Wednesday, June 13, 2012

Superman movies tend to suck.

This new Superman movie called The Man of Steel is probably going to suck. I have a few reasons for saying this. First of all I don't like the costume. Its a little too much NuSuperman for my tastes. But also I hear the villain will be Zod. Again. I know it's not like Superman has the greatest rouges gallery but he has some gems. It doesn't have to be Luthor and Zod over and over again. Why not Brainiac, or Doomsday, or Darkseid? But the biggest reason I think it will suck is historical precedence. I mean lets be honest they all kinda sucked.

This first occurred to me at my comic book stand/store, I was playing the old Supergirl movie which I had never seen before then. As I was watching it on and off while helping customers I thought "Yeah this kinda sucks, but is it really any worse then the Christopher Reeves movies?" I know that's sacrilege among my fellow nerds but I'm prepared to defend it. Let's look at some of the ridiculous random nonsense that infected the Reeves Superman movies.

Example one: Remember when Lois was flying with Superman and they were just touching fingers and she was still flying? What the fuck was going on there? How was she flying? Yeah I know its sci-fi and I gotta suspend my disbelief but you gotta meet me halfway and that means the story has to at least not violate its own internal logic. Superman can fly. OK fair enough. But Lois can't fly so how is this happening.

Example two: Superman flying around the work to turn back time. Nuff said.

Example three: The saran wrap 'S' that Superman rips off his costume to throw at Zod (or was it one of Zod's goons?) What the fuck was that all about?

You know what I could go on to list tons of random nonsensical bullshit in those movies but that would require me having to sit through them again to remember it all and I'm just not going to do that. 2006's Superman V: The Broken Condom otherwise known as Superman Returns was to me by far the best Superman movie. It certainly had it's flaws. But at least it wasn't full of random bullshit.

Now I can already hear you say "You have to think of how amazing Superman: The Movie seemed at the time." I grant you that by 1978 standards the special affects were amazing. So what? I'm supposed to consider it a good movie because it had great special affects by the standards of 40 years ago? By that logic Michael Bay movies will be considered classics in a few decades. The Transformers movies looked fucking amazing, doesn't mean they weren't shitty movies.

Will I go see Superman: The Man of Steel? Oh yeah, I'm a comic book nerd. Am I excited about it? No. I have a feeling the best I can hope for it that it'll be OK.


  1. Your examples are just anal retentiveness. Honestly, it's up there with saying Superman Returns sucked because his hair was parted on the wrong side.

  2. Really? Anal retentiveness? Is it really anal retentive to point out unexplained nonsense that doesn't even make sense within a film's internal logic. What was the point of the saran wrap S? How did he do that? Why did he do that? What point did it serve in the story?

    And the whole going back in time thing in Superman I, aside from it being rediculous, even within the internal logic of a Superman movie, from a narrative stand point it's a terrible idea to give an already over powered character yet another power. Giving him time travel makes it so he litteraly can't lose.

    Take your nostalgia goggles off for a moment and take a look at those movies. They do not stand up.