Me too.

The problem with SR, as others have stated, was the awful script. I'd like to see a sequel with Routh as Superman, but with a new writer, new director, and no Lois Lane and no superkid.

Agree, but they can get rid of that anorexic Lois Lane. I really enjoyed Superman Returns, but couldn't help but notice how out of place she was in the film. The script had issues, but considering what they went through to get that film made I thought it was pretty good and I personally liked that it was a sequel to II.

With what Singer did from X-Men to X-2, I'd expect a similar rise in quality of his Superman series. Either way I really liked Routh as Clark/Superman.

I think you're underestimating the amount of luke warm to negative reactions there was to this movie.

Yeah, Superman Returns is going to be a considered a classic years from now. Not bloody likely. It was okay. I think that the box office performance was pretty good for a no-so-good movie, so to give them another shot isn't a crazy notion. But you think with all those years to make a great movie, and they couldn't do, it is really sad.

I don't mind them dropping Routh if the plan is to do a complete reboot in a few years(ala The Incredible Hulk). I did really like him as Superman/Clark Kent, but if he's a casualty in the process of starting over from scratch, so be it.

Bryan Singer needs to be kept the hell away from this project however. His creative decisions with Superman Returns were disastrous. Superman disappearing for 5 years? Superman having a kid? Lois being an anorexic, whiny bitch in her early 20's? Superman stalking Lois? Lex Luthor plotting to turn the entire US into a bunch of rock?

For those of you comparing this to Star Trek: The Motion Picture, granted the cast was all brought back, but Paramount hired a completely new creative team to make the movie. Gene Roddenberry was locked in a room somewhere and given a token "Executive Consultant" credit. The same needs to happen here.

That's my thinking, too. He did a damn good X-MEN, and really did a great job with X-2.

Again, we'll just have to see if all this stuff is hype or fact.

Brandon was perfect as the man of steel. Singer should direct the new Superman.

I hope Singer can come back. I was on board as soon as he said he was going "Wrath Of Kahn" with the sequel.

I'm pretty sure they aren't talking about Routh not being in the next Superman TITLED film, but instead The Justice League film. People didn't really expect to see Brandon Routh or Christian Bale be in that movie, did they?

Same here... Just didnt really care for Returns and I didnt really like Routh as Supes. But my biggest issue was with Spacey. I thought his Luthor was terrible and drove me up a wall.

I couldn't deal with all the over to top Christ metaphors in the new Superman, it was a lame attempt to add some weight to it. It also really didn't jive with the moer campy approach that Spacey was going for. Roth was also really boring, he did a dynamite Reeve as Clark Kent impression though. I really wouldn't be too sadened if we didn't get another Superman movie from that team/cast.

Thus far the best Superman adaption has been the animated series.

I hated nearly everything about Superman Returns but Routh.

Gotta agree. Routh was alright. Everything else about Returns sucked balls. Super balls.

Uhm....trust me, the Christ thing has always been there. I remember a teacher pointing out the Christ references when Superman came out back in the 70's. The same goes for "Campy Lex". It's always been in the Franchise. Did you pay any attention to Hackman's Lex over the years? Frankly, I think they should use the comic book/Smallville Lex who's the Corporate Bad Guy and not the Silly Lex skulking in sewers and secret hideouts.

Maybe, maybe not. If he was boring it was only because he was channeling the late Christopher Reeve who, IMHO, was a good Superman, but who was also kinda boring in the role. But Routh did a great job either way.

SUPERMAN RETURNS and BATMAN BEGINS made roughly the same $$$ at the box office. The former is considered a disappointment and the latter a hit (primarily because of costs and box office expectations), but regardless of what the budgets were, AUDIENCES supported both films equally.

So I don't think there's any question about Singer and Routh getting another shot at Superman.

I would love to see a sequel with the cast and crew returning but it doesn't seem like its gonna happen. Routh better have not blown all that money he got from the first one or I fear he may soon be busing tables at the waffle house.

Call me crazy, but that's kind of a big deal when you're watching a 2-hour + film. There have been numerous films made over the years with casts that directors would die to work with and people would clamor to see on screen, but when all was said and done the films simply sucked. It doesn't matter who the talent is, if you don't have a good script you don't have anything. Period.

I hope you are correct.

Ya know...I was re-reading the VARIETY article, and besides the fact that it is speculation, I also notice that the statement is rather (deliberately?) vague. It states that Bryan Singer is unlikely to shoot the next Superman movie, then states "the next Superman we will see on the big screen will not be Brandon Routh" which of course refers to JLA. It really doesn't mention the next Superman sequel.

I am not sure if this is Thompson trying to be cute or coy about the events, or if it's just poor writing on her part.

Well Michael Dougherty, one of the writers already dropped off right? I have't heard anything from Dan Harris. Hopefully they hire someone who can make a great story though.

And this is why I think Singer is vastly overrated by fans. Yes, you are correct; the Christ metaphors were implicit in the original film. But the big difference is they were implied thru dialouge and they were supported by the entire film- The character is presented as a saviour who makes sacrifices in his personal hapiness for a higher cause (until he transgresses in the end, which would have had ramifications explored in the sequel).
Here, Singer just throws out these visual metaphors for the only reason that "uh...it was a great idea in the Donner movie". He seems to lack the most basic story-telling understanding that you have to support these kinds of things in the narrative.
While Christ was appropriate for the origin story of the original, the metaphor to follow here should have been "the Prodigal Son"

sorry. I just see Returns as an affectionate but mostly inept product of a hack whose vision rarely goes beyond bodily lifting from other creators work, and on the rare occassions when it does (such as the additions of the son to the plot/universe), it is woefully out tune with these characters.




labeling Spaceys character as 'campy' kind of misses the large point that the character is inconsistent, and not in a good way- only a sloppy way.
In his first conversation with the Eve Teshmacher-redux, he presents himself as "I don't want to bring fire to the people, I just want to make a buck" which falls perfectly in line with Donner & Mankiewiczs version of the character as venal schemer. Fine. But then by the middle of the picture the character has had a wholesale change precipitated by nothing that we can see, and he declares to Lois that "she isn't seeing the big picture here" He is going to give the world alien technology, and entirely new land masses. In other words, he does want to bring fire to the people.
Singer has the character say lines that harken back to the film he loved, yet the actions he gives these character completely betray these lines-
And Singer never seems to realize there is any kind of disconnect here.

Sorry. Unlike the Hulk which gets ritually slagged as being a "bad" movie but is actually thoughtful and consistent, Returns actually is a bad movie. It is sloppy, sentimental, intellectually and emotionaly dishonest, foolish, and frequently a beat for beat swipe of another filmmakers work.

I didn't want this thread (as if I control and rule over it) to degenerate into another discussion over the merits of SUPERMAN RETURNS, but I guess it was inevitable since discussing a sequel always brings us back to how people enjoyed the original.

I did want to know if people thought that WB was making a mistake - assuming rumors are true - in not letting Singer and Routh make another Superman film. If we're going to return back to the pre-Singer days of Tim Burton-Nic Cage-McG- Kevin Smith-JJ Abrams ideas just because the movie underperformed and just because some people didn't like it, then it is an act of creative cowardice on the studio's part.

I agree. Singer and Routh should do the sequel.

Exactly. I am amazed how many people did not take a step back and realize how awful some of the plot points were. Just brutal. Feel bad for Routh as it was not his fault, but start this over with no attachment to two movies made almost 30 years ago.

That's ok, the best Batman adaption has been the animated series as well. And without even seeing the JLA movie, I'll throw my vote to the animated series yet again.