Why The Hate For Superman Returns?

[USS Firefly]

Indeed he didn't stayed there all night.
And for everyone who did likes the movie I recommend the book of the movie.

 

[bbjeg]

I wanted to leave the theater after this scene. Listening for crime over a city, I get, but he had no right to peek on Lois' life.

Obviously it crosses a bit of a line, but I didn't think it came across all that creepy the way they did it. Superman had just returned to Earth and learned that not only is Lois seeing Perry's son, but she's got a freakin kid. It seemed clear to me that he was as thrown by that as we were, and simply wanted to confirm that it was true, and that he hadn't just imagined the whole thing.

I mean, it's not like he was peeking in on her in the shower or anything, or hovering outside the house all night long. And plus the look into her new life was as much for our benefit as it was for Superman's anyway.

How would Superman know she wasn't in the shower? I think they could have added that scene to when he's listening over the city, and he so happens to catch Lois. Then we (the audience) see Lois, then cut back to Superman hearing alarms, and so on.

Switch the roles with a normal person; unprotected sex, leaves for a few years without a goodbye, comes back and his girl has a kid with the bosses son so he peaks through her window at night to see if it's true. If you were a neighbor and saw that, would you say 'how sweet', or call the cops?

I liked Reeves Superman, I was pumped that they were continuing(ish) the story, I even did a Superman marathon the night before Returns came out, and I was stoked that Spacey was playing Luthor. My expectations were high which probably made faults stand out more. Looking back, it wasn't that bad a movie, but it wasn't a good Superman movie.

 

[Trekker4747]

I wanted to leave the theater after this scene. Listening for crime over a city, I get, but he had no right to peek on Lois' life.

Obviously it crosses a bit of a line, but I didn't think it came across all that creepy the way they did it. Superman had just returned to Earth and learned that not only is Lois seeing Perry's son, but she's got a freakin kid. It seemed clear to me that he was as thrown by that as we were, and simply wanted to confirm that it was true, and that he hadn't just imagined the whole thing.

I mean, it's not like he was peeking in on her in the shower or anything, or hovering outside the house all night long. And plus the look into her new life was as much for our benefit as it was for Superman's anyway.

It doesn't matter what the person inside is doing or their state of clothedness if you look in someone's home without their permission/knowing about you're being a stalker and a creeper.

We didn't need Superman there to see Lois' homelife the action simply could have moved there on its own without Superman being a complete freak and creep by spying on people inside the privacy of their home.

 

[davejames]

Well I guess for me the fact that it's Superman doing it precludes the scene from having any kind of creepy undertone to it. He's coming from a much more pure and innocent place than that, and doesn't feel to me at all like just another typical, spurned ex-boyfriend there.

I'm not saying it was the right thing for him to do, I just don't get the same "creepy vibe" that others do. And clearly Singer didn't either.

 

[M.A.C.O.]

Wasn't he crying after he left Lois' home also?

Routh looked the part. However Singer gave the man very little dialogue as either Clark or Supes and admitted he told Routh to play it like Chris Reeve. Wrong, wrong wrong. At least Cavil can be considers a star in MoS. Where Routh felt like a supporting character in his own movie.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

Since it was a continuation of the first two Superman films, they had to stay in character with the Superman who when asked what color panties Lois was wearing leered intently, got bummed out that the planter she was standing behind was made of lead, and then continued to stare even after the conversation had moved on until he could finally see them. He's kind of a Super-Perv. We won't even get into his Super-Roofie Kiss after having sex with Lois or the fact that the logo on his chest turns into a giant throwable condom, which he clearly didn't use with Lois.

I kid, I kid.

 

[Yminale]

I don't get this. Superman snaps Zod's neck and people shrug. Superman check up on Lois Lane and he's some evil stalker. I don't get it.

 

[M.A.C.O.]

Well one he did in defense of the human race. As Zod was an unrepentant killer of humans and threatened to kill more humans.

The other was a situation created by Superman's own action of leaving earth for 5 years and not even saying goodbye to the so called love of his life. The world didn't stop Supes. It moved on without you as did Lois. Get over it.

Honestly the whole Superson thing is a gimmick you could see being introduced as the last part of a trilogy. Not the beginning of a soft reboot like SR. Seeing where they were going to take it in the sequel to SR that never happened. Makes the idea even more shallow and stupid.

 

[Dream]

What if Lois had been naked and taking a shower? Would Superman have kept staring until she was done, or would he have immediately looked away?

 

[M.A.C.O.]

^You don't think Supes was afraid to kick Cyclops' teeth in do you?

Haha

 

[Greylock Crescent]

the logo on his chest turns into a giant throwable condom, which he clearly didn't use with Lois.

That's hot.

 

[Trekker4747]

I don't get this. Superman snaps Zod's neck and people shrug. Superman check up on Lois Lane and he's some evil stalker. I don't get it.

You honestly don't see the difference between killing a man who's hell-bent on killing others and continuing to do so and spying on a woman in the privacy of her own home when she's done nothing more than lived her life?

 

[USS Firefly]

What Brandon Routh did very good was the difference between Clark and Superman.
At the end of MOS when we first saw journalist Clark, I didn't see any difference between him and Superman

 

[DarKush]

^
I don't think there was supposed to be a difference between Clark and Superman in MOS. The idea of Clark is the real person with Superman just being Clark in the suit is the dominant take on Superman now. Whereas SR was calling back the Reeve films where Clark was a disguise and Superman was the real person, which had been the dominant take pre-Crisis/John Byrne.

 

[Tosk]

You honestly don't see the difference between killing a man who's hell-bent on killing others and continuing to do so and spying on a woman in the privacy of her own home when she's done nothing more than lived her life?

Secretly observing someone is worse than murder?

 

[JoeZhang]

How would it be *murder* ? If Zod was out cold and he stamped on his head killing him you would have s point but the law generally doesn't consider it murder if you are acting in self defence or the defence of others.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

What Brandon Routh did very good was the difference between Clark and Superman.
At the end of MOS when we first saw journalist Clark, I didn't see any difference between him and Superman

Darkush already addressed the answer, but how do you consider it remotely fair to judge a five-second introduction at the end of MoS with journalist Clark featuring in almost the entirety of SR?

 

[Christopher]

At least Cavil can be considers a star in MoS. Where Routh felt like a supporting character in his own movie.

Funny -- I felt that Cavill's Superman was a supporting character in a movie about the heroic actions of Jor-El, Last Father of Krypton, and his allies the United States military. Cavill was fantastic in the part; I felt he was the most convincing Superman since Reeve. But the damn script wouldn't let him be Superman, except occasionally like in that great sequence where he surrendered to the military and spoke to Lois.

I don't get this. Superman snaps Zod's neck and people shrug.

Seriously? You must not have been reading the same Internet I have. I've heard far more outrage and debate about that than I remember hearing about Routh's super-voyeurism.

 

[JarodRussell]

The other was a situation created by Superman's own action of leaving earth for 5 years and not even saying goodbye to the so called love of his life. The world didn't stop Supes. It moved on without you as did Lois. Get over it.

The events in this film take place over the course of maybe a week. Can a guy have maybe a week to get over it before people start bitching?


I liked that James Marsden didn't play the asshole boyfriend. He was a geniunely good guy who deserved the relationship. I think that's a very rare thing in films.

Problem with Superman Returns is that Superman is a wimp overall in that film. It became clear in the film that without his powers he is nothing. Instead he should also have that Supercharacter, being a great guy with extreme will power even without any of his superpowers.

 

[RandyS]

Routh looked the part. However Singer gave the man very little dialogue as either Clark or Supes and admitted he told Routh to play it like Chris Reeve. Wrong, wrong wrong.

Indeed.

I always suspected this, but until now, assumed it was only my opinion. I didn't know Singer admitted it.