My Name Is Legion wrote:
Flying Spaghetti Monster wrote:
Compared the epic of Donner's first film, it's scope, it's use of poetry, wit, emotion and it's breakthroughs in music, special effects, not to mention how it defined to all of how superheroes can bring out the best in all of us, it makes Burton's film look like a rush job of an amateur.
And not surprisingly, you missed the point. I wasn't discussing your personal enthusiasm for Superman
, simply pointing out the fact that your assertion "every superhero film since owes its very soul..." to the Superman
films is specious.
Modern superhero films depend heavily upon the direction that Burton's Batman
took, and not at all on Donner's Superman
. The only superhero movie of note since X-Men
that owes a debt to Superman
in any substantial respect is Superman Returns
, and it disappointed Warner Bros.
Is that clearer?
Flying Spaghetti Monster wrote:
The second one, nearly as good, beat Peter Parker and Bruce Wayne and everyone else in the angst department while still giving us the most memorable superhero showdown in cinema history.
That's nonsense. Superman II
is a patchwork job, badly written and clumsily edited together from usable footage shot by Donner and new stuff representing a complete change of tone and direction on the part of Richard Lester. It's an entertaining film, but not even a particularly good one. Angst? Nope - goofy, occasionally touching melodrama at best.
Wrong on both counts. Nolan might have been making a batman film when he made BB, but he had everyone in the production study Superman. He said that's the template. The movie breathes the same way, and the appearance of the finest actors of the representative times even in minor roles proves it it as well. Need more proof, notice the time stamps for the time when the hero, in costume, appears. Raimi, to a smaller extent, had the same idea, and he even paid direct homage to it when Parker pulled his shirt open to reveal his costume. The new spider man film did as well, taking its time for the origin story. Daredevil, iron man, all of them. batman was a fun film but it was a hack job. Move the camera slightly to the left in almost any shot and you'll see a gaffer.
Superman 2 has some issues of tone, I'll grant you that, but it was still forging ahead to new, uncharted ground. Dude it was the first superhero sequel ever. Need I remind you that it was intended to be a part of the first film? They had to split it up and in many ways that was a good decision, and Suoes is introduced in an early action scene and the villains are introduced as well. The film picks up the themes of its predecessor and uses them for a good story in a way that has only been matched by X2.
Burton's batman is a template for a hack job of style over substance. Superman used style to supplement the substance, beginning like a science fiction opus, then moving to an aesthetic that is not at all disimilar (no doubt influenced by) the work of Norman Rockwell, to a more modern urban adventure that had something you might have noticed: wit.
See for yourself. Google "template for superhero films" and see how many times Batman pops up in the lists, essays, whatever.