Superman Returns...pics of the new guy as Supes.
 

This is for my fellow comic book nerds....

My oh my I have really low expectations for this movie now.
At least the Batman movie is going to be good.

http://www.superherohype.com/news/su...ws.php?id=2890 :hmm:

mmmm not a bad looking Superman.

double hmm...

I got mixed feelings about that picture.

Maroon instead of bright red: non-traditional, but I don't think it looks too bad.
Boots and belt look cool.
They screwed with the chest emblem too much. It looks too small, and I don't like it raised like that.
The worst is the guy's expression in that picture. He doesn't look heroic. He looks like Brandon Fraiser trying to be serious (read: like an idiot).

Meh, in the end, no one picture is gonna make or break the movie for me. I'm still forking over 8 bucks to see it.


For reference:

http://www.berkleyidiots.com/~moskie...uperman2fs.jpg

And the bulge! I mean, come on!

It kinda reminds me of Max Fleischer's Superman.

The "S" on the belt is overkill.

I really hope they change some things about it.

Overall, he looks better in it than your average geek at a costume ball would. ;)

I'm sold. They successfully added a few new touches without changing the basic look. My buddy pointed out that "Reeve's underwear was much bigger."

I like the dulling of the reds and the greater amount of blue overall, but like Harry Knowles, I agree that the first shot of Supes should have been in flight.

Oh jeez...maroon is not red. Red was cool. Maroon is...maroon.

Superman is supposed to be pretty cool, this guy looks like a fucktard in the tight blue tights.

What I mean to say is they should have beefed the costume up a little kind of like they did Batman and Spiderman. Give the guy a little definition, make him look like the Man of Steel. Anything to avert the gaze from his Super-crotch, which now that it's been mentioned, I can't stop focusing on when I look at the picture.

I hate to nitpick, but this is my childhood their screwing with. How can I look my nephew in the eye and say "Superman is oh, so cool" while pointing to this guy despite his serious Brenden Frazier style face? I've already lost credibility with him for the Hulk.....

All that being said....I'll probably still go see it....*coughAhem!

Somebody on another board pointed out that Routh looks like a young Ken Wahl in that pic.
I gotta agree.

He looks far too young to be such a poweful hero. I mean, just look at him in the comics, he's a big-square-jawed manly man, Routh looks too young, too small and too innocent... he looks fantastic as Clark but as the man in tights? Ehh...

His suit from the belt down is great but the chest is terrible! Small S? WHY!?! And really, why are their overly visible seams around his arms and shoulders? And the cape, the cape comes out of his neck.. They should've gone for the over the shoulders look.

I really wish they cast and designed Supes like an Alex Ross painting..
http://www.sequart.com/superman/poster.JPG

Regardless I'm still lookin' forward to the film, I love Singer's work.

Well.. Maybe they chose him because he could act hopefully. I do remember at one stage they were looking at Nicolas Cage for the part.
Come to think of it, can someone confirm that when ChristopherReeve was cast, he got the part mostly because of his square jaw and was actually blonde at that time?

Thank God we didn't end up with Nick Cage... He does look pretty good though.

The only thing I don't like is the maroon. It's not red enuff. Superman's cape and costume is supposed to have red on it not maroon. The rest is good tho.

- Undercover_Man

Yah, the guy looks like a Christopher Reeve wannabe. I was so amazed when I saw his movies - like, they took a cartoon character and found an actor who could actually pull it off. This guy, well, I'll have to see him in action. After all, I was pleasantly surprised by that Keaton guy in the first Batman.

I think Routh looks good for the part, but as mentioned earlier, I didn't like his look in this particular picture. But again, it's just one picture. However, like others have voiced concerns over, I'm not happy with the costume modifications. The maroon just doesn't work, and they need to get back to the traditional Superman red. Also, though I'm slightly ok with the S on the belt buckle--better than Batman's bat-nipples, right?--I'm not ok with what they've done with his chest emblem. The S is just a big rubber mold and looks more like it came out of a cheap Halloween costume kit than what's supposed to be the real deal.


Regardless....I'm gonna see this no matter what as well :\

Its going to be very hard for me to watch someone besides Reeve...and as much as I LOVE brendan fraser I have to agree with Moskie.

I thought the same thing...

i don't think people will buy it..

something about the costume is just too... blah. no action or tactical gear... i know that supes doesn't and wouldn't need anything like that, but just the same i don't know if people these days will buy Superman.

don't get me wrong i have more faith in brian singer than i do god, but maybe it's just that picture, its too plain. he's superman he should stand out. it looks like he's trick or treating.

i guess i'll wait till the movie, i'll see it anyway.

I'm not sure if the realism and muted colors work for superman like they do so well for Batman (Tim Burton Batman not Schumacher Batman). I always thought Superman was meant to be a little flashy and unrealistic. I have faith in Bryan Singer though, I don't think he'll disappoint.

That may be a pre-production still, and not truly representative of the final product. Reeves' superman suit is probably the best superhero costume in the movies. I never liked the body armour version of the bat suit, and don't care for Spider-Man's raised rubber webs instead of their being part of the fabric.

But that's really not indicative of the quality of the movie. There's never been a good live action batman movie, but both Spider-Man movies have absolutely rocked. The costume can have problems and the movie still work.

The picture looks like a snap of a TV show, not a Major Motion Picture character...

^ thanks micah!! that's what my brain refused to come up with. it seems to lack a certain dynamic. i know supes is supposed to be the original superhero and doesn't need cool stuff but it just doesn't seem like it will work. truth, justice and the american way don't seem to hold much power over people today. IMHO.

Eh... not digging the emblem, but the maroon's okay. That aside, I'll fork over the money to see it, if only to say I have.

Really I'm jazzed about the Ghost Rider pics they have up there.

The maroon makes the suit look dirty, IMHO.

Shani, I just have to say, you are my kinda girl. You love Harry Potter, Clive Cussler, and Brendan Fraser. You ROCK.
/end threadjack

On topic, I enjoyed all the original Supermans except for the last one. One of my best memories as a young child is being woke up, lead to the car in my nightgown, and driven to the drivein to see the second Superman. Here's hoping to a decent movie.

I'n not feeling this guy. Maybe it's just the expression on this one picture of him. He doesn't look at all serious. Like others have said, he's looking like her trying to fint into the part. He doesn't look like he's one with the character. Maybe he'll grow into it. I'll wait for more info before I shell over 8 buckaroos.

Hmm...I ain't buying it. There's something not just right about the picture. The actor's too young. Maroon ain't red! Logo on chest ain't big nuf. Belt isn't yellow enough.

Kinda reminds me of Lois and Clark show, it doesn't remind me of Reeves (RIP)

wow
*scratching Superman off my 'Must See' List*

That costume doesn't even look as good as any of the tv versions (the best live action version of which is The Adventures of Superboy).

But I stand by my assertion that one publicity still is no indication of quality.

Maybe this is too off topic but is anyone else sick of Hollywood being the most expensive recycling plant ever? How about instead of re-doing superman they come up with an original idea...

Hubby and I were discussing this the other day. It seems like the majority of movies that come out nowadays are either remakes or sequels.

Eh. I don't see any problem with producing new Superman movies. There are somewhere between 3 and 4 thousand Superman stories available to be told from the comic books, and a half dozen new ones every month.

They do Superman because he's the most popular comic book character in history (not currently, but throughout history), which gives them instand character recognition.

Certainly there are other stories out there to be told. Alan Moore's Supreme stories are arguably the best Silver Age Superman stories ever written.

But when a movie studio starts to look for a comic to adapt, they want the big guns. These movies cost a literal fortune to make, so they want a proven commodity. At DC that's Superman and Batman. DC would like for Wonder Woman to be in that class, but she isn't. At Marvel you have Spider-Man and the X-Men, and a step down from those, the Fantastic Four.

I don't have as much of a problem with the adaptations that haven't been done before as I do with the total recycles. We already have like 4 superman movies, why another one? Why not a new idea instead.

Haven't you heard? Hollywood is out of idea...

The new superman looks a lot like a young and more slender Ken Wahl from the old Wiseguy series.

<img src="http://www.appstate.edu/~jt52439/supesoriginal.jpg">


Here's more like it ;)
<img src="http://www.appstate.edu/~jt52439/supes.jpg">

that does look quite a bit better, but the more i think of it the more i feel they're going to have trouble selling super man overall to people today.

but the costume there does look much better. :thumbsup:

The bigger 'S' looks INFINITELY superior to the small maroon one.

It really does. The small S makes the guys chest look far too puny. This is The Man Of Steel here people! He's supposed to have a chest like the front of an F150!!

Eh I don't like this Superman. He looks like Topher Grace on steroids...that aren't working like he wanted.

Asta!!

I agree that the 'S' on the chest is waaayy toooo small. Needs to be bigger. But something else seems to be off. Like the colour of the whole thing isn't right, maroon is not the right colour and the yellow to me seems to be a little dull. But you know Hollywood, this will be the summers next hit.

Perhaps these colors will be enhanced or work better with all the CG they'll be using for all his super powers? :confused:

Asta!!

and what's with that pic anyway?

Superman does not POSE!!! i cry outrage!!!

Whaddaya call this!?
:)
http://www.kualosw.com/eevyl/files/superman.jpg

That's all natural baby.

Strutting

There's a differences between posing and strutting ;)

I CALL IT OUTRAGE!!!! NEVER WILL SUPERMAN BE REDEEMED IN MY EYES!!! NEVER!!!

but i will still see the movie. just in case.

Superman
 

I'm with Mr. Deflok on this one. After reading Kingdom Come by Alex Ross and Mark Waid, not many can epitomize Superman and Chris Reeve was the closest so far to try.

Ethan.

i dont like the guy. he looks small. his neck is skinny. his face is bony. he has no muscle. why doesnt the media ever use people that look like the characters?

definitely not liking that. As someone previously stated, that looks very "sitcom"ish rather than movie material.

They could have done better I think.

To go out on a limb here, maybe we should wait and see what his performance is like? I mean... to be honest, his costume, his pose and all of that can really go hang, as long as he acts the part well enough to make me believe he's Kal-El.

However...

I think a lot of the problem with that pic is he seems to have a very ordinary-Joe stature. Like, a comic book pose to me is feet planted apart, shoulders back, chest thrust out, fists riveted to hips, a pose of poise to suit a man of steel. That would have made a huge difference. If he's unable to get something like a pose right, what chance has he got of nailing the nuance?

I've been reading a bit about the movie now on www.bluetights.net and I'm really looking forward to it. While I agree that this version of Superman doesn't look like a muscle-bound comic book version of Superman, the "look" of the character isn't as important to me as the ability to act the part. I am a huge fan of Smallville, not because of the look of the character, but because of Tom Welling's ability to bring the confusion and turmoil of the character to life.

i think the superman looks kinda puny, and the S is too small, also that picture is weird, but im jus stating stuff already said, but that one photoshopped pic rocked, if onyl u could change the actor lol

There is someone that I think would have been perfect for the role. He's big and muscular, has the right square jawed look, the right voice, and the presense, and is about the right age given that they're continuing on from the Richard Donner films. If I ran the world, Patrick Warburton would long ago have been playing Superman.

Still, Bryan Singer has a good track record, and Kevin Spacey as Lex looks great and is an inspired choice for a creepy evil genius, so I'll be there with bells on. Hell, I'd be there if it stared Paul Reubens and was directed by Joel Shumacher.

Gilda

Warburton would be great, very Alex Ross-ish but I'd find it hard to take him seriously due to his super-comicness.

I don't know...... Its gonna be hard to fill reeves shoes. I don't know if I can get into it. I'll see it when it comes out, but I'll be pretty skeptical about it. :hmm:

He needs a roll of quarters in his tights...and
I like the red, the maroon just isn't distinctive enough.

I see Patrick Warburton as more of a Captain Marvel than a Superman. They've both got that constant squinting thing going on.

I've been watching the 'making of' videos that Singer has been putting up (thanks for the link, by the way :thumbsup: ) and I have to say, Singer is really doing a bang up job.

I mean, I haven't seen the suit in action (or the actor for that matter), but it looks like it might turn out to be pretty good.

Didn't Warburton do the voice for Superman in all those Jerry Seinfeld skits?

You're welcome for the link. That's one of the reasons that I revived this thread. I wasn't too sure I was going to like the movie until I started watching some of his journals, and I'm starting to get a good feeling about it now. I encourage others to take a look and see what you think.

Footage from the movie.
 

For those of you who want to see some of what the film looks like; but not be too spoiled.

This is a fan made teaser promo for Superman Returns. The official teaser isn't suppose to hit theaters until sometime in November.

http://www.supermanimagery.com/SRmovies/Superman_Returns_Teaser_Trailer.mov

Copy and Paste; because the link doesn't seem to work for some odd reason.

New Pic . . . . few days old.
http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/j/msnbc/Se...ide.hlarge.jpg


Also, possible spoilers in the video . . .
Taken from Singer's videos and made as a teaser

The Tick as Superman??? That'd be too hilarious!!
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

http://raincloud.warnerbros.com/wbmo...teaser_500.asx

Direct link to a teaser.

Neat teaser... though I don't think I've ever seen the Superman as God angle played quite so heavily...

I hope not... Christopher didn't need any CG, he was all Superman!

But really what CG would they really need besides flying and heat vision?

The only thing I can think of is bright red is really hard to film right.

Trailer 2 is up. It is a lot less vague - and extreemly entertaining - so please enjoy.

i liked the trailer a lot. it's made me a *lot* less fearful of it being really bad.

and kevin spacey seems to play the perfect lex luthor.

Where Batman has a terrible problem with continunity, Superman seems to be able to stand on it's own. Theme music by John Williams, storyline picking up where Christopher Reeves left off, and a very talented cast = happy Willravel.

slight fanboy rant here...

I just read an article in the latest issue of Southwest Airline's Spirit magazine while I was flying this weekend, titled "Hero Worship," talking about the different incarnations and interpretations Superman has gone through. It's a good read, and I'd link to it, but it doesn't appear to be available online.

Anyway, towards the end of the article, the author has a few words with Bryan Singer regarding the cliched question of "Who's the real person: Superman or Clark Kent?"

A while back, I remember seeing a video where this same question was posed to Singer during some convention, at which point he quickly gave "Superman" as the answer. Which always irked me. Mainly because the question itself is flawed: there's more than two personalities to consider. The character of Superman is wholly different from Clark the reporter, who is wholly seperate from the Clark raised by Jonathan and Martha Kent on a farm in Smallville. And there may arguably be more, when you consider his Kryptonian origins as Kal-El...

As far as I'm concerned, it's the Clark on the farm that's the "true" personality. It's the one that isn't a guise serving some purpose. I guess I've taken this notion for granted through my experiences with the story of Superman, so I was a bit taken aback when Singer gave the simple answer as Superman being the real personality.

Anyway, back to the article: as Singer was giving his answer this time to the author of the article, he stopped himself. In midsentence he seemed to come to the realization that, indeed, it is the Clark Kent we see on the farm who embodies the real personality. I'd quote what he says exactly, but I can't find the article online.

I just find it frustrating that Singer came upon this too late. He's a great director, and I wish he had a chance to make the movie with this idea in mind. This won't ruin the movie or anything, but reading his quote here made me realize how close we might have been to a more interesting (in my opinion, at least) portrayal of the character. Hopefully the interpretation he presents is still enjoyable, so we'll see.

All right, just some thoughts that have been floating in my head since I read the article. This seemed like an appropriate place to get it out. :)

I think you are looking at that question the wrong way. There are only two personalities to consider at the current time, Superman and Clark Kent. Just as all of us grow up and use our experiences in life to become the people we are today, Clark Kent grew up to become Superman, using all of his life experience to decide that is who he wanted, and needed, to be. The current Clark Kent is a pure guise, and has very little of what is actually his true personality. In short, Superman is the natural evolution of the young Clark Kent, who leaned to be heroic and caring from his adotped family, and also the necessity of the alter ego to hide he and his loved ones from those who would harm them.

I think the new superman fit quite nicely and I can't wait to be able to see it, I have been waiting for years now, wondering wen te hell they were going to redo it with the nice fx we have those day...

I have seen the trailer when I saw Poseidon (which was crap in my opinion) and it made me want to see it even more... Look like it's going to be amazing...

But do you really think that the natural progression from Clark Kent the farmhand is a god flying around the universe in blue tights and a red cape? That doesn't follow for me. I think Clark decided that the disguise of Superman was needed to allow as much separation from his true self (the farmboy) and the superhero as he could possibly create. The costume is used as a distraction.

I think it's become impossible for him to be that farmboy anymore, so we might only see him express that side of him, inwardly, as he's in costume. But I think there's still a distinction between the hero and the man.

Well consider which disguise covers his face.

I am pumped for this movie. Consider this: Singer has decided to do a sequel to Superman II, thereby negating any expectation of an amazing new origin story. The problem with so many new superhero films is "getting it right." The 80s films (I and II anyway) already got it right, so basically Singer is not fixing what ain't broke.

To put it crudely, he's lowered our expectations. That way it'll be easy to smash them out of the park if A) Spacey is spot on, B) Routh treads a fine line between consistency with Reeve's interpretation and caricature and C) the FX are great. How can he screw it up?

I am afriad I havent been sold on this one. In my heart Mr. Reeve will never be replaced as superman. I dont think I will even be ablt to purchace the DVD edition. Even if they were going for a younger superman look... I feel they have failed.
Please ignore the ramblings of the crazy woman behind the keyboard.

Well look at it this way: George Lazenby, Roger Moore, Timothy Dalton, and Pierce Brosnan never really replaced Sean Connery...but there were several good Bond films made after Sean retired from the role. Goldeneye is one of my favorite movies. This Brandon Routh probably can't replace Chris Reeve in most peoples minds (most people over 20 or so, at least), but he could do a good job. I'm just glad they didn't cast Nicolas Cage.

Just as a fun little aside....I went to High School with the new superman :)

We'll just have to agree to disagree I suppose. I personally think that every experience he had as the boy Clark Kent, every role model that was involved in his life at the time, is what shaped into Superman. Being the older Kent, he is bumbling, ackward, and cowardly to a point. But as Superman, he is courageous, caring, dependable, and confident, all of which are traits instilled in him while growing up on the farm with his foster family. His oft confident persona, which might seem a little like detachment at times, is just a natural expression of his acceptence of his powers and the role he has decided to take on in society, not a mask to hide his long outgrown boyish insecurities.

I say give the guy (Brandon Routh) a chance. Christian Bale (IMHO) played an excellent Batman, better than the ones that preceded him. Surely, the Batman movies, prior to Batman Begins, don't share the same fanboy mythology as Superman and certainly didn't have one consistent actor that sort of galvanize the series, but the fact remains that just like people are presumed innocent (in the court of law), let us presume (in the court of public opinion) that this guy can act. If he messes it up, I have the torches and pitchforks waiting. Still, let us not forget, Christopher Reeve had to start somewhere too.

Christopher Reeve was basically an unknown when he donned the red cape for the first time. He had a few TV roles under his belt (not unlike Brandon Routh), and had acted in one movie, Gray Lady Down, in which he only played a small role (not leading at all). Brandon Routh has just as much of a cnance to make this hero great as Christopher Reeve.

My point exactly.

So is anyone else considering cryogenically freezing themselves for 7 days so as to see the movie sooner? Or am I all alone on that one?

The more I hear about it the more I am pumped. I've even had a couple of Kryptonite-ice slurpies from 7-11 now!

Apparently aberkok has attempted to cryogenically freeze his brain with Krytonite-ice slurpees... so, no... you are not alone.

I had much the same response upon reading aberkok's post. Remember to bundle up.

i'm right with you guys. this could be pretty good.

is anyone else thinking about seeing it in IMAX? I'd really like to, but it doesn't appear to be showing in any IMAX theaters near me (the Baltimore/DC area)

I'll be seeing it at 10:00 on the 27th at an IMAX theater. I wonder how the 3D scenes will be.

Just got back from seeing a 10 o'clock showing in Baltimore. Definitely, definitely worth the wait. Some things are revealed that I did not see coming at *all* Spoiler: it's HIS kid? holy shit. Special effects adn action were great, it was well written, and I believed the character dynamics and motivations... which can be hard with such epic characters.

It's not perfect though. The main problem is its length: the movie doesn't seem to know how or when to end. I think it had more to do with the overall pacing of scenes towards the end, as opposed to there being too much story. And I might not have a problem with it so much, but I could sense the audience getting a bit restless, which in turn made me want the movie to end, so that people would like the movie.

And Routh doesn't quite do it for me (he's pretty darn close though), and I think the main issue is his voice. Maybe I'm being petty, but... it's just not deep enough. It doesn't evoke heroism...

But any remote fan Superman or comics or action movies should see this, 100%, don't hesitate.

And Kumar is now on my shit list.

He looks ok but I like the old one from the tv show when I was about 13 yrs old. Dean Cain!!!!! I wish he could be superman again!!! Hes Hotter!!!!!

BEST MOVIE OF ALL TIME. I CANNOT FIND WORDS TO DESCRIBE THE JOY IN MY HEART.

Out of a scale of 1 to 10, this movie hits an even infinity. Plus 3. Infinity3. It's a number.

Great movie. Bryan Singer is forgiven for abandoning X-Men.

I just returned from a 1pm screening this afternoon and I have to agree... I think I have a new, "best comic book filmed".

Bryan Singer knows how to tell a story and he knows how to film it.

(PS: I watched Superman I and II over the weekend and this film, with a few exceptions, flow nicely from them. I wasn't sure how smooth the transition would be, but it is nice and smooth.)

You're being petty :lol: Routh totally did it for me, I actually had more of a problem with Lois, the actress was just too young for the part. Now I'm being petty...
BTW Spoiler: Anyone else find it kinda cool when Cyclops saved Superman? :lol:

It just kicked soo much ass...

Another vote for awesome! In light of so many poor decisions being made with comic book movies lately (ahem...X3...Fantastic 4...Elektra), it was great to see so many no-brainer decisions being nailed to the wall.

Should there be a sequel I'm curious to see how they handle the BIG SPOILER WHICH I WON'T MENTION (If you've seen it you know what I'm talking about).

The torch of good comic movies begun its pass with Batman Begins and is now firmly passed over. Looking forward to the sequel "Superman Stays"

so can we talk about the film without spoiler tags now? I'll assume so. If you haven't seen the movie yet, don't read this post.

Spoiler: So yea, the kid. It's Superman's. I had absolutely no idea that was going to be the case; it floored me. Did anyone else here even suspect it at all? And was the kid just pretending to be sickly to cover up his abilities? If not, why is he sickly? I really hope the kid (Jason, right?) is a central part of the next movie, because I was left wanting to know more about him.

Was anyone else really affected by the scene where Lex's henchmen are beating up the weakened Supes, followed by Lex stabbing him? It really got to me... gave me a sinking feeling like I was a kid watching Santa get run over by a truck.

Lastly, the movie did a great job of making me wonder whether they were going to have Superman die. I would have bought it. Actually, I think it would have been great if they made that happen... just to be ballsy.

understood. to his credit, i thought he played the clark kent role perfectly.

Spoiler: I think Jason could really be sick. In the flashback to Superman as a teen, he can't fully fly yet. This would suggest that his powers developed gradually from birth.

Folks, for the benefit of those who haven't seen the film, please use spoiler tags for the next few weeks...

I am sure some of the spoilers will get spilled soon enough, but so far the damn is holding.

_________________________________

I'd also like to add that hearing John William's them music was great. It really added to the flow from the first two films.

I guess I'm the only one who in no way forgives Singer for leaving the X-Men series to rot in favor of making this movie. Does it bother no one else that the classic superman retro look was combined with sleek new audis, flat screen TVs and cell phones? Did the stupid copyboy who I know from Not Another Teen Movie not deserve a slap in the face every time he opened his mouth?

Watching Superman save the day was, indeed, awesome. The movie, overall, looked slick (except for a few random sequences when Superman himself looked really cartoony for some reason). I loved Kevin Spacey as Lex Luthor and Routh performed admirably at an impossible task.

On the other hand, the "spoiler" was trite, predictable and boring. They barely did anything with it! Where's the plot about that?!? Lois and Superman had...something...going for each other, but I'm not totally sure what it was since it definitely wasn't love. I REALLY could have done without the It's a bird! It's a plane! No, it's JESU...er...SUPERMAN! crap. Why was Lois so totally unresponsive to Kent's obvious crushing on her? I mean, I know she's involved with two other guys, but she didn't do anything to acknowledge what he was doing, and it was a little hard to dismiss.

It was a solid superhero movie that stuck to the guns of the Superman movie franchise. I enjoyed it and I'd watch it again, but it's nowhere close to Batman Begins or Spiderman 2 in my book.

Spoiler: Here's a question: How did Lois know that the baby was Superman's? As far as she knows, they never had sex. He wiped her memory at the end of SMII. Her memory couldn't have returned or she would know that Clark=Superman. It was the one plot hole that bugged me. Otherwise, unlike Frosstbyte I didn't think it was trite and boring at all. It was handled very well. It wasn't the focus of this film. It was the B or even C story. I expect it will be increasingly important in future films (this is a series after all).

Personally, I think it can stand shoulder to shoulder with Batman Begins and Spiderman II.

I liked it, but it doesn't come anywhere close to making my list of the ten greatest comic book movies. It's only the third best Superman movie IMO.

Gilda