1. Batman Begins
2. XMen 2
3. Spiderman
4. Superman Returns
5. Spiderman 2
6. Blade
7. Hulk (I know, I know)
8. Batman Returns

big drop

9. Superman 2
10. XMen

I've seen it twice, it's held up for me.

It actually works better on a second viewing for several reasons, namely, it's a sheer joy to watch and with expectations in check, it's a wonderful thrill ride. Silly and shallow, but a hell of a lot of fun.

As for the complaint about there not being enough action, I actually felt there was a touch too much of it. Of course, my definition of action probably varies from others, but that doesn't really matter.

My only complaint, on second viewing, is there really is one too many "Heroic rescue" moments. Otherwise, I had a smile on my face for a majority of this movie, and that is an extreme rarity these days.

I don't get why everyone hates Hulk so much, and why people have to defend it constantly. I would like to know what people think a GOOD idea for a Hulk movie would be compared to that movie. The Hulk always had stupid villains and his character was always weak. Unless you happen to have read Peter David's run of Incredible Hulk, you might feel violated, but then, they weren't the kind of stories that would translate well to the big screen. You have Bruce Banner, repressed scientist type, he turns into the hulk, he rampages, he calms down, he goes after betty, the army comes after him, and then some stupid villain comes out of the woodwork to challenge him, which the hulk pounds into submission. Clearly the idea is inherently flawed, so maybe it was the execution...?

I think Blade is incredibly overrated. I thought it was one of the worst movies i'd ever seen in my life; even to this day, i'm still confused as to why people like it. The ONLY part of the movie that I enjoyed was the aside to Kentucky Fried Movie. Somehow, they managed to take a watered-down comic character, water them down even more, then make him into a cross between Batman, Daredevil, and the Punisher. In 5-10 years I can't see Blade still retaining what value it had. I mean take The Lost Boys for instance. It had bad clothes, worse music, homoerotic subtext, and it's STILL a better movie in many ways.

And Batman Returns as well was another terrible comic-to-movie movie that most people liked but I cannot stand to watch. First of all, you have the most non-threatening villain ever, the Penguin: "Watch out Batman! i'm going to politicize you by exploiting the left-wing media bias!". Then there's the non-entity Catwoman, who just occupies empty space in the movie and adds perverse sex appeal. Then again, she was a prostitute in the comics. Then you have genuinely creepy characters like Max Schrek and the whole circus act, which are creepy for no reason whatsoever. Then you have horrific scenes like the Prom Queen falling onto a Christmas tree - that really creeped the shit out of me when I was a kid. Is it just me, or does Tim Burton remind anyone else of Sam Hain from The Real Ghostbusters.

Batman Begins was a great restart to a franchise that went downhill with its first sequel. I could have done without the preachy bleeding-heart social commentary though.

Superman Returns is my favorite comic book movie so far. Good ideas, execution, cast, acting, SFX, etc. All around a great movie. Spider-man is up there too, although I felt like the sequel really missed a lot of Peter Parker and tried to incorporate a little bit too much of other superheros; Superman always rushing in to save the day, tearing open his shirt; Batman was the one who always felt "cursed" by his existence; The Flash was the one who was never around for anything or he was always late, which was an ironic twist since he was the fastest man alive; and Green Lantern's power was always based on willpower, just as in the movie. It was still great though.

I liked it, although it got hokey at times. I saw it in IMAX 3-D, and was disappointed that 1) so few scenes were in 3d, and 2) at some of the choices for what they made 3d.

I said basically the same as Sabre, but felt despite its faults, I still enjoyed the film a great deal, but do wonder why Singer gets such a pass

One thing I dont see mentioned here is the fact that .

for me, the only thing that hurts Superman Returns is the kid ....


adding him to the story hurts the future of the franchise...

To anyone who can answer...

My James Karen question from a previous page is still bugging me. Here's something I found:



I don't recall seeing him.

His scenes were cut. He's the one in the truck driving away when you first see Ma Kent.

Maybe he was cut for time reasons? I noticed a few scenes from the teaser that weren't in the film such as Johnathon Kent in flashback scenes.

Thanks for the explanation...

I'm sure they'll be on the DVD.

I really loved this movie overall. Great effects, the performances by Spacey and Routh were both quite good, and I loved all the little nods back to the older films and comics (especially the space flight and Superman lifting the car to look like Action Comics #1).

My biggest gripe was Bosworth. She was ok as Lois, but she lacked the same bite in the role that actresses like Margot Kidder and Teri Hatcher gave to the character. She seemed somewhat soft. Someone like Rachel McAdams or Kristen Bell would have definitely pulled off Lois' more aggressive personality alot better in my opinion.

That being said, bring on Brainiac or Doomsday in 2009!

According to IMDB, the kid's name is Jason White. So Richard obviously thinks it's his son. He never married Lois, so the kid couldnt have his name otherwise. If you're just dating a pregnant girl, her kid doesnt get your last name.

So Lois doesnt get a pass on that one. For all we know Richard will keep thinking Jason is his until Lois decides to hit up Superman for back child support.

D

Perhaps you should have yours examined?

Different times, different movies...

I too think that the first ones were overrated. That has nothing to do with whether I know what "good" cinema is... as far as I know you may think the Toxic Avenger films are better than the Godfather. That point could be argued all day. Your interpretation of what "good" cinema is could be crap to everyone else.

As for this one my son and I enjoyed it quite a bit. I would rank it at about a 8/10 or so. Cut have used a couple of cuts just about 15-20 minutes overlong. My son started to get a little antsy...

Hmm... 21 mill for Wed. I don't see it making more than 125m thru the 4th. Assuming it follows the regular drop-off it looks like a 200-225 final. Not bad, enough to get another one greenlit I assume...

To each their own. It's names on paper. and it's from IMDB. And even if it says so on the official cast list/credits/whatever, fact of the matter is, we don't know.

According to sources on avsforum, the hd-dvd is in production at WB and will include IME (InMovieExperience) and TruHD 5.1 audio....woohoo!!!...cant wait!!!

I have a feeling when both are released, that King Kong and Superman Returns will be my demo discs for quite a while.

Spacey nailed Lex. he was perfect. Routh was great also. Sure the movie has a few slow parts but it's been a long time since superman II and it's good to a have supes back. totally loved when he flew through the detached wing from the plane. it's nice to see his heat vision used more. Is it me or DC hit two homeruns with this and batman bgeins and marvel only has spidey because x-men 3, Fantastic Four, and Blade3 were turds. I'm a marvel fan and it's very dissapointing.

Superman Returns' $21 million yesterday is #8 on all-time opening Wednesdays. War of the Worlds, which was #7, made $100 million even during the first 5 days. I think Supes can match and beat that number. I think it'll have better word-of-mouth.

I tend to agree with you...the holiday falls on a Tuesday this year, and with many taking Monday off, it's like a four-day weekend.

However, if you look at the numbers of the 7 Wednesday openings that finished above SUPERMAN RETURNS and the few that finished below it, it's probably not too early to estimate that this picture (unless it suffers from MATRIX REVOLUTIONS-like backlash...and it shouldn't, it's a better movie than that) is going to finish domestically somewhere in the $200 million range.

Will that kind of money warrant a sequel? Most likely, but probably one with not nearly the budget that this one had.

Anyone know if Warners had Singer & Co. save all the sets? That would have been the smart move...especially where re-used pieces like The Daily Planet offices and The Fortress of Solitude are concerned.

Am I the only person who finds it a little odd that this icon of good has a bastard child? I guess that's not really a stigma in this day as it used to be.

I did miss Hackman's MISS TESSMACHAAAAAAAAAAA.

But it was a fun movie. I think the ending, while perhaps drawn out, really did engage the audience.

And I was expecting the kid to be like Superman 2.0, imprevious to kryptonite because of the combination of Lois/Clark's DNA.

Another question: if this movie is supposed to be five years after Superman II which took place in 1980, does this mean the time for this movie is set in 1985, the present, or this doesn't really matter?

I think I have to agree with the other poster who thinks the actress who plays Lois Lane is a bit too young to play the character, especially to have a kid that old, but still, she's cute enough for me.

The Fortress of Solitude is a real place....duh.

It doesn't really matter, though we see some newspapers dated 2005. My guess is Superman took off sometime in the summer of 2001. He looked kind of surprised by world events, leaving then would mean he missed Sept. 11.

It's like the James Bond series or comic books. Time passes, but the characters don't age. Read some old Spider-Man book and he'll be 25 and talking about how he's a "swinging 70s cat." Open one today and he's still 25, but it's clearly 2006.