's with the drastic change in the marketing for Lady in the Water? The teaser called it a bed time story, but the new trailer turned it into a horror. So, which film will it be? One? Both? Neither? I was more interested in the story from the teaser.)
Now for Superman:
I want you to imagine that you have found the one true love of your life. The more time you spend with this person, the more you love him or her. And then one day, your person gets some news and leaves you with out saying good-bye. You're strong, though. You go on living your life. You even meet someone. Sure, this new person isn't perfect, but she or he is someone you can love, not with the same deep and intense passion as the other, but it's love none the less. Then your true love comes back to town. He or she doesn't push into your life, but you know that she or he is near and just waiting for you. How would you react? What would you do?
Now I want you to imagine that you have found the one true love of your life. The more time you spend with this person, the more you love him or her. And then one day, you get some news and you have to leave, now. You don't want to say good-bye because it'd hurt too much and you may not be able to leave at all, but it's very important that you do. So, you go and there's no way to contact the one you love. You're gone for a long time, but each day you think about the person you left. You think about how she or he made you feel. You use that memory to get through each day. Eventually, you make it back and before you have a chance to see the one you love, you learn that he or she has moved on. This person has even fallen in love. How would you react? What would you do?
These, to me, are what Superman Returns is about, at it's heart.
When the movie opens, Superman has been gone for five years (he left sometime after the end of Superman II); he went to explore what he thought were the remains of Krypton. During that time, Lois has had a son, got engaged, and was nominated for a Pulitzer for an editorial called "Why the World Doesn't Need Superman." And Lex Luthor got out of prison because Superman couldn't show up to a trial. The world has moved on with out Superman and has survived.
But he's back. He flies around the world saving as many people as he can. Lois wants to ignore him. And Lex has come up with a way to create his own continent, but will probably kill a couple billion people in the process.
In the end, Superman saves the world. Lex is stuck on an island. And Lois is trying to write an editorial called "Why the World Needs Superman."
For the first half, or two thirds of the movie, I had a grin on my face. From the moment the Superman fanfare started and I saw the original Superman font on the screen, I was giddy. When the words soared toward me, I got chills. This was Superman, the original brought back. This was what my inner fanboy wanted, and I was totally immersed in the action. Then something happened that knocked me right out the movie. It was so jarring that I couldn't get it out of my head for the rest of the film and it made it hard for me to watch the rest. I couldn't settle back into the film because what happened was always on my mind. (I'll describe what it was that shook me out of the movie next week because it's a pretty big spoiler and I don't want to ruin the movie for everyone until a week has gone by. I figure that in that time most of those who were going to see the film in the theater will have seen it. I've actually already written about it so I'd be better able to write this and it's sitting, dated for July 5th.)
Brandon Routh plays a pretty good Superman, but I simply adored his bumbling Clark Kent. From his first walk through the Daily Planet running into people with his suit cases, to his stolen glances at Lois, to his goofy grin and wave, his Clark was wonderful. It's just too bad Clark wasn't in the film that much.
Kate Bosworth as Lois Lane was okay. Sure, she's cute, but I've never thought of her as a great actress. She did the protective mother bit well, although she doesn't look old enough to be the mother of a 5-year old and to have been nominated for a Pulitzer, but that's movie casting for you. Also, I'd have liked to see Lois try and kick some ass. In every incarnation of Lois that I've seen, she at least tries to fight back for a while, but this one didn't. Maybe she thought getting her head smashed in would save her son's life, as opposed to kicking the guy in the knee or balls, I don't know.
Kevin Spacey, as expected, was excellent. His Lex Luthor is darker and less funny than Gene Hackman’s, but they both have that obsession about getting land and aren't worried about who may have to die to get it. Spacey's Lex also seems more intelligent because he goes out of his way (the Arctic is pretty much out of everyone’s way) to learn the secrets of Superman. And I thought what he did to protect himself from Superman on his new bit of land was really clever.
The rest of the cast was really good, too. Although I thought that too often the guy playing Jimmy Olson would speak a bit too loud, but other than that he's the best Jimmy I've seen.
Some of the things that I really liked follow, in no particular order:
- The homage to John Bryne's Man of Steel mini series in the form of the first rescue Superman performs after returning to Earth.
- The reveal of Lex's hobby in the basement.
- Parker Posey's performance as Kitty.
- Seeing the guy who played Cyclops actually get to be a hero in a superhero movie this summer.
- The Fortress of Solitude
- Young Clark enjoying his powers
- The recycled lines from the first movie. (I started laughing at one of them by the third word. The rest of the theater waited until the end. I wondered if they were just being polite or did they not recognize it.)
It's a good movie. It really is. If it weren't for the one thing that really bugged me, but didn't seem to bother anyone else, I'd be headed into the city this weekend to see it on IMAX in 3D. But there was that one thing. However, I'm looking forward to its release on DVD so I can see it again and I think that most people who enjoyed the original movies will like this one, too.
3 comments:
A really good unbiased review.. just love it.
this is an excellent review, telling so much without spoiling anything for those who have not seen the movie yet... and in particular for me who will not see the movie until I find it in a dusty shop on a CD that is hardly working ;-) put a link on my blog to your review like Blog Dog did.
what are you working?? government.... hmmm.... and not a lot to do. isn't it sad that all those prejudices just tend to turn out to be close to truth? I have similar experiences with the UN...
Thanks Blog Dog. To enjoy movies based on comics, though, you shouldn't have to have any knowledge about the comic. How many people out there have seen The Road to Perdition or Ghost World and never knew they are based on comics and still enjoyed them? Probably most people.
Batman, was it really that unbiased? Is it a good thing to be unbiased in a review? I'm curious because whenever I approach a review (whether I'm writing it or I'm reading some else's) I try to remember that it's all based on opinion because I really hated it when I loved (and still love) Joe Versus the Volcano and so many critics thought it was awful.
Yeah, I have a government job, Pumuckl. The problem isn't that the work isn't there, it's that we have way too many people to spread it out between. There are five of us and the work could easily be handled by three. The problem is that if they don't fill all the empty spots and every thing goes smoothly, they'll lose the money to hire the people at a later date after the district has grown and more people are actually needed. The private sector does this as well. Personally, I think it's stupid, but I'm not in charge so I just have to live with it.
Post a Comment