Superman Returns
I saw the new Superman movie on the weekend, so I'll offer a brief review in the Siskel/Ebert/Roeper format of "thumbs up/thumbs down" (and get well soon Roger - Mr. Ebert is in serious condition after an emergency surgery due to his salivary gland cancer).
Brandon Routh plays the Man of Steel in this long (154 minutes) and often uneven portrayal of the Jewish Canadian icon of Truth Justice and the American Way. Routh seems to channel the definitive Superman - the late Christopher Reeve. He is built with more of Reeve's balletic grace than the earlier, more muscle-bound portrayals of George Reeves and others.
The film is quite satisfying in it's plot progression, taking its time in generating a truly threatening scenario that plausibly endangers Superman's life (not an easy life to endanger, that). Kevin Spacey is terrific Lex Luthor, playing the arch-villain with a glaring menace and a mischievous twinkle in his eye. He takes over an hour of film time to deliver on his plan, but it's time well spent, allowing Superman time to reintegrate his life in Metropolis.
It seems as though director Bryan Singer never decided on the story's pacing - or perhaps decided that it should be paced to ebb and flow erratically. There are scenes that move like the chick-iest chick movie, and others that are as erratic and visually noisy as seizure-inducing Japanamation.
The effects are drop-dead. Absolutely stunning (I saw it in Imax 3d). Not only the flying-strength scenes, but the surrounding weather and all the surrounding area. The bar is set quite high for CGI these days, and this movie really delivers.
What I liked in particular was the serene sense of control in Superman's actions. He floats effortlessly. You feel as though he is totally in control of his actions. Where previous generations - even Chris Reeve's fairly recent efforts - saw the power of the character in the bullet-like power of his motions, the new Superman shows his power through control. In the scen where he is putting down a car, he does it gently, even stopping to pose exactly as in Superman's first comic book (Action Comics #1).
The film asks the question: 'is Superman a savior?' After a five-year absence, even Lois Lane has given up on him. The world, seemingly, does just as well without him.
Which is a notion that is never disproved. Sure, there are great dangers and catastrophic events, but all of them are directly linked to the Man of Steel himself. It's through the power of Krypton that Luthor gets the mojo to make his big move. Without the Superman planet's largesse, Luthor is stuck with the terrestrial weapons that have gotten him exactly nowhere in the past. Even in the much-publicized scene where he saves the aircraft, one must recall that the cause of the plane's misfortune is the Kryptonian technology that would not be an issue if not for Superman himself.
He creates the disasters he rescues us from.
The plot of the recent Fantastic Four movie had the same hole - if they didn't exist there wouldn't be a problem for them to solve. The superior Spider Man movies don't have that issue. The Green Goblin and Dr. Octopus would be a far greater danger if the title character wasn't there to stop them. Spidey himself is an unambiguous good.
But whereas the FF problem is clearly due to sloppy writing, one suspects that Superman's question is a real one. Is he a savior? Do we need a Superman?
This is a somewhat more mature question for a somewhat more mature hero. Even the Lois Lane in this film is a mom with a child and a grown-up live-in relationship. Her guy (Richard White, editor Perry's nephew) is a grown-up guy who is never made to seem ridiculous or superfluous (if you'll excuse the pun). He's clearly the competition for Lois' interest, but the film never takes a cheap shot at him - he isn't a gambler or philanderer and has no characters flaws that would cheapen him in our eyes.
This is no Lois &Clark or Smallville where you wonder whether they'll kiss. You don't quietly root for Lois to see the Superman in Clark and unify the Kent-Lane-Superman triangle. It's a Superman that's grown up the way Superman has in the comics. Pick up a recent issue - it may surprise you.
Perhaps emblematic of this attitude in the film is the image of Lois Lane smoking. In one scene, she takes out her cigarettes and tries to light one. Her lighter goes out a few times, until we see Superman floating off to the side, blowing out the flame. That's cute - but later we see her take out the cigarettes again, and make the decision not to smoke.
Nobody could quit for her. Not even Superman.
Result: thumbs up.
Brandon Routh plays the Man of Steel in this long (154 minutes) and often uneven portrayal of the Jewish Canadian icon of Truth Justice and the American Way. Routh seems to channel the definitive Superman - the late Christopher Reeve. He is built with more of Reeve's balletic grace than the earlier, more muscle-bound portrayals of George Reeves and others.
The film is quite satisfying in it's plot progression, taking its time in generating a truly threatening scenario that plausibly endangers Superman's life (not an easy life to endanger, that). Kevin Spacey is terrific Lex Luthor, playing the arch-villain with a glaring menace and a mischievous twinkle in his eye. He takes over an hour of film time to deliver on his plan, but it's time well spent, allowing Superman time to reintegrate his life in Metropolis.
It seems as though director Bryan Singer never decided on the story's pacing - or perhaps decided that it should be paced to ebb and flow erratically. There are scenes that move like the chick-iest chick movie, and others that are as erratic and visually noisy as seizure-inducing Japanamation.
The effects are drop-dead. Absolutely stunning (I saw it in Imax 3d). Not only the flying-strength scenes, but the surrounding weather and all the surrounding area. The bar is set quite high for CGI these days, and this movie really delivers.
What I liked in particular was the serene sense of control in Superman's actions. He floats effortlessly. You feel as though he is totally in control of his actions. Where previous generations - even Chris Reeve's fairly recent efforts - saw the power of the character in the bullet-like power of his motions, the new Superman shows his power through control. In the scen where he is putting down a car, he does it gently, even stopping to pose exactly as in Superman's first comic book (Action Comics #1).
The film asks the question: 'is Superman a savior?' After a five-year absence, even Lois Lane has given up on him. The world, seemingly, does just as well without him.
Which is a notion that is never disproved. Sure, there are great dangers and catastrophic events, but all of them are directly linked to the Man of Steel himself. It's through the power of Krypton that Luthor gets the mojo to make his big move. Without the Superman planet's largesse, Luthor is stuck with the terrestrial weapons that have gotten him exactly nowhere in the past. Even in the much-publicized scene where he saves the aircraft, one must recall that the cause of the plane's misfortune is the Kryptonian technology that would not be an issue if not for Superman himself.
He creates the disasters he rescues us from.
The plot of the recent Fantastic Four movie had the same hole - if they didn't exist there wouldn't be a problem for them to solve. The superior Spider Man movies don't have that issue. The Green Goblin and Dr. Octopus would be a far greater danger if the title character wasn't there to stop them. Spidey himself is an unambiguous good.
But whereas the FF problem is clearly due to sloppy writing, one suspects that Superman's question is a real one. Is he a savior? Do we need a Superman?
This is a somewhat more mature question for a somewhat more mature hero. Even the Lois Lane in this film is a mom with a child and a grown-up live-in relationship. Her guy (Richard White, editor Perry's nephew) is a grown-up guy who is never made to seem ridiculous or superfluous (if you'll excuse the pun). He's clearly the competition for Lois' interest, but the film never takes a cheap shot at him - he isn't a gambler or philanderer and has no characters flaws that would cheapen him in our eyes.
This is no Lois &Clark or Smallville where you wonder whether they'll kiss. You don't quietly root for Lois to see the Superman in Clark and unify the Kent-Lane-Superman triangle. It's a Superman that's grown up the way Superman has in the comics. Pick up a recent issue - it may surprise you.
Perhaps emblematic of this attitude in the film is the image of Lois Lane smoking. In one scene, she takes out her cigarettes and tries to light one. Her lighter goes out a few times, until we see Superman floating off to the side, blowing out the flame. That's cute - but later we see her take out the cigarettes again, and make the decision not to smoke.
Nobody could quit for her. Not even Superman.
Result: thumbs up.
posted by fiduciary at 3:56 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home