Look! Up in the Sky! It's a Bird! It's a Plane

[Alexander]

Superman Returns trailer

Watch...and be amazed.

I cannot WAIT to see this! Being a HUGE fan of the Christopher Reeve films (well, the first two anyway), I admit that I was very skeptical that they could pull off another Superman film without him. But this looks incredible. Watch the kid playing Superman/Clark Kent. He's really channelling Reeve. And Kevin Spacey! He's perfect as Luthor (he's definitely got a Gene Hackman thing going on here). June 30th can't come fast enough!

There's really only one question...

Is it too soon?

Edited May 3, 2006 by Alexander

[ep1str0phy]

Well, I'm psyched (hides photos of himself as 3-year-old in Superman T-shirt).

[gdogus]

eh.

Give me the next in the Batman Begins sequence.

[Aggie87]

Do they keep re-treading the same story for Superman (with some tweaking - like Lois Lane having a kid now), or is this a continuation of the stories from the Christopher Reeve films? Or a completely different storyline altogether?

That trailer didn't really do that much for me, to be honest. I saw a trailer on tv for the newest X-Men movie that looked more interesting.

[Rooster_Ties]

Kevin Spacey looked like the biggest draw for me. Coin toss as to whether I'd see it or not.

[Christiern]

I agree with Aggie, it didn't strike me as an interesting trailer, not at all--boring, in fact. Perhaps I'm missing something. What is it about it that so excited you, Alexander?

[Alexander]

Do they keep re-treading the same story for Superman (with some tweaking - like Lois Lane having a kid now), or is this a continuation of the stories from the Christopher Reeve films? Or a completely different storyline altogether?

That trailer didn't really do that much for me, to be honest. I saw a trailer on tv for the newest X-Men movie that looked more interesting.

As I understand it, this film (while not a direct sequel) is meant to take place after the events of "Superman II" (effectively negating both III and IV, thank God). Following the confrontation with the Kryptonian villians in that film, Superman has (apparently) left earth for several years (nearly a decade, I think). At the same time, the Daily Planet staff obviously believes that Clark Kent has left for greener pastures. This film deals with what happens when Superman returns to earth and Kent returns to Metropolis (hence the film's title, "Superman Returns"). Now, you can tell that this film is meant to be a part of the series begun in "Superman" and "Superman II." First of all, the music from the earlier films is being used in this film. Secondly, in the teaser trailer that has been around for a while now, Marlon Brando's dialogue as Jor-El is used (in addtion, you can see Brando's face among the crystals in the Fortress of Solitude while Luthor is prowling around there). Ma Kent's line (heard in the preview) Clark's father believed that Clark was here "for a reason" echoes a line in the first "Superman" film. Clearly, this is intended to be a part of that cycle. The scenes relating to Clark's childhood will probably be seen in flashback, rather than starting the whole story from scratch. So no, this is not meant to be a rehash of the same story.

I'd like to see some more villians from the comic book in the films. Only Luthor and Zod came from the comic (III and IV had "new" villians written for the movies). I'd like to see Brianiac, Metallo, and some of the others in upcoming films.

As to what excited me so about this trailer? Well, I was about eight when the first "Superman" film was released, and I saw it in the theater. I loved it, of course. I have a theory that Superman has to be older than you, which means that whichever actor played Superman when you were a kid is the "real" Superman. For my dad, the "real" Superman was George Reeves. He *liked* Christopher Reeve, but he couldn't take the place of the "real" thing in his mind. This is part of the reason that I've never been able to get into "Lois and Clark" or "Smallville." These guys just aren't SUPERMAN to me. But this guy was clearly chosen because he closely resembles (and even sounds like) Christopher Reeve. So he is meant to appeal to people (like me) who were kids when the first films were released, while also becoming the "real" Superman to kids like my daughter. I guess it excites me because it reawakens all of the feelings of wonder I felt when I watched Christopher Reeve flying accross the screen when I was eight. He made this eight year old believe that a man could fly. That's what I felt watching this preview...

[Dave James]

Sorry, but I've had it up to here with Hollywood's style over substance fixation. If I never see another special effects laden "blockbuster", it'll be too soon. Give me decent acting, a good story, solid, believable characters and character development...in short, something I can actually care about, and I'll be a happy camper.

Up over and out.

[Jim Alfredson]

So do you need the latest version of Quicktime to see this? And can you download that version without downloading stupid iTunes!?

[Aggie87]

To avoid any software hassles, you can watch the trailer on youtube.

[Jim Alfredson]

Thanks. Looks pretty cool. I loved the first movie as a kid.

[RDK]

Sorry, but I've had it up to here with Hollywood's style over substance fixation. If I never see another special effects laden "blockbuster", it'll be too soon. Give me decent acting, a good story, solid, believable characters and character development...in short, something I can actually care about, and I'll be a happy camper.

Up over and out.

Huh? Won't argue the "style over substance" generalization, but this is Superman for crissakes and not some character-driven indie flick. It's supposed to be a huge, stylish, effects-laden blockbuster kind of movie. Furthermore, how can you be so certain that there won't be any "decent acting, good story, believable characters, etc." here just from seeing the trailer? Looks pretty solid to me - better, at least, than all but the first two Superman flicks (and personally I think that even they are overrated and showing their age).

I don't know if this will actually be any good, but I'm with Alex in being excited to see it...

[BruceH]

Do they keep re-treading the same story for Superman (with some tweaking - like Lois Lane having a kid now), or is this a continuation of the stories from the Christopher Reeve films? Or a completely different storyline altogether?

That trailer didn't really do that much for me, to be honest. I saw a trailer on tv for the newest X-Men movie that looked more interesting.

As I understand it, this film (while not a direct sequel) is meant to take place after the events of "Superman II" (effectively negating both III and IV, thank God). Following the confrontation with the Kryptonian villians in that film, Superman has (apparently) left earth for several years (nearly a decade, I think). At the same time, the Daily Planet staff obviously believes that Clark Kent has left for greener pastures. This film deals with what happens when Superman returns to earth and Kent returns to Metropolis (hence the film's title, "Superman Returns"). Now, you can tell that this film is meant to be a part of the series begun in "Superman" and "Superman II." First of all, the music from the earlier films is being used in this film. Secondly, in the teaser trailer that has been around for a while now, Marlon Brando's dialogue as Jor-El is used (in addtion, you can see Brando's face among the crystals in the Fortress of Solitude while Luthor is prowling around there). Ma Kent's line (heard in the preview) Clark's father believed that Clark was here "for a reason" echoes a line in the first "Superman" film. Clearly, this is intended to be a part of that cycle. The scenes relating to Clark's childhood will probably be seen in flashback, rather than starting the whole story from scratch. So no, this is not meant to be a rehash of the same story.

I'd like to see some more villians from the comic book in the films. Only Luthor and Zod came from the comic (III and IV had "new" villians written for the movies). I'd like to see Brianiac, Metallo, and some of the others in upcoming films.

As to what excited me so about this trailer? Well, I was about eight when the first "Superman" film was released, and I saw it in the theater. I loved it, of course. I have a theory that Superman has to be older than you, which means that whichever actor played Superman when you were a kid is the "real" Superman. For my dad, the "real" Superman was George Reeves. He *liked* Christopher Reeve, but he couldn't take the place of the "real" thing in his mind. This is part of the reason that I've never been able to get into "Lois and Clark" or "Smallville." These guys just aren't SUPERMAN to me. But this guy was clearly chosen because he closely resembles (and even sounds like) Christopher Reeve. So he is meant to appeal to people (like me) who were kids when the first films were released, while also becoming the "real" Superman to kids like my daughter. I guess it excites me because it reawakens all of the feelings of wonder I felt when I watched Christopher Reeve flying accross the screen when I was eight. He made this eight year old believe that a man could fly. That's what I felt watching this preview...

My "real" Superman is the comic book one. Well, two or three of the versions in the comic... (NOT the lame John Byrne version!)

I guess we're at the point were a new cinematic incarnation of both Superman and Batman is trotted out for each generation. Not necessarily a bad thing. I saw this trailer just the other day and it did kick ass. You've got me wondering who would make a good Brainiac. I've been wracking my, um, brains over it and can't come up with a good candidate. Maybe an unknown would be best.

[RDK]

An even more impressive trailer...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zIfUt5fMGoE'

[Jazzmoose]

You've got me wondering who would make a good Brainiac. I've been wracking my, um, brains over it and can't come up with a good candidate. Maybe an unknown would be best.

Too bad Yul Brynner isn't with us any longer...