Incompetant script...

You say "NO chemistry between Superman and Lois!"

Well of course look at the idiotic set-up -- Lois has a kid (Bosworth must have started at the Daily Planet at the age of 12) and they giver her a man -- of course she has to be played sexless -- the morons writing this film were trying to maker her a "serious news reporter" which of course means a woman has to be "a man."

This film the more I think it over just keeps getting worse and worse on SO many levels. It's actually insulting which is worse than just being bad.

I also think it's funny that everytime people rave about this film they talk about Perry White -- Perry Who? Who cares? These characters have such puny screen time and ar eone dimensional caricatures that they make almost no impact on the film anyway.

Films like these pivot on the three leads

Reeves, Kidder, Hackman to me did their parts in a much more entertaining memorable way than the dead lifeless Routh, Bosworth, Spacey.

I don't mind them playing this more strait but if you do it strait biy it has to have the acting chops behind it -- and they don't have it here and to be fair the script didn't give them any real opportunity.

This is the reason why I'll take the tongue in cheek Star Wars trilogy (the original three not the "I need more money rubbish prequels) over the one note banal story Lord of the Rings Trilogy. If you have a DOPEY premise and black hat white hat story (The ring is bad don't be corrupted - the force can be bad don't be corrupted) then you had BETTER play this tongue in cheek because then it will be fun -- LOTR failed on the hole for not playing it for fun and because the thread bare story was such banal nonsense and so limited in scope and depth that all it turns into is a good versus evil yarn for an insufferably long 10 hours. Star Wars almost went down the same path but Harrison Ford's Han Solo lifted it from the mire of Buck Rogers - and of course the new ones have no such characters and they play much like LOTR -- banal verbose bores with some special effects and sound editing to provide some spectacle.

I am willing to give comic book movies HUGE benefits of the doubt because I know their limitations -- it's just so sad when they are truly this dull.

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

Follow Ups Full Thread

Topic - Superman Returns - Mr Underhill 11:41:35 07/17/06 (16)

First movie I might have dozed off in. - oscar 14:05:07 07/19/06 (1)

Re: First movie I might have dozed off in. - Vinylized 08:23:51 07/20/06 (0)

Saw it yesterday in 3D at the Bose Imax Theatre. Sure wish I could have had a go at the script... - clarkjohnsen 08:49:18 07/19/06 (7)

Come on, it's based on a comic book...(nt) - mkuller 21:06:20 07/19/06 (0)

Re: Saw it yesterday in 3D at the Bose Imax Theatre. Sure wish I could have had a go at the script... - Wendell Narrod 14:31:23 07/19/06 (2)

Add that to the list. And yes, I've always thought of Lois as somewhat older than Clark. nt - clarkjohnsen 14:42:27 07/19/06 (1)

Terry Hatcher was too old... - RGA 08:41:11 07/20/06 (0)

Sure wish I could have had a go at the script... - Mr Underhill 14:23:22 07/19/06 (2)

Ah! I had not seen S II. But physics doesn't *have* to be disregarded. - clarkjohnsen 14:45:24 07/19/06 (1)

You should see Superman II - RGA 08:47:52 07/20/06 (0)

Well I found it to be just about the worst Superman movie... - RGA 07:15:43 07/19/06 (5)

the worst Superman movie... - Mr Underhill 14:06:11 07/19/06 (2)

Re: the worst Superman movie... - RGA 08:18:02 07/20/06 (1)

Best Superman Film? - Mr Underhill 09:51:25 07/20/06 (0)

Funny...I liked Superman Returns better than the new Pirates movie... - TWB 09:58:58 07/19/06 (1)

Incompetant script... - RGA 08:35:53 07/20/06 (0)

Follow Ups

Incompetant script... - RGA 08:35:53 07/20/06 (0)

You can not post to an archived thread.