I think the problem with Routh in the role was he didn't have presence - Superman is pretty much a God with ultimate powers but has been raise among his "people." Routh spent too much of the film as an homage to Christopher Reeves' Superman when he should have been more concerned with acting. I think Reeves and George Reeve were almost perfect for the rolls and I think if you merged to two, you'd get a perfect Superman.
Superman Returns was just badly written and really contained nothing of what Superman is. There were just moments of nudges and winks to a way better film. The whole issue of turning the Earth back isn't so far off the map being what Superman is. I think was isn't addressed beyond Superman the Movie and Superman II (both versions) is that the story is that of an all powerful being dealing with being the only one of his kind and the responsibility he has to those around him. I think Hancock approched those themes much better than Returns ever could hope to. If someone could make a Superman film about the responsibility of being who he is and how it affects those around him I think we'd be well off. Kent in Retuns was only played for the "wink" and for comic relief, when he should be played as a chance for Superman to be included in humanites gifts - to be apart of the human race rather than as an outsider, which he is as Superman - no matter if he looks human, he isn't. I think that's a great, unexplored theme.
Anyway...
|