posted
I'm not going to tell you any of the plot, but I will tell you what you want to know.
It felt like a Superman movie. The John Williams theme is all over it, but in new and dramatic ways. The flying looks perfect. Lois does not try to sing. Brandon Routh is believable, as both Superman and Clark Kent. Lois, Perry, Jimmy, all excellent portrayals. Not as campy as the first two movies. Kevin Spacey is a fantastic Luthor. Take Hackman's version, add five years of incarceration and a lot of bitterness. There is some effort made to honor physics, in that things crunch when Superman lifts them. The airplane scene is amazing. The stuff you've seen in the trailers and the excerpts at MSNBC and iTunes and other places? Incomplete, editing versions. You have not yet seen a complete scene. The kid is not annoying or overdone. There are several instances of Superman in iconic poses from famous Superman comics covers or scenes, including the first Action Comics cover. The story is... ok. Not the strongest movie plot I ever heard, but not bad. After a long buildup, kind of an anticlimactic ending. Not a disappointing one, really, just not as action-packed as you might have expected. Possibilities for sequels are everywhere. There is nothing after the credits, no reason to hang around. The movie is dedicated to Christopher and Dana Reeve.
And the most important part - when I left the theater, I felt the way I did after seeing the first Superman movie over 25 years ago. Excited, thrilled, changed. It'll probably wear off faster. I'm more jaded now, more cynical. But for the last two hours and twenty minutes I was 14 again, and I believed a man could fly.
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I loved the movie. I'm grateful they made it.
Lex is done perfectly.
I did not think the ending was anticlimatic. There IS a long denoument, but considering the events of the movie, it's necessary. Singer does wonderful work melding action and drama.
Routh is not only believable as Superman, he's perfect. I don't care whether or not he channel Reeves-- he makes the Superman/Clark role his own.
Of course, the real stars of the film are Spacey and...Singer. Spacey's obvious. Singer is not. Superman is a piece of understandable, entertaining art.
I'm glad that I missed out on sleep to catch the sneak preview. This is a wonderful, valuable movie.
Why did it rate PG-13, though?
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
The pg-13 might be warranted by that scene (vague to avoid spoilers) where some people visciously do something to someone. That was pretty harsh, and could upset young children. Otherwise, I'm not too sure myself.
Like Chris I had a tonne of fun. It was just a great, great movie. Plenty of plot and character interwoven with fun action. "I was going to pretend, Lex!" Plus, there was a minigun.
I'm also hugely interested in the directors cut. Early word is that there will be one, as Singer had to cut some forty minutes of good, useable material, which would have been in there if regular people could have sat through a movie over three hours long.
Finally, has anyone read Roger Ebert's review? The one where he only gives it two stars and says "It would have been fun to give Superman a bright, sassy child, like one of the Spy Kids, and make him a part of the plot." Yeah, for those who haven't seen the movie, I just want you to know that that pretty much seals up the question on whether his tastes are gone. Especially when he gave Fast and the Furious 3 and Garfield 2 three stars.
Posts: 254 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
But then, Ebert has a history of odd views on genre films. He had fond memories of The Lord of the Rings books being mostly angst-free tea parties with Hobbits, for one thing. Thought Jackson added all of the darkness and danger for the films.
Posts: 6689 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
