Firstly, I'm not a Superman fan. Give me Batman any day, Spiderman at a pinch, or the angst of the Xmen series, but Superman was always a step too far. That being said, the original Superman is one of THE films of the 70s. Superbly crafted, brilliantly acted and wonderously put together it combined romance, action, derring do, hissing villains.
Hearing glowing reviews, I happily coughed up my six quid to watch Bryan Singer's take on the man of steel and ... boy was I disappointed. Singer excelled with Xmen, especially the second one, he also made the deft Apt Pupil and the superb Usual Suspects. He's very good at character, and this shows in Superman Returns. The character moments are the very best parts of the film - well, from Routh anyway.
Bosworth is more Lois Lame than Lois Lane. Bring back Margot Kidder's sassy newshack. Heck get Jennifer Jason Lee from the Hudsucker Proxy to show Bosworth how it is done. She was terrible, and a real drag on the film. I just didn't care about her, and the kid - while cute - didn't really do much and I didn't give a stuff about him either. James Marsden, good as Cyclops, was also wasted - there was nothing for him to do and he added absolutely zero to the plot or story overall.
So with the entire Lane household consigned to the "I don't care" bin, what about the rest of the film? Spacey should have been a brilliant Lex Luthor, and indeed in many sequences he is excellent, but he doesn't have that many sequences. Woefully underused, along with Parker Posey, who is turning in a neat line of comical bad girls recently. However neither are particularly well developed, and Lex's continent growing scheme too out-there to really register as a threat to humanity.
So the plot's rubbish, the good actors under-used, the bad actors glaringly obvious, is there anything to like about this film? Yes, Routh. The new boy is excellent as Superman, as perfect a fit to the character as Reeve ever was. Where he is believable as Superman, he is excellent as Clark Kent - the film really becomes fun whenever Kent is on screen.
Outside of Routh, the film is turgid and po-faced. It has no sense of adventure, and no real sense of fun. It is trying to do Batman Begins' trick of making a serious, adult take on a comic book character, but Superman isn't that kind of character. You can't do a moody film about a bloke in blue lycra. It would have been better if they had concentrated on following the Spiderman precedent - ticking all the boxes the comic fans want to see.
I just wish Singer had stayed with the X-men, file this one under big disappointment. "Best entertainment since LOTR"? Puh-lease
Hearing glowing reviews, I happily coughed up my six quid to watch Bryan Singer's take on the man of steel and ... boy was I disappointed. Singer excelled with Xmen, especially the second one, he also made the deft Apt Pupil and the superb Usual Suspects. He's very good at character, and this shows in Superman Returns. The character moments are the very best parts of the film - well, from Routh anyway.
Bosworth is more Lois Lame than Lois Lane. Bring back Margot Kidder's sassy newshack. Heck get Jennifer Jason Lee from the Hudsucker Proxy to show Bosworth how it is done. She was terrible, and a real drag on the film. I just didn't care about her, and the kid - while cute - didn't really do much and I didn't give a stuff about him either. James Marsden, good as Cyclops, was also wasted - there was nothing for him to do and he added absolutely zero to the plot or story overall.
So with the entire Lane household consigned to the "I don't care" bin, what about the rest of the film? Spacey should have been a brilliant Lex Luthor, and indeed in many sequences he is excellent, but he doesn't have that many sequences. Woefully underused, along with Parker Posey, who is turning in a neat line of comical bad girls recently. However neither are particularly well developed, and Lex's continent growing scheme too out-there to really register as a threat to humanity.
So the plot's rubbish, the good actors under-used, the bad actors glaringly obvious, is there anything to like about this film? Yes, Routh. The new boy is excellent as Superman, as perfect a fit to the character as Reeve ever was. Where he is believable as Superman, he is excellent as Clark Kent - the film really becomes fun whenever Kent is on screen.
Outside of Routh, the film is turgid and po-faced. It has no sense of adventure, and no real sense of fun. It is trying to do Batman Begins' trick of making a serious, adult take on a comic book character, but Superman isn't that kind of character. You can't do a moody film about a bloke in blue lycra. It would have been better if they had concentrated on following the Spiderman precedent - ticking all the boxes the comic fans want to see.
I just wish Singer had stayed with the X-men, file this one under big disappointment. "Best entertainment since LOTR"? Puh-lease