Features Film

SECOND LOOK: Superman Returns (Two Different Takes)

Superman-returns-poster
So, Man of Steel is looking pretty, pretty good, huh? I haven’t seen it yet, but based on the trailers it looks like Zack Snyder‘s taken a page out of Terrence Malick: the shot of a young Clark in a makeshift cape running his hands through the long grass could have been ripped straight from a print of Tree of Life. That’s not to say the action doesn’t look good – it does – or that the cast aren’t superlative – they clearly are -, only I find myself wondering where the fun’s gone.

Remember before Christopher Nolan went all “psychological realism” with Batman, when it was okay for a DC superhero film to have a sense of humor?True, Nolan’s films are widely regarded as the definitive take on the character and his predecessors often overstepped the mark – Joel Schumacher, we’re looking at you. One thing I noticed while watching The Dark Knight Rises was that however dark and sprawling it might have been, it was never a film during which I stopped and thought, “Man, I’m really enjoying myself.” Which was odd – it’s a long film (165 minutes) and there are some slow bits.

Bryan Singer‘s Superman Returns might not have had the weight or ambition of Nolan’s reinvention, but I would argue it served a different purpose. Whereas The Dark Knight looked firmly towards the storm clouds on the horizon – Lucius Fox’s phone-enslaving device seems particularly prescient given current concerns about the NSA -, Superman Returns cast its eye back towards sunnier times, times when it was okay for a film to simply promise “You’ll believe a man can fly!”

Superman, for all he’s been through, has always been an aspirational figure. As Brando‘s Jor-El says of the people of Earth, “They could be great people Kal-El if they wish to be. They only lack the light to show the way, this reason above all is why I send them you, my only son.” He’s Jesus, sure, a big, blue, All-American Boy Scout, but, at the heart of it, Superman is about hope. Batman seems to have taken the monopoly on grit – Christian Bale‘s voice often suggests he’s been gargling with it. Has the world got so cynical we don’t have room for a little innocent fun?

Did Brandon Routh‘s performance ape Christopher Reeve‘s? Of course it did, but given Reeve’s legend had only grown in the 20 years since Superman IV (closer to 30 years if we backdate to Superman II), it made sense to stick to the mould. Smallville gave us an angsty Clark trying to find himself, Batman Begins had already claimed that decade’s origin story for The Caped Crusader: why not give the audience what they want? If that also means a diabolically campy Kevin Spacey over-enunciating the word “krrrryptonite” with gleeful malice, why the hell not? And yes: all this time later, Lex Luthor is still after the ultimate, ill-conceived land grab, but, with everything else that’s happened in the world – the collapse of the Soviet Union, the end of the moral certainties of the Cold War, to name but one -, isn’t that sort of a comfort?

The action sequence with the crashing plane topped anything we’d seen in any previous Superman film (or any superhero film, I’d argue). And yes, giving Superman and Lois a love child was unnecessary, but, you know what, when Lex Luthor came out of his cabin brushing his teeth, I chuckled, damnit! I laughed, I smiled, I enjoyed myself. Am I glad to see a new take on the franchise, sure, but do I regret having one last chance to spend some time with an old cinematic friend before the inevitable Nolanisation? No, I do not. Love letters are something you only value after the fact and Singer crafted a good one.

Goodbye, Golden Age Superman. You will be missed.

– Rob Wallis

 

So what do you think? Do you agree with David that Superman Returns was a lackluster imitation or do you think Rob’s got a point that maybe that’s what people really want to see?

About the author

Robert Wallis

You can also read Rob's work at www.ofallthefilmblogs.blogspot.com.