.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

What Would People Think?

Tuesday, June 27, 2006

Has Superman Returned?

Roger Ebert on Superman Returns:

This is a glum, lackluster movie in which even the big effects sequences seem dutiful instead of exhilarating...........But when the hero, his alter ego, his girlfriend and the villain all seem to lack any joy in being themselves, why should we feel joy at watching them?

James Berardinelli - another reviewer whose advice I often follow - on Superman Returns:

Superman Returns is near the top - if not at the top - of the superhero movie pile.

You'd think movie reviews were just opinions or something, instead of what I know them to be - documented observations of scientific fact. What's especially funny is how Ebert and Berardinelli come to exact opposite conclusions about each aspect of the film: the casting, the special effects, the romance, etc.

I'm inclined to trust Berardinelli over Ebert on this - partly because I want so much to like this movie, partly because Berardinelli, like me, is a confirmed comic book geek (well, I was one in former years). Oh well. It's not like anything's gonna keep me from seeing the movie. I just hope it doesn't make me weep over wasted potential like the previous Superman movies and X-Men 3.


  • Ebert has gotten to be really hit an miss these days. I used to trust him, but no longer do. Too often his good reviews coincide with a big-name attractive female lead. At least that's my theory. Kate Bosworth probably isn't big enough, and so the movie gets a bad review.

    Also, it's Brian Singer directing, so it's got to be very good (but not necessarily as brilliant as it could have been)(i.e. X1 and X2).

    By Blogger Matthew B. Novak, at 6/27/2006 11:34 PM  

  • I think the primary argument against Ebert on this one is that he liked the original "Superman" so much. Um, was he in the john during that entire ridiculous flying sequence where Lois does her little "Can you read my mind" monologue? Have I mentioned that was the worst idea in the history of filmmaking?*

    And not to mention, Ebert gave the first "Garfield" movie positive reviews even though it rejected a central tenet of the script, namely, that Jon has no luck with women and ergo should have had no chance with the vet. I know that's entirely off subject, but it's been boiling up inside me for a while.

    In short, I agree with Matt: I'm less inclined to agree with Ebert these days.

    * (I will grant that another candidate for worst movie decision ever was to not have anyone hear CFK say "Rosebud" and yet centering "Citizen Kane" around it.)

    By the way, please contact me with a review after you see the movie, if you see it first (I'm probably not going until next week).

    By Blogger Mike, at 6/28/2006 10:15 AM  

  • And so... how was it?

    Blog posts flow like molasses over here.

    By Blogger Mike, at 7/04/2006 1:25 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home