Donner's RETURN take?

[RobertScorpio]

We watched SUPERMAN RETURNS last night. It isn't a bad movie, i actually like it. I saw it as a homage to 1-2. But the construction of the movie defies logic. It takes place five years after two, but its clear more than five years have passed because it takes place just three years ago. Meaning, it isn't 1985 when the movie takes place. My son, five year old, caught on to this very early. I told him to just roll with it; but that is really was a silly way to do the film's timeline.

Did Donner ever comment on this movie? I'd like to what he thought of it, just to see if he considered it a worthy follow up to 1 an 2.

Rob Scorpio

 

[Broccoli]

It is not a direct sequel to the first two movies. Singer used the first two movies as a "vague background". So, the stuff in the first two movies (particularly S:TM) kinda happened, but just a bit differently and not in the 1970s.

 

[Captaindemotion]

It's a loose follow up - had it been set 5 years post SII and been a strict sequel, then it would have to have been set in the early 1980s. Lois would have been more like the Margot Kidder take on her. I think the picking and choosing of Donner's movies in terms of what elements it followed was a sensible way to go but it does seem to have alienated a lot of people.

Singer wanted to avoid another origin story as he felt that Donner had already done the definitive one and as Smallville was airing on tv at the time anyway; as such, both older and younger generations had their onscreen take on the early days of The Man of Steel. He wanted to simply pick up wiith where Superman was today and to assume that the audience knew his backstory. But at the same time, he wasn't making a period piece, he was making a modern set movie.

Continuity wise, I look on it as the same way as I look on the pre-Craig Bond movies. Pierce Brosnan's James Bond may have fought Goldfinger, but unlike Connery's 007, he didn't make jokes about The Beatles when he did so (more likely it was NKOTB or Take That!). It's evident that the Bond of Goldeneye is meant to have some history, has a reputation, from the way that M speaks to him. However, you can't allow for him to be the same age as Sean Connery - Brosnan is clearly a generation or two younger. The passing of movie time and real time can't be confused. You have to allow for the suspension of disbelief.

Similarly, in my interpretation of the continuity of SR, Brandon Routh's Superman would have landed in the mid-west US in the 1970s, not the 1950s and when the US Army fought Zod and Co, they would have been in touch with each other via modern telecommunications, not the clunky walkie-talkies we saw in S2. I must admit, I've never really understood why people can accept James Bond getting younger every few years and accept that he shouldn't look as old as Sean Connery now is (leaving aside the Craig movies, which are a clear reboot), yet can't make the same allowances for Routh's Superman in SR.

I don't have a link but I understand that Donner does like and has praised SR. He and Singer have some history - Donner's wife produced the X-movies and Singer cited the Superman movies as an influence on how he would approach that universe when he landed the job. I also remember reading that Fox initially didn't have a lot of confidence in Singer when he was shooting X-Men and Donner acted as a sort of go-between the young director and the studio.

 

[Out Of My Vulcan Mind]

I think the approach of SR being a kinda sorta sequel to Donner's work hurt the film. Although there were many aspects of SR that I admired, one of the problems with it is that it felt like you were watching a sequel to a Superman film you hadn't seen. The Donner back story doesn't really work since SR isn't a direct continuation of that back story, and there would be all sorts of logic problems if it was, yet they didn't fill in enough back story of their own to provide a story that really felt complete.

 

[RobertScorpio]

I think the approach of SR being a kinda sorta sequel to Donner's work hurt the film. Although there were many aspects of SR that I admired, one of the problems with it is that it felt like you were watching a sequel to a Superman film you hadn't seen. The Donner back story doesn't really work since SR isn't a direct continuation of that back story, and there would be all sorts of logic problems if it was, yet they didn't fill in enough back story of their own to provide a story that really felt complete.

I agree. I am surprised Warners would have green-lit this project with all the interesting 'elements'. One could, I guess, that Singer's rep took a slight hit from it, and Valkry didn't help either. He needs a hit movie..can't live on XMEN's movies for much longer..

Rob

 

[Out Of My Vulcan Mind]

I think Singer and Cruise came out of Valkyrie pretty well actually. The knives were out for both of them on that one and there were a lot of predictions that it was going to flop, so when it took in $200 million worldwide (a fine number for a $75 million Nazi-themed thriller released at Christmas) they both dodged a bullet.

 

[Barbados Slim]

I think the problem was that they injected the wrong character journey. The biggest thing is that the Man of Steel does not resort to being lovelorn and stalkery. The Man of Steel does not knock up a girl and leave behind a son he never knew about. He's stoic, heroic and idealistic. Where Batman taps into the dark emotional conflict of heroism and it works for a film, Superman represents brash iconic Big Damn Hero sensibilities and you have to play that up in your film and find conflict elsewhere.

No one wants to see a tortured and confused Superman.

 

[Stone_Cold_Sisko]

Richard Donner co-wrote "Last Son" a 6 part comic series, which follows similar themes (Superman as a father). I think this would have been his take on RETURNS.

the story is about a Kryptonian child who crash lands in Metropolis a la Superman's original arrival. He is the son of Zod and Ursa. That's the just the beginning though. It was a great story, and had some genuinely heartwarming father/son type moments. Real emotion.

 

[Level 2 Diagnostic]

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/herocomplex/2008/10/richard-donner.html

Bryan Singer's 2006 film, "Superman Returns," felt like a valentine to the Donner work on Superman and the older director received it with fondness. "I totally enjoyed it. I saw it just that once. I went to the theater not knowing anything. Bryan and I had spoken many times before but I didn't want to know anything about the film. I went as the audience. And I thought, 'Wow, he really nailed it.' There's that one scene, when that piano slid across the floor on the boat? I was startled. It was great."

 

[The Comedian]

I must admit, I've never really understood why people can accept James Bond getting younger every few years and accept that he shouldn't look as old as Sean Connery now is (leaving aside the Craig movies, which are a clear reboot), yet can't make the same allowances for Routh's Superman in SR.

James Bond is not a man, it's a title.

Some guy who looked like Connery was taken into the British Secret Service and was given the name Bond. Sometime later, he was killed (or retired) and a guy who looked like George Lazenby took on the name. And so on.

So this guy who looks like Craig is merely the latest to hold the James Bond title...just like female M is the latest to hold the M title.

And I have proof of this because Lazenby said "blah blah never happened to the other guy", a clear reference to his predecessor. It was said on screen and therefore it is Canon.

Alternate theory: The original James Bond is a Time Lord and regenerates every time he is killed.

 

[Out Of My Vulcan Mind]

"This never happened to the other fella" was just a lousy in-joke. Although the Bond films have never been big on continuity, it's obviously supposed to be the same character played by Sean Connery, George Lazenby, and Roger Moore. Lazenby looks at mementos as he reminiscences about previous adventures where Bond was played by Connery. The opening of Diamonds Are Forever has Sean Connery looking to exact revenge against Blofeld following Lazenby's On Her Majesty's Secret Service. References are made to the death of Bond's wife in the later Roger Moore films, including Bond making a visit to her grave.

Once you get into the Timothy Dalton, Pierce Brosnan, and Daniel Craig eras, I look at them as each being a new iteration of the character, but before that there's some kind of continuity at work as Bond ages through the 60s, 70s, and into the mid-80s.

 

[jadcox@mindspring.com]

I must admit, I've never really understood why people can accept James Bond getting younger every few years and accept that he shouldn't look as old as Sean Connery now is (leaving aside the Craig movies, which are a clear reboot), yet can't make the same allowances for Routh's Superman in SR.

James Bond is not a man, it's a title.

Some guy who looked like Connery was taken into the British Secret Service and was given the name Bond. Sometime later, he was killed (or retired) and a guy who looked like George Lazenby took on the name. And so on.

So this guy who looks like Craig is merely the latest to hold the James Bond title...just like female M is the latest to hold the M title.

And I have proof of this because Lazenby said "blah blah never happened to the other guy", a clear reference to his predecessor. It was said on screen and therefore it is Canon.

Alternate theory: The original James Bond is a Time Lord and regenerates every time he is killed.

Bravo.

 

[Harvey]

^^
Except that Timothy Dalton makes reference to his wife's death "a long time ago" in License to Kill (which also features a Felix Leiter played by an actor from the Moore era, though I forget which film). And in the Brosnan era, a portrait of one of the previous M characters (I think it is Bernard Lee) can be seen in M's office, and Bond's reference to M's predecessors seems to be a call back to the previous male M's. And then there are all the in-jokes in Die Another Day in Q's lab, but I'll put those next to "it never happened to the other fella" section.

 

[Dinosauricon]

Yeah, with Roger Moore you have the original 'cast' more or less, and there was continuity in Bond's age, if not entirely his persona and appearence. Then Dalton took over and there was also new Moneypenny (Although Bernard Lee as M had been replaced earlier in the middle of the Moore films).


There is one problem with the agent switching theory. GOLDENEYE opens with a flashback to the 80s with Bond very clearly being Brosnan instead of Dalton or Moore.

 

[Out Of My Vulcan Mind]

^^
Except that Timothy Dalton makes reference to his wife's death "a long time ago" in License to Kill (which also features a Felix Leiter played by an actor from the Moore era, though I forget which film). And in the Brosnan era, a portrait of one of the previous M characters (I think it is Bernard Lee) can be seen in M's office, and Bond's reference to M's predecessors seems to be a call back to the previous male M's. And then there are all the in-jokes in Die Another Day in Q's lab, but I'll put those next to "it never happened to the other fella" section.

I guess Timothy Dalton falls somewhere between a continuation and a new iteration. Brosnan I see as a new iteration, in-jokes aside. Craig is of course a new iteration. And to be clear, when I say "new iteration" I don't mean that they've brought in a different agent and given him the name James Bond. I mean it's the one and only James Bond in a new continuity.

 

[Harvey]

James Bond film continuity is a mess. I look at it sort of how Arthur C. Clarke approached the continuity of the Space Odyssey series--namely, each installment is a different take on common elements, but not a direct sequel in the exact same continuity.

Bond's character changed from actor to actor, and supporting roles (such as Blofield) were often changed in installments with the same actor as Bond.

Craig's Bond is the only one that has sought to tell the character's origin from the beginning, and in the two films so far, mantain a much tighter continuity than the series has had before.

But, boy, has this thread found its way off topic. Uh...Superman Returns. Okay movie. Donner seemed to like it. Probably won't get a sequel.

 

[Broccoli]

"This never happened to the other fella" was just a lousy in-joke. Although the Bond films have never been big on continuity, it's obviously supposed to be the same character played by Sean Connery, George Lazenby, and Roger Moore. Lazenby looks at mementos as he reminiscences about previous adventures where Bond was played by Connery. The opening of Diamonds Are Forever has Sean Connery looking to exact revenge against Blofeld following Lazenby's On Her Majesty's Secret Service. References are made to the death of Bond's wife in the later Roger Moore films, including Bond making a visit to her grave.

Once you get into the Timothy Dalton, Pierce Brosnan, and Daniel Craig eras, I look at them as each being a new iteration of the character, but before that there's some kind of continuity at work as Bond ages through the 60s, 70s, and into the mid-80s.

The Dalton movies referenced Tracy as well.

And there might have been a slight reference to her in TWINE.

 

[Out Of My Vulcan Mind]

The Dalton movies referenced Tracy as well.

And there might have been a slight reference to her in TWINE.

Yeah, but once you get to that point the timeline no longer holds together, so personally I look at them as new iterations after Moore. I guess you could stretch things to include Dalton in a continuity that started with Connery, but Brosnan definitely stands apart from a timeline point of view.

 

[Broccoli]

The Dalton movies referenced Tracy as well.

And there might have been a slight reference to her in TWINE.

Yeah, but once you get to that point the timeline no longer holds together, so personally I look at them as new iterations after Moore. I guess you could stretch things to include Dalton in a continuity that started with Connery, but Brosnan definitely stands apart from a timeline point of view.

Oh yeah, I get you. I'm just throwing it out there.

 

[JacksonArcher]

I heard Donner said to Singer, "Hey, pshht. Make the movie a vague sequel to mine. Audiences will love it."

And thus Superman Returns was born.