The new Superman movie hits theatres today. It was scheduled for a June 30th release, but they bumped it up by 3 days. Seeing it tonight would be insane, so I’m going to see it during a Wednesday afternoon matinee. I’ll report back here immediately.
James loves the movie. Roger Ebert doesn’t. I didn’t read Ebert’s entire review, nor do I plan to glance at any other reviews, because I want to see the movie fresh — but comparing Superman Returns to the Christopher Reeve films, Ebert thinks the new film is boring and uninvolving. It must be an awfully dull movie if it’s less exciting than the other Superman movies.
This might be sacrilege to all the big Superman fans out there, but have you watched the original 1978 Superman recently, or its sequel? I enjoyed them when I was a kid, but they don’t hold up to adult scrunity. They are long, slow, and boring. Lois Lane isn’t sexy, Superman is a wuss, Lex Luthor is a joke, not at all menancing, and the films are extemely dated; they don’t hold up well at all. Go ahead and put in the old Superman DVD — and see if you can watch it all the way through without hitting the fast-forward button or taking extended breaks — and tell me if it’s really that great of a film.
I’m looking foward to the new movie. I don’t see how it could not be a better film.
Update (June 28/06): I saw the movie. Click the more link if you want to know what I thought of it.
I could pull a better script out of my ass. So could you. So could just about anyone. It’s astounding that such a lame story was made into a movie. All the actors are more than capable of doing a good job, but they need to be given something to do, and this script offers nothing. Kevin Smith, who wrote a script for Superman that was never made, must be shaking his head at how dumb this movie is. Superman is cool, and everything looks good, but it’s tedious, boring and uninvolving. There’s a scene early in the movie where Superman saves a plane from crashing. It’s the one fun part of the movie. Then there’s another two hours of nothing. Anyway, James gives the movie 3.5. Roger Ebert gives it 2.0. I’m with Roger Ebert on this one.
June 29/06: I just read all of James’s and Ebert’s reviews. James seems to be so in love with Superman already, he doesn’t notice the obvious flaws of the movie. He says there is plenty of action. Not really. Superman saves an airplane from crashing, then does nothing for an hour or so. Then when the action does pick up, it’s pretty slow-going, not exactly what I’d call on the edge of my seat. Even the action scenes are horribly written.
Ebert’s review is more accurate, though he seems to misinterpret a few things and he gives away too much. Rightfully, he points out how stupid Lex Luthor’s big plan for world domination is (there’s a difference between diabolical and just plan dumb). He mentions how there’s hardly any action, which is true; besides the airplane scene, there is other action, but it’s so boring that at one point I actually picked up a magazine and tried reading it there in the dark of the theatre. Eberts says all the characters are miscast. There is where he’s wrong. The actors are good, even the guy who plays Superman. I agree that Superman doesn’t do much talking, but it’s not bad acting. It’s a bad script. The script doesn’t give the actors enough to work with. The actors, as hard as they try, cannot rise above the material. The script sucks. All the special effects (which look good) and all the acting can’t make a shitty script into a good movie.
I think plenty of people, like James, who are already completely in love with Superman won’t notice these flaws, and they’ll love the movie just for the fact that Superman is in it. The rest will likely be unenthralled by the whole thing. I got exicited about seeing this movie, but now that I know how underwhelming the whole thing is, I say save yourself the disappointment and just wait for the DVD.