Man of Steel is not better than Superman Returns

[phantom1592]

I say this largely as a comparison to "Superman Returns". People say it failed by trying to recreate the feel of the Reeve movies which were allegedly outdated. Um, no. It failed by failing to recreate the magic of the Reeve movies, by deviating too much.

Excellent way to put it. I can't think of a single complaint I had when they were trying to hook up with the Reeve movies... all my complaints were when they took a hard left into 'their own territority' that I felt was insulting to the character.

[dancj]

Just took my best friend's little girl to see "Mary Poppins Returns" Holey Moley. Now THIS is how you do a sequel to an iconic movie. You stay completely true to it, not kind of true but deviate drastically in other ways. This is bordering on impossible, a sequel almost 55 years later that will be accepted and is being accepted as a true sequel. Ironic too since the main character doesn't accept that anything is impossible

I say this largely as a comparison to "Superman Returns". People say it failed by trying to recreate the feel of the Reeve movies which were allegedly outdated. Um, no. It failed by failing to recreate the magic of the Reeve movies, by deviating too much.

I don't know.

Mary Poppins - largely because of its genre - has dated very well, so continuing that in the same fashion can work.

Superman, much as I love it, hasn't dated nearly as well. It puts any film trying to recapture that magic at a big disadvantage. It can either be dated or deviate.

Also, with the exception of Kevin Spacey, it was miscast. Routh was decent (and possibly the best available for the job), but completely lacks Reeves' charisma. There was nothing right about Kate Bosworth's casting.

[brettc1]

How can it?

When the scene between Superman and Lois on top of the daily planet and the flight scene is better than all of Man of Steel combined?

It's a close call. Frankly the stalker vibe in Superman Returns was quite a turn off.

[brettc1]

I say this largely as a comparison to "Superman Returns". People say it failed by trying to recreate the feel of the Reeve movies which were allegedly outdated. Um, no. It failed by failing to recreate the magic of the Reeve movies, by deviating too much.

No, I don't think this is right either.

After all, it pretty much WAS Superman TMP. With the exception of the more love triangle and the kid it was pretty much beat for beat the same movie.

[Powerboy]

No, I don't think this is right either.

After all, it pretty much WAS Superman TMP. With the exception of the more love triangle and the kid it was pretty much beat for beat the same movie.

Yes but the love triangle, the child, the mild stalking and Lex Luthor as vastly more directly vicious created a whole different atmosphere to the movie.

[DochaDocha]

Maybe it's fair to say that Superman Returns failed because trying to emulate the first two Superman movies was already a bad idea, and in the execution to emulate those two movies it also failed, giving us something few of us Superman fans can fondly remember in the years to come. Those who didn't want homage to Reeve were disappointed, and those who did want it were also disappointed.

[JAK]

Maybe it's fair to say that Superman Returns failed because trying to emulate the first two Superman movies was already a bad idea, and in the execution to emulate those two movies it also failed, giving us something few of us Superman fans can fondly remember in the years to come. Those who didn't want homage to Reeve were disappointed, and those who did want it were also disappointed.

I'm not 100% sure, actually. I generally don't like the idea of emulating Donner full-stop, but I do think that taking the general idea of what people remember fondly about the Donnerverse and giving it a slight update (newer but not darker as that negates the whole point) has potential to actually work well with audiences. That's not to say there aren't better ideas - because there absolutely are and I'd prefer them - but I hesitate to say it *could* never work or that it's an unworkable idea on it's face. If that makes any sense?

[Sacred Knight]

I say this largely as a comparison to "Superman Returns". People say it failed by trying to recreate the feel of the Reeve movies which were allegedly outdated. Um, no. It failed by failing to recreate the magic of the Reeve movies, by deviating too much.

Its an interesting theory. It would have been even more not for me personally had they tried extra hard to emulate the originals. But it is an interesting thought to wonder if it would have performed better or worse.

[Lokimaru]

Why would Lex get out of jail cause Superman didn't show up at an appeals court when he was already a wanted fugitive when S:tMP started?

[Jokerz79]

Superman Returns made a respectable box office for 2006 it failed for the same reason Justice League did the Studio spent to much on Budget and Marketing.

[DochaDocha]

Superman Returns made a respectable box office for 2006 it failed for the same reason Justice League did the Studio spent to much on Budget and Marketing.

I've read the real culprit about Superman Returns' disappointing RoI is that the costs for prior, failed Superman projects were added to the total cost of SR. It didn't really cost $200 million on its own.

Otherwise, if you look at it from a marketing and RoI perspective, that's where the movie really disappoints. If you spend a lot of resources trying to get people to watch a movie, and they just don't want to watch the movie, then either the marketing was ineffectual, or the movie was disappointing enough not to generate word-of-mouth. I think SR was a bit of both.

Only reason I watched it was because of the first word in the title. I kept on the Superman Homepage and DC Comics sites to get as much preview of the movie as possible, and almost everything disappointed me. Perhaps I was setting the movie up for failure, but even then I thought it didn't even reach my low expectations.

[manofsteel1979]

Superman Returns failures are not really at all related to how faithfully or unfaithfully it copied the Donner formula/continuity. That film had an uphill battle even before it started filming really. Given the expectations set by the X-Men films and the hype and the accurred costs from the aborted previous versions it had to at least do half a billion worldwide to even be considered as a hit.

Having said that, I still stand by my opinion it was wrong to try and do a sequel in any way to the previous movies, mainly because aside from Chris Reeve's specific performance and John Williams score,those film's just didn't age well nor do they work all that well .The first one is a benchmark when it comes to superheroes on film and comic book adaptations, and I have a great deal of nostalgic affection for the first three Superman films, objectively speaking and removing my nostalgia goggles, they just wouldn't work today. I think even Dick Donner said once that without Chris Reeve, that first movie would not have worked nearly as well.

If Singer had done a straight up sequel to the original film in that style faithfully,it would have still failed, mainly because you don't have the secret sauce that made those old films classics and that is Chris Reeve.

[Powerboy]

Maybe it's fair to say that Superman Returns failed because trying to emulate the first two Superman movies was already a bad idea, and in the execution to emulate those two movies it also failed, giving us something few of us Superman fans can fondly remember in the years to come. Those who didn't want homage to Reeve were disappointed, and those who did want it were also disappointed.

I'd say that sums it up nicely.

[stargazer01]

I'd say that sums it up nicely.

I think SR failed because it wasn't a very good story/script/plot, didn't bring anything really new for modern audiences and it was a very somber film overall (many say boring). it still had a bigger box office than Batman Begins, but the fans didn't embrace it like they did the Nolan movie. the story with his kid and Richard in Lois' life was very problematic too. The writers painted themselves in a corner.

[HeroVladimir93]

I think SR failed because it wasn't a very good story/script/plot, didn't bring anything really new for modern audiences and it was a very somber film overall (many say boring). it still had a bigger box office than Batman Begins, but the fans didn't embrace it like they did the Nolan movie. the story with his kid and Richard in Lois' life was very problematic too. The writers painted themselves in a corner.

That makes me wonder why would they approve this story. What exactly made them think it was a good idea to separate Superman and Lois or portray Superman as a parent out of wedlock? An attempt to modernize the franchise, an interesting new story to explore or just an attempt to be funny? Why would they do something they knew would potentially decrease their customer base?