Register  |   Log In  |  
Sign up to our weekly newsletter    
Follow us on   
Search   
Forum Home Register for Free! Log In Moderator Tickets FAQ Users Online

RE: Superman Returns (2006)

 
Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews >> RE: Superman Returns (2006) Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Superman Returns (2006) - 15/10/2006 12:27:29 AM   
Alistair

 

Posts: 2397
Joined: 1/10/2005
quote:

ORIGINAL: Timon


I can't believe the amount of grief Singer seems to be receiving for daring to make Superman more than a simple action film.


I agree. I think that blockbusters, over the years, have been consistently marketed as being spectacle films that people believe will blow them away. While Superman Returns certainly had its fair share of spectacle, I think people's perception of what the film was going to be was completely misjudged.

Singer made a soulful film with so many beautiful, iconic moments it's difficult to list them.

Fans seemed to dismiss it because there was a lack of super villain (not the way to go when you're re-starting a series of films) and the internet reaction was decidedly mixed.

Superman Returns is one of the greatest blockbuster films ever made in my opinion. If I had made that statement when the film was at the peak of its hype then fair enough, it would probably be a hype-influenced opinion. But having seen it three times when it was released, and having had time to think about it, I just think Singer did a superb job.

< Message edited by Alistair -- 15/10/2006 12:31:54 AM >


_____________________________

Yesterday is history, tomorrow is a mystery. Today is a gift...that's why they call it the present.

(in reply to Timon)
Post #: 91
RE: Superman Returns (2006) - 16/10/2006 5:23:42 PM   
Anne Hedley


Posts: 597
Joined: 31/1/2006
From: BEDFORDSHIRE
quote:

ORIGINAL: Alistair

quote:

ORIGINAL: Timon


I can't believe the amount of grief Singer seems to be receiving for daring to make Superman more than a simple action film.


I agree. I think that blockbusters, over the years, have been consistently marketed as being spectacle films that people believe will blow them away. While Superman Returns certainly had its fair share of spectacle, I think people's perception of what the film was going to be was completely misjudged.

Singer made a soulful film with so many beautiful, iconic moments it's difficult to list them.

Fans seemed to dismiss it because there was a lack of super villain (not the way to go when you're re-starting a series of films) and the internet reaction was decidedly mixed.

Superman Returns is one of the greatest blockbuster films ever made in my opinion. If I had made that statement when the film was at the peak of its hype then fair enough, it would probably be a hype-influenced opinion. But having seen it three times when it was released, and having had time to think about it, I just think Singer did a superb job.


I don't really think it was dismissed because of lack of a super villain I think that Superman should have rested on its laurels after Christopher Reeve.    It is not the type of film to show soulful and iconicimoments  - and beauty should nearly always be accepted
 
My own opinion is that the X Men franchise is the best of all to date but even it had difficulty in getting the fans to accept the raw human emotions that were threaded into the film   - personalluy I thought it was a wonderful idea.  You then become personally involved
 
But you know what they say   - you can please some of the folk some of the time but not all of the folk all the time !

(in reply to Alistair)
Post #: 92
RE: Superman Returns (2006) - 19/10/2006 2:49:29 AM   
Alistair

 

Posts: 2397
Joined: 1/10/2005
quote:

ORIGINAL: Anne Hedley

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alistair

quote:

ORIGINAL: Timon


I can't believe the amount of grief Singer seems to be receiving for daring to make Superman more than a simple action film.


I agree. I think that blockbusters, over the years, have been consistently marketed as being spectacle films that people believe will blow them away. While Superman Returns certainly had its fair share of spectacle, I think people's perception of what the film was going to be was completely misjudged.

Singer made a soulful film with so many beautiful, iconic moments it's difficult to list them.

Fans seemed to dismiss it because there was a lack of super villain (not the way to go when you're re-starting a series of films) and the internet reaction was decidedly mixed.

Superman Returns is one of the greatest blockbuster films ever made in my opinion. If I had made that statement when the film was at the peak of its hype then fair enough, it would probably be a hype-influenced opinion. But having seen it three times when it was released, and having had time to think about it, I just think Singer did a superb job.


(Superman Returns) Is not the type of film to show soulful and iconic moments.
 


Superman Returns is exactly the kind of film that should and did portray some of the most iconic imagery of any comic book film to date. It's these moments that lifted it beyond mere superhero movie (with the exception of some scenes in Batman Begins).
Superman Returns was a success in my eyes because it had soul. Something lacking from the vast majority of 'blockbusters'.

Also if you read my initial post, the 'dismissing' comment was mentioned from the fans' point of view. I frequent the SuperHeroHype forums, and one of the major disappointments for a lot of the Superman fans was that Lex Luthor was the main villain...again.

To say that a Superman film should not have soulful or iconic moments is quite an odd comment to make, actually. Without these the film would be nothing.

< Message edited by Alistair -- 19/10/2006 2:52:41 AM >


_____________________________

Yesterday is history, tomorrow is a mystery. Today is a gift...that's why they call it the present.

(in reply to Anne Hedley)
Post #: 93
RE: Superman Returns (2006) - 19/10/2006 11:57:35 AM   
Hobbes79


Posts: 1180
Joined: 12/3/2006
From: Glasgow
I couldn't have said it better myself Alistair.

For me SR was a huge success. I admit that to have a little more action would have been desirable, but I also love the fact that SR was clearly a huge labour of love for Singer, and it clearly shows. The fact that he has said that he would like to go all "Wrath of Khan" with a sequel (let's hope) really does excite me.

(in reply to Alistair)
Post #: 94
RE: Superman Returns (2006) - 3/11/2006 3:53:49 PM   
Mason Verger


Posts: 4724
Joined: 13/1/2006
From: Bombing the storage depots at Daiquiri
"I realize that science fiction does require you frequently to swallow a bit of the implausible, but it's really hard to gulp down the implausible not only when it comes so frequently, but when the incredulity you are asked to swallow is made up of pieces too big to even get in your mouth."

What he said.





< Message edited by Mason Verger -- 3/11/2006 3:56:00 PM >


_____________________________

Mind like parachute - only function when open.

Be excellent to each other.

(in reply to Hobbes79)
Post #: 95
RE: Superman Returns (2006) - 3/11/2006 5:50:20 PM   
porntrooper

 

Posts: 2616
Joined: 6/9/2006
From: Sheffield
I love Superman Returns.  Really good way to bring back The Man Of Steel.  Let's not forget, we almost got McG and Brett Ratner directing this. . . with Lex as an alien no less!  Fuck that!

Singer did the right thing, he made a soulful superhero movie, brought back the characters we love and can now get on with a more amped up sequel.  I see it like the original X Men film.  He set up our characters, invested in them rather than huge set pieces and that made the eventual action overload in the sequel much easier to get involved with.  I for one can't wait for Superman Returns. . er 2.

_____________________________

"I've got an idea for a special infiltration technique. It involves draining a man of his blood and replacing it with Tizer."

(in reply to Mason Verger)
Post #: 96
RE: Superman Returns (2006) - 3/11/2006 6:07:38 PM   
sanchia


Posts: 18336
Joined: 3/1/2006
From: Norwich
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mason Verger

"I realize that science fiction does require you frequently to swallow a bit of the implausible, but it's really hard to gulp down the implausible not only when it comes so frequently, but when the incredulity you are asked to swallow is made up of pieces too big to even get in your mouth."

What he said.






I like that

Got to agree it is definitely a better film than the proposed McG abomination with the living supersuit and Kryptonions waging a covert war with Earth through their main kryptonion on Earth FBI agent Lex Luthor. Although Superchild is a close runner.

< Message edited by sanchia -- 3/11/2006 6:09:15 PM >


_____________________________

Nothing to see here.



(in reply to Mason Verger)
Post #: 97
RE: Superman Returns (2006) - 3/11/2006 7:54:59 PM   
furrybastard

 

Posts: 5191
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Ireland
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mason Verger

"I realize that science fiction does require you frequently to swallow a bit of the implausible, but it's really hard to gulp down the implausible not only when it comes so frequently, but when the incredulity you are asked to swallow is made up of pieces too big to even get in your mouth."

What he said.



Have you ever anything to say yourself or do you always just copy and paste other peoples arguments in place of your own?

I don't see how that applies to SR. If anything, it's more "realistic" than films like Spider-Man or even the previous Reeves-era Superman films. I don't think Singer was ever trying to make it completely plausible (the title really gives it away, after all); it's as much to do with spectacle and symbolism as a narrative steeped in gritty realism. I don't see what was so incredulous that a mild suspension of disbelief couldn't handle.

(in reply to Mason Verger)
Post #: 98
RE: Superman Returns (2006) - 3/11/2006 9:45:16 PM   
bozo


Posts: 2513
Joined: 1/11/2006
From: HM Prison Slade
exactly. I just don't see why people spend so much time searching for plot holes and continuity mistakes and why his cape is wrinkled by the wind in airless space and etc. Every fantasy requires you to leave your microscope at home.
On the other hand when the fuck-ups are too many or too in-your-face, I admit it is annoying. Prime example - Armageddon.
But Superman Returns is pure cinema. The film has warmth. It is probably not the sharpest knife in the drawer, but for that go and see a Lynch.

(in reply to furrybastard)
Post #: 99
RE: Superman Returns (2006) - 3/11/2006 11:07:02 PM   
pettsy

 

Posts: 5969
Joined: 30/9/2005
Superman isn't exactly steeped in reality.  In fact I have to admit he's not one of my favourite comic-book characters, he's essentially a superpowered Boy Scout.  Despite all this, I really liked Superman Returns.  I saw it twice at the cinema (a real rarity these days) and loved it both times.  The only criticism I have is the same as other people...it is a bit action-light.  But so was the first X-Men film, and look what followed that.  Have faith, Singer will come good (or rather, even better) with the sequel.
 
quote:

Alistair

 
Superman Returns is exactly the kind of film that should and did portray some of the most iconic imagery of any comic book film to date.


Spot on.  Especially that bit when he rises above the clouds to the sun....Wow.

(in reply to bozo)
Post #: 100
RE: Superman Returns (2006) - 3/11/2006 11:53:47 PM   
bozo


Posts: 2513
Joined: 1/11/2006
From: HM Prison Slade
quote:

ORIGINAL: pettsy

The only criticism I have is the same as other people...it is a bit action-light.  But so was the first X-Men film, and look what followed that.  Have faith, Singer will come good (or rather, even better) with the sequel.
 


Erm... I like the first X-Men better than the second. I suppose I like a-bit-action-light films.  

(in reply to pettsy)
Post #: 101
RE: Superman Returns (2006) - 4/11/2006 9:50:40 AM   
BatFan


Posts: 2124
Joined: 27/7/2006
I love this movie to bits. And one of the reasons I think that people didn't like it was that it was The Phantom Menace. Not in terms of quality, but in terms of hype and anticipation. Everyone was probally thinking in their head for the 20 or so years between superman 4 and returns what their dream superman film could be. And obviously throughout those 20 years that dream film became grander and grander and that movie could not be made. It was kinda handy for me that I only saw Superman 1 and 2 a couple of months before Returns so I had anticipation but not 20 years worth.
I agree with the above posters that this was a great Superhero film with heart. And I have faith that Singer will deliver with a film as good as or better when the sequel comes along.
Also I think that Lex will probally be in it but like Superman 2 where he is the secondary villian. The main villian will be this alien creature. I hoping that Darkseid will be saved for the final Superman film, whichever one that may be. Because he is El Grande in terms of Superman villians. So maybe Brainiac in the next one accompanied by either Doomsday or Metallo if they choose to make Brainiac more of a cerebral villian than a physical one.

< Message edited by BatFan -- 4/11/2006 9:52:02 AM >


_____________________________

"You are in hell, little man! And I am the devil!"
"You're not the devil. You're practice"

(in reply to bozo)
Post #: 102
RE: Superman Returns (2006) - 4/11/2006 2:55:26 PM   
bozo


Posts: 2513
Joined: 1/11/2006
From: HM Prison Slade
Yeah, I really think they should pick a villain who can kick Supes' arse (or at least try). A physical threat.

(in reply to BatFan)
Post #: 103
RE: Superman Returns (2006) - 4/11/2006 7:19:58 PM   
Anne Hedley


Posts: 597
Joined: 31/1/2006
From: BEDFORDSHIRE
quote:

ORIGINAL: porntrooper

I love Superman Returns.  Really good way to bring back The Man Of Steel.  Let's not forget, we almost got McG and Brett Ratner directing this. . . with Lex as an alien no less!  Fuck that!

Singer did the right thing, he made a soulful superhero movie, brought back the characters we love and can now get on with a more amped up sequel.  I see it like the original X Men film.  He set up our characters, invested in them rather than huge set pieces and that made the eventual action overload in the sequel much easier to get involved with.  I for one can't wait for Superman Returns. . er 2.


I think that they should have left Superman alone after Christopher Reeve really made the role is own.   Superman Returns did not do too well in  the charts - which does matter.  So I would say that perhaps the film was not that good and let's not forget the pressure that Brett Ratner was put under when Singer and Vaughan dropped out  of X Men 3 The Last Stand - and this film did make mega bucks world wide.   So never mind the 'F' word the proof of the pudding is in the eating.  Unfortunately Mr Singer did not make the grade with the Superman film and I believe he has just jumped ship yet again on another film.   Pity really had he finished the job he started it woudl have been a job well done  -  may be

(in reply to porntrooper)
Post #: 104
RE: Superman Returns (2006) - 4/11/2006 7:33:41 PM   
furrybastard

 

Posts: 5191
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Ireland
 That's an incredibly weak argument. Box office does not equate with quality.

A huge reason for X3's initial gross was the fact that the previous film was so acclaimed. Reviews - from critics and fans alike - of X3 were mostly negative.

And Superman Returns $400 million dollar take is hardly bad. It underperformed, yes, but in no way is that amount of money considered a failure. Taking into account the estimated $70 million of development over the last 15 years, and the hefty takings from both merchandise tie-ins and peripheral related products like the comics, the film has made a profit (both Singer and the studio have said this).

How well it did financially is ultimately irrelevant. We're talking about the quality of the movie here; something Superman Returns excels in.

(in reply to Anne Hedley)
Post #: 105
RE: Superman Returns (2006) - 4/11/2006 8:19:02 PM   
bozo


Posts: 2513
Joined: 1/11/2006
From: HM Prison Slade
The fact that Superman Returns underperformed at the box office DOES NOT IN ANY WAY PROVE IT'S A BAD FILM.
The list of underperforming films throughout Hollywood history is filled with cult classics, like Brazil (any Gilliam, really), The Shawshank Redemption (if we're talking cinema gross), Fight Club and more and more and more.
Actually almost all of my top 10 films underperformed box office wise. Maybe it's a proof of quality?

(in reply to furrybastard)
Post #: 106
RE: Superman Returns (2006) - 5/11/2006 1:53:52 PM   
Mason Verger


Posts: 4724
Joined: 13/1/2006
From: Bombing the storage depots at Daiquiri
[/quote]

Have you ever anything to say yourself or do you always just copy and paste other peoples arguments in place of your own?

[/quote]

Yes!



_____________________________

Mind like parachute - only function when open.

Be excellent to each other.

(in reply to furrybastard)
Post #: 107
RE: Superman Returns (2006) - 5/11/2006 2:40:52 PM   
sanchia


Posts: 18336
Joined: 3/1/2006
From: Norwich
quote:

ORIGINAL: bozo

The fact that Superman Returns underperformed at the box office DOES NOT IN ANY WAY PROVE IT'S A BAD FILM.
The list of underperforming films throughout Hollywood history is filled with cult classics, like Brazil (any Gilliam, really), The Shawshank Redemption (if we're talking cinema gross), Fight Club and more and more and more.
Actually almost all of my top 10 films underperformed box office wise. Maybe it's a proof of quality?


I don't find it a bad film but I do feel that it does not deserve anywhere near the reverence it seems to be getting.  One thing that can be said about it is that almost as many people don't really rate it or hate is as seem to really enjoy it or love it.  It is a film which has truly divided the audience which surely a great and truly brilliant film what not do to this degree.  There are always haters of even great films but this film has the most apparent dislike aimed at it that I have seen and at the same time the most fervent fans. Of course it may just be that people see different things in it or gain a connection where others do not.

Of course it might be my cynicism as this film is the one which inspired my "Is cynicism the bane of the moviegoer" thread on movie musings.

_____________________________

Nothing to see here.



(in reply to bozo)
Post #: 108
RE: Superman Returns (2006) - 5/11/2006 5:38:04 PM   
bozo


Posts: 2513
Joined: 1/11/2006
From: HM Prison Slade
You're right about the dividing part - I haven't seen so many 'greatest film ever' and 'worst film ever' reviews of the same film since Signs.
The funny thing is that I loved Signs as well...
I really think only truly great films can cause such blatant discrepancies in opinion.  

(in reply to sanchia)
Post #: 109
RE: Superman Returns (2006) - 5/11/2006 6:26:15 PM   
Axel Foley


Posts: 731
Joined: 15/10/2005
quote:

ORIGINAL: furrybastard

Reviews - from critics and fans alike - of X3 were mostly negative.


I agree with all your other points, but that isn't wholly true - both Superman Returns and X3 rate a 7.0 on IMDB, and reviews for each film are mixed, so fan opinions were pretty split.

I do feel your earlier point is the key though as people have missed the fact Singer was making an allegorical film, both in terms of its politics -  a caring hero - and religious symbolism. The action is fantastic when it comes, but I got as much pleasure from seeing Superman speeding through the sky, before stopping Christ like to glide back to earth.

And Anne last time you commented on SR you mentioned you hadn't seen it as yet, has this situation been rectified? Ultimately SR didn't do badly at the box office, as furrybastard pointed out. As with King Kong expectations were raised to ridiculous levels, but both films more or less made back their budgets. DVD and TV rights are still to come.

< Message edited by Axel Foley -- 5/11/2006 6:28:15 PM >


_____________________________

https://twitter.com/Obiwan_desouza

(in reply to furrybastard)
Post #: 110
RE: Superman Returns (2006) - 5/11/2006 8:41:20 PM   
furrybastard

 

Posts: 5191
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Ireland
quote:

ORIGINAL: Axel Foley

quote:

ORIGINAL: furrybastard

Reviews - from critics and fans alike - of X3 were mostly negative.


I agree with all your other points, but that isn't wholly true - both Superman Returns and X3 rate a 7.0 on IMDB, and reviews for each film are mixed, so fan opinions were pretty split.


I stand corrected

I know SR proved divisive amongst cinema-goers but the reviews I'd seen (from respectable, non-tabloid areas) were pretty much on the positive side. Apart from a few on this forum, I saw very little positivity towards X3 both in terms of critics and the general concensus I gathered from others. However I'll take your word for it on this as I didn't exactly go scouting around the net before making that comment and based it mostly on my own impressions.

It's funny how most topics concerning SR seem to eventually descend into a grudge match between it and X3.

I agree with your point about raised expectations though I always felt both Warners and internet-folk overestimated the general audience's desire for another Superman movie. I made the point before the film was released that while Superman is arguably the most famous comic book character, he is by no means the most popular. While I felt Superman Returns was the best blockbuster I'd seen in years and a beautiful, inspiring film to boot I was a bit surprised that so many people thought it would be as huge an earner as Pirates 2. It deserved to be but then, those films which deserve such commercial success are rarely those who receive it.

(in reply to Axel Foley)
Post #: 111
RE: Superman Returns (2006) - 5/11/2006 9:17:57 PM   
sanchia


Posts: 18336
Joined: 3/1/2006
From: Norwich
Got to agree with furry X3 and SR are different beasts.  The one connecting thread is Singerand even that is a tenuous link and they cannot really be compared in that there was different history to the productions different budgets etc.

< Message edited by sanchia -- 5/11/2006 9:23:29 PM >


_____________________________

Nothing to see here.



(in reply to furrybastard)
Post #: 112
RE: Superman Returns (2006) - 5/11/2006 11:32:59 PM   
bozo


Posts: 2513
Joined: 1/11/2006
From: HM Prison Slade
quote:

ORIGINAL: furrybastard

[While I felt Superman Returns was the best blockbuster I'd seen in years and a beautiful, inspiring film to boot I was a bit surprised that so many people thought it would be as huge an earner as Pirates 2. It deserved to be but then, those films which deserve such commercial success are rarely those who receive it.



so true

(in reply to furrybastard)
Post #: 113
RE: Superman Returns (2006) - 6/11/2006 11:33:31 PM   
Anne Hedley


Posts: 597
Joined: 31/1/2006
From: BEDFORDSHIRE
quote:

ORIGINAL: sanchia

quote:

ORIGINAL: bozo

The fact that Superman Returns underperformed at the box office DOES NOT IN ANY WAY PROVE IT'S A BAD FILM.
The list of underperforming films throughout Hollywood history is filled with cult classics, like Brazil (any Gilliam, really), The Shawshank Redemption (if we're talking cinema gross), Fight Club and more and more and more.
Actually almost all of my top 10 films underperformed box office wise. Maybe it's a proof of quality?


I don't find it a bad film but I do feel that it does not deserve anywhere near the reverence it seems to be getting.  One thing that can be said about it is that almost as many people don't really rate it or hate is as seem to really enjoy it or love it.  It is a film which has truly divided the audience which surely a great and truly brilliant film what not do to this degree.  There are always haters of even great films but this film has the most apparent dislike aimed at it that I have seen and at the same time the most fervent fans. Of course it may just be that people see different things in it or gain a connection where others do not.

Of course it might be my cynicism as this film is the one which inspired my "Is cynicism the bane of the moviegoer" thread on movie musings.


I think you are right but I would go a step further and saythat Superman should have been left alone so we could remember the best Superman of Christopher Reeve and it certainly did not have the panache from Singer as he did in the first X Men films

(in reply to sanchia)
Post #: 114
RE: Superman Returns (2006) - 7/11/2006 8:26:47 PM   
bozo


Posts: 2513
Joined: 1/11/2006
From: HM Prison Slade
quote:

ORIGINAL: Anne Hedley

quote:

ORIGINAL: sanchia

quote:

ORIGINAL: bozo

The fact that Superman Returns underperformed at the box office DOES NOT IN ANY WAY PROVE IT'S A BAD FILM.
The list of underperforming films throughout Hollywood history is filled with cult classics, like Brazil (any Gilliam, really), The Shawshank Redemption (if we're talking cinema gross), Fight Club and more and more and more.
Actually almost all of my top 10 films underperformed box office wise. Maybe it's a proof of quality?


I don't find it a bad film but I do feel that it does not deserve anywhere near the reverence it seems to be getting.  One thing that can be said about it is that almost as many people don't really rate it or hate is as seem to really enjoy it or love it.  It is a film which has truly divided the audience which surely a great and truly brilliant film what not do to this degree.  There are always haters of even great films but this film has the most apparent dislike aimed at it that I have seen and at the same time the most fervent fans. Of course it may just be that people see different things in it or gain a connection where others do not.

Of course it might be my cynicism as this film is the one which inspired my "Is cynicism the bane of the moviegoer" thread on movie musings.


I think you are right but I would go a step further and saythat Superman should have been left alone so we could remember the best Superman of Christopher Reeve and it certainly did not have the panache from Singer as he did in the first X Men films


Surely Singer's film is better than Donner's? At least for me.

(in reply to Anne Hedley)
Post #: 115
RE: Superman Returns (2006) - 7/11/2006 8:42:00 PM   
pettsy

 

Posts: 5969
Joined: 30/9/2005
quote:

ORIGINAL: furrybastard

I know SR proved divisive amongst cinema-goers but the reviews I'd seen (from respectable, non-tabloid areas) were pretty much on the positive side. Apart from a few on this forum, I saw very little positivity towards X3 both in terms of critics and the general concensus I gathered from others. However I'll take your word for it on this as I didn't exactly go scouting around the net before making that comment and based it mostly on my own impressions.


I know quite a lot of people who enjoyed X-Men 3.  However, they tended to be of the general cinema-going public type, who enjoyed lots of big bangs and action, and who did not give a toss about the love and care put into the first two being brutally murderlised over 2 hours.

quote:


It's funny how most topics concerning SR seem to eventually descend into a grudge match between it and X3.


This is what Fox wanted though isn't it, and this is why they wouldn't wait for Singer to make Superman Returns.  They wanted to prove that the director wasn't bigger than the franchise.  Yes, X3 took more money, but in the long run, I think it will lose out - badly - to SR in the 'classic' stakes.

(in reply to furrybastard)
Post #: 116
RE: Superman Returns (2006) - 7/11/2006 9:23:01 PM   
bozo


Posts: 2513
Joined: 1/11/2006
From: HM Prison Slade
quote:

ORIGINAL: pettsy

Yes, X3 took more money, but in the long run, I think it will lose out - badly - to SR in the 'classic' stakes.



Without a doubt. 

(in reply to pettsy)
Post #: 117
RE: Superman Returns (2006) - 7/11/2006 9:44:43 PM   
bobsmith1698

 

Posts: 233
Joined: 6/10/2005
From: Manchester
SR was decent enough. Now I'm not a big Marvel fan per se so I may very well be talking through my chocolate starfish (ewww!)
but I enjoyed X3 far more the SR. You know when you need a no-brainer to sit down and just chill to?


_____________________________






(in reply to bozo)
Post #: 118
RE: Superman Returns (2006) - 7/11/2006 11:23:18 PM   
Dirty Hartigan


Posts: 5890
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Manchester
quote:

ORIGINAL: bobsmith1698


but I enjoyed X3 far more the SR. You know when you need a no-brainer to sit down and just chill to?



X3 shouldn't have been one of those types of film.

(in reply to bobsmith1698)
Post #: 119
RE: Superman Returns (2006) - 7/11/2006 11:26:23 PM   
bozo


Posts: 2513
Joined: 1/11/2006
From: HM Prison Slade
quote:

ORIGINAL: bobsmith1698

SR was decent enough. Now I'm not a big Marvel fan per se so I may very well be talking through my chocolate starfish (ewww!)
but I enjoyed X3 far more the SR. You know when you need a no-brainer to sit down and just chill to?



I do, unfortunately, for I am only human.
But SR, although not as effects-heavy as X3, was far more enjoyable for me. And I mean enjoyable in the most primal and brainless sense of the word. It just had more spine-tingling moments.   

(in reply to bobsmith1698)
Post #: 120
Page:   <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews >> RE: Superman Returns (2006) Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


 
Movie News  |  Empire Blog  |  Movie Reviews  |  Future Films  |  Features  |  Video Interviews  |  Image Gallery  |  Competitions  |  Forum  |  Magazine  |  Resources
 
Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.125