Favorite modern Superman movie

[Vakanai]

None have really been good enough for me to vote for any one of them, but my thoughts on each are...

Superman Returns has my utmost favorite Superman scene in film ever. As much as I really love fight scenes, for Superman for some reason I'm always more impressed by his rescue scenes than his fight scenes, and by God he's never had a better rescue scene than when he saved the hell out of that plane. That plane rescue hasn't been topped by anything that has come since.

I also never got the deadbeat dad argument. Clark didn't even know he had a kid most of the movie, how can you be considered a deadbeat dad if you didn't even know you were a dad?

That said, much of the movie was a bore. And the tone was all wrong for a Superman film.

Man of Steel has easily the best Superman fight scenes I've seen to date in a live action film. The origin story stuff works. And the Kents act like I would expect from parents worried about their kid's safety would act (never got the criticisms against them). But the somber tone, letting his dad die, and the Zod neck snap, the film just doesn't feel like Superman.

Batman v Superman is easily my favorite film on the list (extended cut, never seen the theatrical version). Unfortunately it's solely for the Batman stuff, none of the Superman scenes. Also, they screwed Lex worse than the real estate Lex versions. So for Supes it is the bottom of the list.

Justice League is the only modern live action film to get Superman's personality right, outside attacking the League which is easily hand waved away by coming back from the dead out of his mind (mostly, him repeating Batman's "do you bleed" line was cringe worthy). But the movie was a mess and CGI whatever with his face.

Take Superman Returns' rescue scene, Man of Steel's fight scenes, and Justice League's personality and you would have the best Superman movie ever. But as it stands, none of them do justice to the character.

[Adekis]

Very interesting that you don't like Superman 2 since many fans seem to think high on it.

I like it, but it has big flaws, IMO. And it's very interesting to see how many fans give those flaws a big pass but they can't give it to other movies like MOS or BvS or SR.. it's funny but also annoying how selective fans can be. I guess it's part of their childhood and they see it with rose-colored glasses.

We definitely can be selective, haha! But I don't begrudge anyone their pop culture nostalgia.

Superman II is interesting because a lot of fans like it a lot more than me. I can complain about Superman the Movie occasionally but it's ultimately all nitpicking done for my own entertainment. Superman II on the other hand first just makes a bunch of choices I don't really think work, and one of which is actually painful. It's not all down to Donner vs. Lester either. I respect what they were trying to do with Superman giving up his powers and all that, but ultimately the fact that he has no idea how to act when he's Clark without powers just bugs me. It's really a phenomenal piece of acting from Reeve, but it also makes it look like without his powers, Clark has literally no idea what he's doing, he's utterly reliant on them. To someone whose idea of a great Superman-with-no-powers story is Hereafter from JLU, Superman II just makes Superman look bad. I don't really care that he goes back to beat up the trucker or whatever, I've seen people argue that it's out of character for Superman to go back for petty revenge, but I never really cared about that, I just cared that he couldn't handle a nobody trucker in the first place. Some of the other, lesser issues include the abandon with which powers Kryptonians don't have in the comics show up, the question of how Clark got back to the Fortress without dying, and a general disregard for Hackman's Columbo-Lex, but ultimately those are lesser concerns compared to the issue of how he acts without powers. Even that, I might be able to look past though. After all, I regard it as a failed experiment, not something awful.

The really big problem with Superman II is the mind-wipe though. Again, I see what they're going for - Superman sacrifices his own happiness in order to protect the world without causing Lois undue pain and stress. It does not help in the slightest. He violates her sanctity of mind without so much as asking for her permission - which obviously she never would have given. It's a truly monstrous, heinous act and it cannot be excused. Superman II has a lot to like )"General, would you care to step outside?"), but that thing in particular stops me from having a good opinion of it as a whole.

(Ironically, I'm quite fond of the much less popular Superman III; I think the Lana Lang plot is far and away the best single thing in the Reeve movies, and the fact that ******* Superman has to fight Regular Clark did a lot to cement the now-popular idea of Clark as Superman's heart, which despite being overblown these days is generally a really good concept. For those elements, I'll sit through Richard Pryor spectacularly failing to live up to his comedy skills.)

Batman v. Superman is the opposite of Superman II for me - a widely hated movie that I really like. Clark's dedication to the vulnerable and marginalized shines through better in that movie than any other (except maybe "Superman and the Mole Men") and because of frustration with systemic apathy to their plight, and fear of unintentionally harming them himself, he feels unsure of himself. I'm generally not a big fan of "Superman quits due to feelings" plots, but I think BvS does a really good job coming up with a complex nexus of believable problems that would make Clark wonder whether he ought to stop, in contrast to comics where it's usually something like "people are treating me like Spider-Man and for some reason I just can't handle it," even in otherwise stellar comics like Birthright or Superman and the Men of Steel. The only real problems with Superman's arc in BvS are that he spends most of it out of his costume, and that Snyder didn't take his time to remind the audience that Clark's not brooding and concerned as a person. I feel quite the same way with Brutal, Murderous-Intent Batman. He's not supposed to be like that all the time, and by the last fight scene, both Bruce and Clark had moved past their respective issues. So Snyder messed up by expecting the audience to be more familiar with the characters and the way he's playing with them than they really were - it's a mistake, but not a damning one.

Also, Lois totally solves the whole mystery by being the greatest ever, so yeah, awesome.

[dancj]

I hated THE GOONIES (I'm probably the only one).

You're not. Goonies is crap.

[Powerboy]

Didn't they all die?

I think SUPERMAN RETURNS left out something. He goes back to Krypton and finds nothing and then comes back--which takes a lot of time, apparently. It's underwhelming to have him go there and then nothing. I think they planned to have something there but cut it from the film. The Return to Krypton story is the one I wanted to see. And I think they could have still doubled back on that for the sequel.

If Superman goes back in time and arrives on Krypton before it explodes--well, there's your movie. They would have had to recast Jor-El, but I wouldn't mind that. And throw Brainiac into the mix as the big bad. Maybe the timeline is changed in the end, so that Superman doesn't have a kid or if he does, it's because he married Lois and never left the Earth.

Honestly, I think the trip to Krypton was just a plot device to get him out of the way so Lois could get married and have a child without him knowing about it. The trip happened, went nowhere and was dismissed because it had served its only purpose.

[DochaDocha]

Honestly, I think the trip to Krypton was just a plot device to get him out of the way so Lois could get married and have a child without him knowing about it. The trip happened, went nowhere and was dismissed because it had served its only purpose.

Sadly true.

Why can't Superman's kids get the Pebble Flintstones treatment, i.e. you meet them when they're born and get to see them grow up?

[stargazer01]

Sadly true.

Why can't Superman's kids get the Pebble Flintstones treatment, i.e. you meet them when they're born and get to see them grow up?

In the movies? I'd love that. I recently saw an old Tarzan movie and he had his preteen son. It was adorable and reminded me of Jon Kent. But I think Superman needs a great solo movie first or 2 and then maybe they can bring the son of Superman story. If done right, it'd be unique in the superhero world.

[stargazer01]

You're not. Goonies is crap.

I love the Goonies!

Yes it's corny but it's such a fun adventure and I love the whole cast.

[stargazer01]

We definitely can be selective, haha! But I don't begrudge anyone their pop culture nostalgia.

Superman II is interesting because a lot of fans like it a lot more than me. I can complain about Superman the Movie occasionally but it's ultimately all nitpicking done for my own entertainment. Superman II on the other hand first just makes a bunch of choices I don't really think work, and one of which is actually painful. It's not all down to Donner vs. Lester either. I respect what they were trying to do with Superman giving up his powers and all that, but ultimately the fact that he has no idea how to act when he's Clark without powers just bugs me. It's really a phenomenal piece of acting from Reeve, but it also makes it look like without his powers, Clark has literally no idea what he's doing, he's utterly reliant on them. To someone whose idea of a great Superman-with-no-powers story is Hereafter from JLU, Superman II just makes Superman look bad. I don't really care that he goes back to beat up the trucker or whatever, I've seen people argue that it's out of character for Superman to go back for petty revenge, but I never really cared about that, I just cared that he couldn't handle a nobody trucker in the first place. Some of the other, lesser issues include the abandon with which powers Kryptonians don't have in the comics show up, the question of how Clark got back to the Fortress without dying, and a general disregard for Hackman's Columbo-Lex, but ultimately those are lesser concerns compared to the issue of how he acts without powers. Even that, I might be able to look past though. After all, I regard it as a failed experiment, not something awful.

The really big problem with Superman II is the mind-wipe though. Again, I see what they're going for - Superman sacrifices his own happiness in order to protect the world without causing Lois undue pain and stress. It does not help in the slightest. He violates her sanctity of mind without so much as asking for her permission - which obviously she never would have given. It's a truly monstrous, heinous act and it cannot be excused. Superman II has a lot to like )"General, would you care to step outside?"), but that thing in particular stops me from having a good opinion of it as a whole.

(Ironically, I'm quite fond of the much less popular Superman III; I think the Lana Lang plot is far and away the best single thing in the Reeve movies, and the fact that ******* Superman has to fight Regular Clark did a lot to cement the now-popular idea of Clark as Superman's heart, which despite being overblown these days is generally a really good concept. For those elements, I'll sit through Richard Pryor spectacularly failing to live up to his comedy skills.)

Batman v. Superman is the opposite of Superman II for me - a widely hated movie that I really like. Clark's dedication to the vulnerable and marginalized shines through better in that movie than any other (except maybe "Superman and the Mole Men") and because of frustration with systemic apathy to their plight, and fear of unintentionally harming them himself, he feels unsure of himself. I'm generally not a big fan of "Superman quits due to feelings" plots, but I think BvS does a really good job coming up with a complex nexus of believable problems that would make Clark wonder whether he ought to stop, in contrast to comics where it's usually something like "people are treating me like Spider-Man and for some reason I just can't handle it," even in otherwise stellar comics like Birthright or Superman and the Men of Steel. The only real problems with Superman's arc in BvS are that he spends most of it out of his costume, and that Snyder didn't take his time to remind the audience that Clark's not brooding and concerned as a person. I feel quite the same way with Brutal, Murderous-Intent Batman. He's not supposed to be like that all the time, and by the last fight scene, both Bruce and Clark had moved past their respective issues. So Snyder messed up by expecting the audience to be more familiar with the characters and the way he's playing with them than they really were - it's a mistake, but not a damning one.

Also, Lois totally solves the whole mystery by being the greatest ever, so yeah, awesome.

Someone said that Superman 4 was a good movie done wrong, and Superman 3 a bad movie done well. I can see that.

yeah, I think the Superman renouncing to his powers to be with Lois is the worst thing he ever did in all the movies. It feels so out of character. It's not like he had been a superhero for so long and felt he deserved some personal time. It wasn't even 5 years... but it's your childhood nostalgia so you forgive it. I didn't care about it when I was a child either, but then I grew up and realized it was wrong. And the mind-wipe is also so wrong. It doesn't matter if he did it out of love. It bothers me that Lois is so weak and can't deal with it like an adult. It's why I prefer Amy Lois because she is more mature and gives Clark more emotional support.

[Starter Set]

You're not. Goonies is crap.

[Adekis]

Someone said that Superman 4 was a good movie done wrong, and Superman 3 a bad movie done well. I can see that.

yeah, I think the Superman renouncing to his powers to be with Lois is the worst thing he ever did in all the movies. It feels so out of character. It's not like he had been a superhero for so long and felt he deserved some personal time. It wasn't even 5 years... but it's your childhood nostalgia so you forgive it. I didn't care about it when I was a child either, but then I grew up and realized it was wrong. And the mind-wipe is also so wrong. It doesn't matter if he did it out of love. It bothers me that Lois is so weak and can't deal with it like an adult. It's why I prefer Amy Lois because she is more mature and gives Clark more emotional support.

I think Superman IV's got a good, solid core (Superman tries to take a stand for global peace and unity, against nuclear weapons, and then has to fight a monster personifying them), and despite his hair it's got a pretty decent Lex. As a movie, it's just too weighed down by the soulless cash-grab elements, exemplified in part by its tendency to remake the worst elements of Superman and Superman II on next to no budget. The remade "Can You Read My Mind" scene looks so much worse than the original, which I'm not super fond of anyway, and Clark once again gets back his powers through an ill-explained plot device. Worst of all, he wreaks havoc with Lois's memory so he can get the benefits of being in a relationship with her without putting in any of the work! Disgusting. Plus I'm not fond of Lex's kid sidekick, or worse, the younger woman who spends half the movie hanging out with Clark because they thought maybe Margot Kidder was getting too old. Double yuck! Couldn't even bring in Annette O'Toole, could they? Bad enough they can't commit to a relationship with Lois successfully, but now Lana's just gone and Lois gets yet another replacement, now one like half her age? Honestly disturbing.

I don't think the problem with the mind-wipe scene in Superman II was Lois. Sure she has a little bit of a breakdown before getting mind-wiped, and yeah Amy Adams' Lois is clearly better in every conceivable way, but having no feelings isn't emotional maturity; Adams' Lois deals with some of the '70s Lois' concerns too ("I just don't know if it's possible... for you to love me and be you,") and she and Clark are able to kind of work around those concerns. Ultimately the blame for Superman II's horrific ending has to lie on Lester's Clark for refusing to engage with her feelings like a human being, instead basically treating her as an object within his control. A Superman II of any quality at all would end with Clark sitting down with Lois and talking out their feelings like adults, and lead into a sequel where they have a relationship not unlike the one in Dawn of Justice or Justice League where they can acknowledge their feelings and talk about them. Instead, the Salkinds tried to hit the reset button and we wound up eventually with basically, three sequels to Superman II, none of which are especially beloved.

I definitely feel the same way as you about Superman giving up his powers in the first place though. It's just irresponsible.

[DochaDocha]

Instead, the Salkinds tried to hit the reset button and we wound up eventually with basically, three sequels to Superman II, none of which are especially beloved.

To be fair, I think a lot of writers stick with the reset button. That's why we have so many origin stories, because once you start to scratch the surface of the character, you don't know where to go.

[dancj]

I love the Goonies!

Yes it's corny but it's such a fun adventure and I love the whole cast.

Meh. I was 13 when I saw it. Maybe that was too old.

[stargazer01]

Meh. I was 13 when I saw it. Maybe that was too old.

I actually watched it first as an adult and really enjoyed it. but then I really enjoy some kids movies.

[stargazer01]

I think Superman IV's got a good, solid core (Superman tries to take a stand for global peace and unity, against nuclear weapons, and then has to fight a monster personifying them), and despite his hair it's got a pretty decent Lex. As a movie, it's just too weighed down by the soulless cash-grab elements, exemplified in part by its tendency to remake the worst elements of Superman and Superman II on next to no budget. The remade "Can You Read My Mind" scene looks so much worse than the original, which I'm not super fond of anyway, and Clark once again gets back his powers through an ill-explained plot device. Worst of all, he wreaks havoc with Lois's memory so he can get the benefits of being in a relationship with her without putting in any of the work! Disgusting. Plus I'm not fond of Lex's kid sidekick, or worse, the younger woman who spends half the movie hanging out with Clark because they thought maybe Margot Kidder was getting too old. Double yuck! Couldn't even bring in Annette O'Toole, could they? Bad enough they can't commit to a relationship with Lois successfully, but now Lana's just gone and Lois gets yet another replacement, now one like half her age? Honestly disturbing.

I don't think the problem with the mind-wipe scene in Superman II was Lois. Sure she has a little bit of a breakdown before getting mind-wiped, and yeah Amy Adams' Lois is clearly better in every conceivable way, but having no feelings isn't emotional maturity; Adams' Lois deals with some of the '70s Lois' concerns too ("I just don't know if it's possible... for you to love me and be you,") and she and Clark are able to kind of work around those concerns. Ultimately the blame for Superman II's horrific ending has to lie on Lester's Clark for refusing to engage with her feelings like a human being, instead basically treating her as an object within his control. A Superman II of any quality at all would end with Clark sitting down with Lois and talking out their feelings like adults, and lead into a sequel where they have a relationship not unlike the one in Dawn of Justice or Justice League where they can acknowledge their feelings and talk about them. Instead, the Salkinds tried to hit the reset button and we wound up eventually with basically, three sequels to Superman II, none of which are especially beloved.

I definitely feel the same way as you about Superman giving up his powers in the first place though. It's just irresponsible.

double post

[stargazer01]

I think Superman IV's got a good, solid core (Superman tries to take a stand for global peace and unity, against nuclear weapons, and then has to fight a monster personifying them), and despite his hair it's got a pretty decent Lex. As a movie, it's just too weighed down by the soulless cash-grab elements, exemplified in part by its tendency to remake the worst elements of Superman and Superman II on next to no budget. The remade "Can You Read My Mind" scene looks so much worse than the original, which I'm not super fond of anyway, and Clark once again gets back his powers through an ill-explained plot device. Worst of all, he wreaks havoc with Lois's memory so he can get the benefits of being in a relationship with her without putting in any of the work! Disgusting. Plus I'm not fond of Lex's kid sidekick, or worse, the younger woman who spends half the movie hanging out with Clark because they thought maybe Margot Kidder was getting too old. Double yuck! Couldn't even bring in Annette O'Toole, could they? Bad enough they can't commit to a relationship with Lois successfully, but now Lana's just gone and Lois gets yet another replacement, now one like half her age? Honestly disturbing.

I don't think the problem with the mind-wipe scene in Superman II was Lois. Sure she has a little bit of a breakdown before getting mind-wiped, and yeah Amy Adams' Lois is clearly better in every conceivable way, but having no feelings isn't emotional maturity; Adams' Lois deals with some of the '70s Lois' concerns too ("I just don't know if it's possible... for you to love me and be you,") and she and Clark are able to kind of work around those concerns. Ultimately the blame for Superman II's horrific ending has to lie on Lester's Clark for refusing to engage with her feelings like a human being, instead basically treating her as an object within his control. A Superman II of any quality at all would end with Clark sitting down with Lois and talking out their feelings like adults, and lead into a sequel where they have a relationship not unlike the one in Dawn of Justice or Justice League where they can acknowledge their feelings and talk about them. Instead, the Salkinds tried to hit the reset button and we wound up eventually with basically, three sequels to Superman II, none of which are especially beloved.

I definitely feel the same way as you about Superman giving up his powers in the first place though. It's just irresponsible.

I guess my problem is the writing in the mind-wipe scene. I guess that's the only thing the writers could come up with to keep Lois and Superman apart, because they couldn't handle them having an more mature relationship in the movies. The way the Lois bathtub scene is written in BvS seems more mature to me.

another example is when Lois tells Clark that she wasn't strong after he died in JL when they are in the cornfield. I like it because it's human to feel weak sometimes while mourning a loved one that died. It felt realistic. Now if Lois stayed weak the rest of her life, then I have a problem. Same with Clark if Lois was the one who died. But feeling really sad and a bit lost after a loved one dies seems reasonable to me.

BTW, I love the 'Can you read my mind' scene.' The original that is. Why can I say, I love romance, and to me that scene feels right, but then I'm a girl. I can totally understand how Lois feels lol.