It’s hard not to make comparisons between Superman Returns and the 1978 classic Superman: The Movie, which in my opinion remains the best comic book film adaptation of all time. In fact, director Richard Donner’s version of the Superman story is one my all time favourite movies, which is strange because Superman was not one of my favourite superhero characters – mainly because he was too perfect and too powerful to be relatable. I was much more into Spider-Man, whose limitations, flaws and struggles made comic book escapism very compelling. Superman, despite his obvious messianic links, is not really a very interesting character. And yet, the genius of the 1978 interpretation of the Superman story is that it managed to make a great film out of a mediocre albeit iconic comic book character.
Superman Returns is for the most part a noble and successful attempt to resurrect the Man of Steel and adapt him to a post 9/11 America – a disillusioned America with little to hope for, little to believe in and in desperate need of a saviour. But is a post 9/11 America really ready to embrace a savior?
Superman is very different than a lot of the other popular superheroes in that his power is almost limitless. So, although 9/11 could have easily happened with say Spider-Man or Batman, it could never have happened with Superman. He’s the only superhero with enough power to have prevented that catastrophic event. And yet 9/11 did happen – so the unspoken question the film wrestles with is whether Superman’s return is too late. In other words, has 9/11 left us too jaded to believe in a savior or did 9/11 make us even more aware of our need for a savior? Superman Returns may tackle the question, but it doesn’t really answer it satisfactorily, as a messianic figure like the Son of Krypton doesn’t seem to fit that easily into a post 9/11 world as he did into the pre 9/11 world of the 70’s & 80’s.
This may seem like making way too much out of an escapist summer film but, as I’ve stated before, the key to comic book adaptations is adapting the superhero character to our world rather than bringing the audience into the world of the superhero character. Spider-Man and Batman could fit easily into our post 9/11 psyche because like most of us, they would more or less have been powerless spectators of the event. But a messianic figure like Superman doesn’t fit quite as easily because he could have prevented such a tragedy. As we venture into the third millennium and mankind seems even more bent on self destruction, our world may need a messianic figure like the Man of Steel, but in a way, his presence in our reality doesn’t really make sense. After all, how could our world continue to be the way it is when inhabited by someone who has the power to single handedly prevent wars, genocide, hunger and even natural disasters?
The brilliance of Donner’s version of Superman is how well it adapted such a wholesome, fantastical character, to a modern, jaded sensibility. With the 2006 version, a messianic figure like Superman may seem like an easier sell to a post 9/11 reality, but it is really the opposite. In other words, director Bryan Singer has a more difficult challenge in adapting the Superman character to our present time because although a post 9/11 mentality desperately wants a savior; it is too disillusioned to believe in one - i.e. a post 9/11 mentality is willing to embrace a hero but not necessarily a savior.
But enough philosophizing – how does Superman Returns compare to Superman: The Movie?
Christopher Reeves characterization of the Man of Steel was unique and the ideal adaptation of the superhero to a contemporary mindset. In comparison, Brandon Routh’s characterization of Superman is less original and more of an homage to Reeves’ characterization. Nevertheless, Routh does a fairly good job considering he has such big shoes to fill and considering how difficult it is to play such an iconic figure. Routh doesn’t have the same presence and charisma as Reeves, but given more time, Routh could grow into the role, make it his own, and do great things with it. In any case, he’s off to good start and he certainly reflects Superman's sense of melancholy well. If only he didn't look like he was straight out of high school.
Kate Bosworth’s Lois Lane is on par with Margot Kidder’s, but unfortunately Bosworth’s chemistry with Routh is less dynamic than Reeve’s chemistry with Kidder. Bosworth seems to have more chemistry with her terrestrial beau, played well by James Marsden.
I never thought anyone could rival Gene Hackman’s characterization of Lex Luther, but Kevin Spacey comes close. He was a superb choice to play the super villain and his depiction of the character is the strongest performance in the film. Almost immediately, Spacey makes the character his own, accentuating the drama with his acting prowess and electrifying screen presence. His performance may be less understated than Hackman’s, but it is no less compelling.
The special effects in Superman Returns are extremely well executed but they have less emotional impact than those of the 1978 version. In Superman: The Movie the effects weren’t only impressive for their time, they were also infused with a sense of wonder – something that is lacking in the 2006 version. The ad copy for the 1978 version was: “You’ll believe a man can fly.” And it’s true, we did believe a man could fly (or at the least we believed in Hollywood's ability to convince us of that). But not only did Donner’s Superman make us believe a man can fly, it made us experience the sense of awe we would feel at witnessing such a miraculous sight.
What’s decidedly different about this Superman is its darker tone. There’s something more somber about this version of Superman as Singer revels in the same territory Superman II began to explore – how Superman’s higher calling isolates him from the rest of humanity reinforcing his feelings of alienation. In the original version, Superman’s arrival injected a sense of hope and optimism into our cynical, present day frame of mind. Superman’s second coming doesn’t feel quite as hopeful. But the darker tone doesn’t bother me as much as the confusion of tones. Singer’s Superman doesn’t quite know what it wants to be – it wants to recapture the same escapist optimism brilliantly reflected in Donner’s pre 9/11 version while adapting the character to the darker atmosphere of our post 9/11 reality. The two tones don’t quite mesh well together, giving the film a sense of split personality. It doesn’t help that Singer constantly makes little references or tributes to the Donner version. It might have been better if Singer simply reinterpreted the Superman story altogether and make it his own rather than doing an updated version of the Donner interpretation. But, despite all this, Superman’s Return is indeed a welcome one as Singer charts a new direction for the Son of Krypton .
On The Rickter-Scale Superman Returns rates a 6 out of 10 (B); Superman: The Movie rates a 10 of 10 (A+).
THE RICKTER-SCALE:
10 (A+) – extraordinary, a masterpiece
9.5/9.0 (A) – exceptional, a milestone
8.5/8.0 (A-) – excellent, a classic
7.5/7.0 (B+) – very good, a near classic
6.5/6.0 (B) – good
5.5/5.0 (B-) – fair
4.5/4.0 (C+) – poor
3.5/3.0 (C) – very poor, a near disaster
2.5/2.0 (C-) – terrible, a total disaster
1.5/1.0 (D+) – torture, a catastrophe
0.5/0.0 (F) – abysmal, the end of film as an artform
