supermanreturns

Much like the 16-year wait for the fourth “Star Wars” film, the 19-year wait for the fifth “Superman”
movie was filled with anticipation from the nostalgic movie-going public. As the release date neared,
people wondered if it would be great. Unlike the wait for “Star Wars,” the last installment in
Superman’s franchise, “Superman IV: The Quest for Peace” was a dismal failure. There was
nowhere for Superman to go but up, up and away.

“X-Men” director Bryan Singer abandoned that franchise to helm “Superman Returns” and the
results are disappointingly mixed. While it is wonderful that Singer wanted to pay close homage to
the original films starring Christopher Reeve and Marlon Brando, what results is a movie that is not
completely a sequel because of continuity problems and not completely a re-imagining because of
direct links to the original films.

Singer is a competent director, but he needs to stay away from superhero movies because he is
unwilling to commit and seal the deal, so to speak. While some brooding cinematography works for
the traditionally moody “X-Men,” Singer’s use of it here is completely misplaced. Gone is all the fun
from a character that is traditionally the most crowd-pleasing comic hero.

Superman returns to Earth after years in space searching for Krypton. Meanwhile, Lex Luthor,
played to the hilt by Kevin Spacey, is devising a way to steal Superman’s continent-growing crystals
from his long-abandoned Fortress of Solitude and create continents to sell on the real estate
market. Both Superman and the audience return to a sterile world without humor or fun.

Singer fumbles the ball here in more than a few places. While new Superman actor Brandon Routh
and Spacey deliver great performances, Singer completely miscasts Lois Lane in the form of Kate
Bosworth, who (like Kirsten Dunst in the “Spider-Man” films) barely seems to know where she is, let
alone who she’s playing. By the way, Miss Bosworth, eat a sandwich. Parker Posey is charming as
Luthor’s squeeze, but ultimately wasted.

The film borrows lines wonderfully from “Superman: The Movie” at first, but it quickly becomes
tiring. Does Singer have anything original to say. Yes, he does, but it is a mythos-wrecking plot twist
that undermines Superman’s entire cultural power. Dare I say that Singer takes this material far too
seriously. Director Richard Donner and Reeve found the balance between fun and credibility.

There is a spectacular airplane rescue that is worth the price of admission and hearing the rousing Superman theme amid the flying credits is awesome, but for
the rest of the film Superman simply catches and lifts heavy objects and there is no time lent to Clark Kent or the Daily Planet, a real misfire by the writers and
Singer. With the digital effects today, why didn’t we see a fistfight with a super villain? You know, something truly epic in scope and, well, super.

Singer understands Superman, but only so far as what he wants to understand. He ignores the positive waves that emanate from the Superman story as loudly
as the primary colors on his costume, which Singer mutes to maroons by the way.
Singer was a safe choice to bring Superman back to the big screen, but somewhere in here, he’s pushing some kind of personal agenda that I never could put
my finger on and he never lets go and lets the Superman universe stretch its legs. The film is too serene, the mood too restrained. How did Superman become
boring? Even “Superman IV,” as bad as it was, wasn’t boring!

It’s more like, “Up! Up! And, oh wait, hold on sec. Don’t fly to high or fast!”

Hopefully the sequel will take the potential of this flick and run with it, but I’m not holding my breath.