Merin's Blog

Merin's Definitive Critique of Superman Returns

(Sat 08/18/2007 07:51pm)
or “It IS Like Donner's Superman – That's WHY It's Good!”

Ok, its been long delayed (and I think somewhat awaited) but here is my Definitive Critique of Superman Returns. I am writing this because I know some people find it hard to understand how I can enjoy this film so much, because I believe some people are missing the point of the film entirely, and because instead of reiterating some of these points over and over again I want to be able to just link to this blog (as I now do with my DC of X3.)

As I often do, let me put forth some of my biases so you can read my critique with them in mind. Knowing ahead of time some of my personal views and thoughts can help you understand what I am seeing in the film and will give you an easier time analyzing my points and critically come to your own conclusions on the validity of what I put forth. We all have our prejudices going into a film, and those notions color how we view it – here are mine that I think are relevant:



I am not a fan of the character Superman, necessarily. I don't like nor dislike him. He's kind of there, like Spider-Man or Batman, for me.
I am a big fan of Richard Donner and of his Superman films. So the feel of that film, his version of Luthor, the wholesomeness of it all – yep, I'm predispositioned in favor of it.
For the most part, I enjoy the idealistic, noble and self-sacrificing hero (especially Super-Hero), and I don't like watching / reading about the anti-hero. I especially dislike watching the criminal / bad guy / betrayer / murderer / thief / gangster / “you get the picture” character depicted as the protagonist of a story.
While I like action, and love super-heroes, I don't need my stories to have big battles. I really don't need my “hero” challenged by a foe his physical match or superior – I don't mind that being part of the story, it can be very entertaining, but I don't need it. My protagonist (even the Super-Hero kind) can have different conflicts and still be in an interesting story (such as dealing with not fitting in, with how to help people without preventing them from taking care of themselves, struggling with restraint and control, etc.)
I like drama at least as much as comedy and action, and I don't think every story needs all elements to be good. I prefer if a story focuses on one element (drama, action, comedy, horror) and only adds the other elements as is natural for the story and not just to try and please a larger audience. The more unnecessary comic relief or over-the-top action tossed into a dramatic story, the worse the product is for me overall.
I like homages. And, having studied history and literature fairly extensively (History Major, English Minor) I know that retelling of old tales and re-imaginings are as old as Homer (Greek story-teller, not the dad on the Simpsons) and a time honored tradition. I like seeing a tale retold in a creative way.

Ok, accepting these biases of mine, we get to the review. I'm going to do this in two main parts – first, I'll go over some elements that I think make this such an excellent film; second, I'll point out some specific moments (some funny, some dramatic) that I believe exemplify why this was one of the best of 2006.

----

To be fair, though, I'm going to briefly list some things that I believe are honest criticisms of the film and then things which I personally felt were bad decisions or poorly executed.

Critiques others make that I find legitimate, whether I agree with them or not:


Too similar to Superman the Movie – right down to Lex Luthor and the land grab plan
Pseudo-Christian Imagery Heavy-handed - Jor-El as God, Kal-El as his son Christ, savior motif, people needing / calling out to him, Lois's intellectual “no need for savior” piece being rescinded due to emotion and faith : some of this is straight from Donner's work, actually
Lois and Clark's son – a contentious story element which easily rubs people the wrong way
Length – the film is indeed one of too many films that suddenly are all cracking the two and a half hour mark (I blame James Cameron, personally)

No film is perfect, and here's what I see as the main flaws of Superman Returns


Lois's Son – I don't hate this aspect of the film, but I feel the story would have been so much stronger and the alienation aspect so much more powerful had the son been Richard's and Clark had to deal with that; I also find the “super-brat” as some call it a bit too cutesy for me
His “Death” - the whole “is he dead” thing was way too long, especially since no one save maybe some very young and very naïve children thought there was even an iota of a chance that Superman was really dead
Superman Lifting the New Krypton Island Into Space – No, actually, I don't have a problem with this story element, I just believe it was poorly shot. I, for one, saw that Clark went deep enough to bring up an undercoating of lead and earth to protect him from the radiation of the kryptonite that allowed him to fly it into space until the growing crystals broke through those layers and weakened him – but you have to be paying attention, know that lead protects him from kryptonite, and make an intuitive leap. That's far more than one should ask of an audience that goes to see Borat and finds Michael Bay films “good.”
Kitty Crying – Not that she was moved by Superman getting the tar beat out of him, I think that's good (if expected) storytelling; its how it was filmed / edited - showing her in several cuts crying, carrying the dog, walking down the steps, as the goons bashed the Man of Steel. It was jarring, poorly put together, and pulls me out of the scene very violently.

----

Honest Critiques and the Flaws I Saw aside, onto why this film is spectacular. We begin with elements, bigger points or themes or aspects of the film that I find so refreshing and endearing.

I want to briefly touch upon the casting. Most of the roles were brilliantly filled, and as such the film is much stronger for that. Specifically I am thinking of -


James Marsden as Richard White– good actor and excellent in the role
Brandon Routh as Clark/Kal-El – looks the part, acts the part, perfect selection to fill Christopher Reeve's shoes.
Sam Huntington as Jimmy Olson – another good actor and is great as Jimmy
Frank Langella as Perry White – a bit subdued but he looks the part
Kevin Spacey as the “Gene Hackman” Lex Luthor – corny and over-the-top as Gene Hackman was.
Parker Posey as Kitty – I've always liked Parker Posey


The concept of the super-hero. In the past many of you will remember me having commented on this before, but bear with me. To me, the term “super-hero” has a specific meaning. I'm pulling this from another blog as I could paraphrase it but I think I said it well enough then: -- A hero, for my purposes, is “someone who does good deeds, is noble and virtuous, and is a role model or the ideal.” A superhero, following, is in this context “someone who does exceeding good deeds above and beyond what a normal hero would, often due to extraordinary abilities or talents that normal people do not have, and is the superior or ultimate example.” -- In this essence, Superman as depicted in this film is, indeed, a “super-hero.” It is not the costume nor the powers that makes him such – it is the selflessness and the efforts he makes, above and beyond those of duty, to help others than make him a “super-hero.” Most of the film shows that, despite not getting any reward and despite no one making him do so, he rescues people and tries to prevent disasters – and those disasters he fails to prevent he does his best to fix. He is a “hero” because he is, as some call him, a “boy scout.” He is “super” because his abilities allow him to help more people and do bigger deeds than others, and because he holds himself to an even higher ideal as a result (the Peter Parker philosophy “with great power” and all that jazz.) This film really shows this, again and again.

Let's talk about action. All good stories need conflict, but conflict can come in many forms. Good movies, especially summer “blockbuster” films, need action. But action can come in many forms, too. Some may watch Superman Returns, not see him punch a single super-villain, and leave bored claiming there was no “action.” Well, there was no “fighting” action, sure – no violence as entertainment. But there IS plenty of action in Superman Returns. Some big moments include the earthquake and all the catastrophes there, the shuttle and plane out of control, and the growing New Krypton Island. These are exciting, edge of your seat moments, all done extremely well, and which when finished leave many (myself in particular) applauding. I was very excited through much of the film, and as such I say there is plenty of action.

But continuing a moment on this concept, there is little violence in the film – comparatively with most “blockbusters” - and what violence is shown is perpetrated by the bad guys. Any real gun play, any beating up people, any damaging of property and causing of danger to others, is caused by people in the film who are clearly the villains. Some may dislike the “black and white” of such things, claiming that in the real world things are more “shades of gray.” While I don't disagree that things in the real world are far more complicated and far less cut-and-dry like a story, I disagree that entertainment needs represent reality. Super-Hero stories, especially, should show a more idealistic view. That's my take on Super-Hero stories, and Superman Returns fits into this mold.

For a bit how about we focus on Lois? I know, there are many who complain about the casting. I'm ignoring that for a moment and instead looking at the character as written and portrayed in the film. A big plus, for me, is how Lois is a positive role-model. Much like Hermione Granger in the Harry Potter novels and films, Lois is one of the few characters in popular fiction that is shown as a positive role-model for intelligence, hard work and research. Lois is shown spending hours doing the hard work of being a competent reporter, and is probably a far better example of a journalist than most shown in film today. Too many stories show luck, inborn (untrained) talent and external artifices (magical items, technological devices, etc) as being more important than diligence, effort, practice and learning.

Sticking with Lois, let's talk about morality. While clearly she loved / loves Superman, she has been with for years and is engaged to Richard White. Despite still loving Superman she stays with Richard. This film doesn't have the too-often-used easy-out for the separated couple of getting back together – the new significant other dying or finding someone else or ending up being a jerk or “bowing out gracefully.” Lois honors her commitment and honestly loves Richard, and this is very unusual for a film of this type.

Following this thread, let's move to Richard White. He's written and acted as a strong, heroic, caring person. He's perfect with and for Lois, understanding of her past and supportive of her. He is a hero, risking himself to save her and to save Superman. Richard is never used merely as a plot device, and in a movie titled Superman and not Nephew of Perry this is very refreshing. Easily the film could have used him as another obstacle, simply one more thing for Clark to overcome. The depth this adds to the story, that he's a real person, as heroic as Clark and as in love with Lois as Clark, is something I really appreciate.

Last for elements of the film that I found good I want to touch upon how Superman Returns is a continuation of Richard Donner's Superman films. As someone who really liked Superman 1 & 2, Singer's love for the films and his desire to honor Donner's work is exactly the direction I'd want Returns to go. When I learned this way back when the plans for the film were being released I got over very bad feelings about this project (the Death of Superman angle, the bad Kevin Smith script and horrible ideas of Silver and Burton, McG, etc.) and was very excited again. From the opening credits and music, to the obvious love for the previous films – the way that Superman Returns played like a refresher of the previous 2 Donner films and yet was its own story – it all worked for me.
The thing to understand about how Returns is crafted, what so many seem unwilling to even try to see, is that Returns is not truly a remake of Superman the Movie, not really a true sequel, but something of a hybrid of both. It takes the pacing and themes of the first two movies (really, mostly the first one), how the characters were written and such, and used that as a basis for a “new” movie that continued the tradition of the Donner films. As a result it feels like a remake at times, like a sequel at others, but never truly like either entirely. And that, at least for me and others who loved it, worked. How many times was King Arthur told and retold during centuries in Europe, or Robin Hood? How many anime series have several versions, from feature film version to OVA version to tv series version, all the same but all different? How many properties have book / comic book / movie / tv series / radio series versions like Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy? This isn't a bad thing, nor a new thing, to do. It can be done poorly (the comic version of Neverwhere or the Bay movie of Transformers, in my opinion) or well (X-Men Evolution cartoon , comic version of Anita Blake, in my opinion.) Whether someone personally likes this kind of thing or not doesn't mean it, alone, marks a good or bad movie. I happen to like it, and I happen to think this is a great example of this done in a compelling and somewhat unique way.

----

Now, the second part in which I look at specific moments in the film Superman Returns; moments that, for me, help make this an excellent movie.

First I'd to speak about some scenes I'm going to refer to as “Iconic Imagery.” These scenes either harken to classic panels or covers of the comic series, do a beautiful job of in one shot or moment depicting a central location or event, or just look so stunning that they could be a dramatic painting hanging on a wall. These are just a few of the many in the film.


At the beginning there is Krypton exploding. This is shown very well, and I'm glad to see it in the film as it is so crucial to the character of Superman.
The visual of the Kent farm before Clark's ship lands. It is a gorgeous scene and Clark's childhood home is such an important part of who he is.
The scene of Superman in space, listening to all the cries for help. It is such a powerful, cinematic moment in a film full of such moments. It lays into how “above” and “beyond” he is from humanity, and yet how much he cares and wants to be part of it.
Superman lowering Kitty's car. One of the classic covers of Superman comics!
After being rescued from the ocean, Superman flies up into space to recharge in the sunlight. Another stunning visual, full of imagery.
After carrying the New Krypton Island into space, he falls. The effort he put forth, the risk, and then his sudden descent is very intense. While never in this film does the typical view REALLY worry for Superman, its at this point, after beaten, stabbed with kryptonite, and so close to large amounts of kryptonite that we ALMOST think he might have had it. Its a great moment visually, and the fall after being stabbed in the side and carrying away the worries of the world is a very archetypal moment.

Speaking of powerful cinematic moments – there is in Superman Returns a scene that is arguably the best of the whole year of 2006 in film. I speak of the plummeting plane and Superman's attempts at stopping it from crashing. You get to feel how his speed and strength might not be enough, with the weakness of the plane's structure and the momentum it is falling at being more difficulties than even the Man of Steel might be able to overcome. The wing ripping off, the plane heading to crash into a crowded baseball stadium – this is excellent action and suspense that has nothing to do with beating up someone or shooting someone. This is heroics. This is a job for Superman! When he lands in the stadium, just stopping the plane and setting it down . . . when the people in the stadium cheer, I know that many in the theater both times I saw it were cheering and applauding as well. I know I did both times. You don't get this kind of moment in many films.

I'm going to close out with one last list – this one of very humorous moments that made me chuckle or laugh out loud even the fourth time I saw it. These are, for the most part, appropriate moments for humor in the same vein that Shakespeare would use humor as a bridge between dramatic or tragic scenes.


After the plane is set down in the stadium Lois faints and falls down the rescue slide.
When Lex is testing a piece of crystal at the model train set and the water starts bubbling he steps back, leaving his lackeys behind. Classic movie Luthor, and very funny!
Lois's son running around with the trash can on his head. Ok, I should find this annoying, but it gets funnier every time I see it.
Speaking of the kid, when he looks up at Clark and up at Superman on the screen and you see in his eyes that he makes the connection.
Lois and Richard discussing how Clark is about the same height as Superman, and Clark (listening in) tries to look all clumsy and unimposing.
Clark, upon hearing Lois is engaged, breaks the picture frame he was holding.
Hearing of Luthor's freedom and how Superman's not being at the trial basically set the man free, Jimmy says “How much do you think that pisses off Superman?” and Clark responds “Very much.” or some such.
After Superman rescues Kitty from the runaway car, Kitty goes back to Lex on the boat. She strides right over to him and slaps him and says “I was going to PRETEND the brakes were out!” Hysterical!
Spacey being so super-corny when he says “Go on, say it”, Lois responds “You're insane,” Lex laughs and says “No, no, the other one,” and then yells at her before she can finish “Superman will stop you.” Kind of silly, but still funny. If you find this goofy kind of Lex amusing, which I do.
Lex and Kitty stuck on that island. The whole scene is humorous!

----

I really enjoyed Superman Returns. I continued to enjoy it each time I saw it. This was my kind of Super-Hero film, much more so than X-Men: The Last Stand (which was a sci-fi / action film, not truly a Super-Hero film, in my opinion.) I believe Singer did an excellent job, well enough that I forgive him letting X3 be made as the gigantic steaming pile of dog puke it turned out to be. What could easily have been a film so much as bad as X3 (for example, if Burton had directed that horrible Kevin Smith script (sorry Silent Bob)) was one of the films that saved 2006 for me.

People wanted to see Superman bashing on some super-strong villains, just like they wanted to in The Hulk. I get it. I don't need that, and I feel that the more of that you put in a film the worse the film becomes. If that is what you need from a Super-Hero film, then you and I don't really see eye to eye and my review will probably seem like incoherent non-sense. I can't help you if all you wanted was an hour of Doomsday and Superman slugging it out – save the upcoming cartoon (possibly) you are most likely not ever going to get that. I don't want that personally. You and I, therefore, want something different from a film.

Those who can enjoy action without violence, heroes without bashing of villains, retellings and homages – I think you might see much in my Critique that you understand, even if you didn't like Superman Returns. Maybe, even, you can think about the film and see it in a different light – that, for what I think the film was trying to do, it succeeded at. It is even possible that, upon another viewing with these thoughts in mind, you might agree the film is better than you initially thought – perhaps even one you can appreciate with a new perspective.

If nothing else, however, I hope I've shown amply why it is I really like Superman Returns. Mostly this is for me to be able to point back to and say “I said it all over here, read if you like” instead of reiterating the same points again and again. It also serves as a way for those who care to get a broader scope of my views on the film Superman Returns, and what it is I like in my Super-Hero films. Even if you still end up disagreeing with me, it is my wish that we can come to both understand why it is we disagree about about which parts in a way that we can get along and continue to discuss movies in a productive way together.

Thanks for reading, and for those who were waiting – sorry for the long delay!

League of Extraordinary Gentlemen

(Mon 08/13/2007 04:17pm)
I finally found an Alan Moore comic I really like!  After being disappointed with Watchmen, let down by V for Vendetta, bored by both From Hell and Lost Girls . . .

LoEG really did grab me from the beginning and made me rush out to buy the second volume.

I'm glad I liked something by Moore - I really don't want to be on the outside of enjoying stuff everyone else seems to.  I'm just not going to like it for that reason alone.

LoEG was a good read.  Maybe, with Snyder working on a Watchmen film, I'll try and give that book another go.