[ironjade]

Although I've seen this movie countless times I thought I'd watch Sky's HD version. Big mistake. It shows up the difference in the elements used to make the fx sequences really clearly so that back/front projection becomes even more obvious, graininess is even more noticeable throughout and the models look even ropier than they did on the cinema screen.
However, it did give me the chance to check on something I never realised until it was pointed out: the voice of Jeff East's young Clark Kent is actually provided by Christopher Reeve.
None of which prevents it from being an enjoyable, lovingly made, undeniable classic.
Can't see "Superman Returns" lasting so well.

[rybev]

Originally Posted by ironjade

Although I've seen this movie countless times I thought I'd watch Sky's HD version. Big mistake. It shows up the difference in the elements used to make the fx sequences really clearly so that back/front projection becomes even more obvious, graininess is even more noticeable throughout and the models look even ropier than they did on the cinema screen.
However, it did give me the chance to check on something I never realised until it was pointed out: the voice of Jeff East's young Clark Kent is actually provided by Christopher Reeve.
None of which prevents it from being an enjoyable, lovingly made, undeniable classic.
Can't see "Superman Returns" lasting so well.

It looks amazing on Blu-Ray, seeing the rear projection etc is part of the charm of these older effects now.
I still believe a man can fly

[revans9]

Originally Posted by ironjade

Although I've seen this movie countless times I thought I'd watch Sky's HD version. Big mistake. It shows up the difference in the elements used to make the fx sequences really clearly so that back/front projection becomes even more obvious, graininess is even more noticeable throughout and the models look even ropier than they did on the cinema screen.
However, it did give me the chance to check on something I never realised until it was pointed out: the voice of Jeff East's young Clark Kent is actually provided by Christopher Reeve.
None of which prevents it from being an enjoyable, lovingly made, undeniable classic.
Can't see "Superman Returns" lasting so well.

I watched my dvd of this on saturday night actually. Still stands up extremely well even though the effects are inevitably a bit ropey by modern standards. There's actually a lot of plot packed into two hours. Considering how many slightly-off performances Brando gave in his career, he got it spot on in this.

I wonder how Jeff East's false nose looks on on blu-ray

there's a great moment after Lois/Superman have done their nightflight. In one shot, Superman says goodnight, flies off and the camera then follows Lois to her front door where Clark Kent is standing. very cleverly done, though i expect most people don't notice it.

Superman Returns didn't seem right at the time and hasn't improved any, so if Man of Steel is a success next year I expect it will basically be forgotten. A $200 million exercise in fanboy worship.

[ironjade]

Originally Posted by revans9

I watched my dvd of this on saturday night actually. Still stands up extremely well even though the effects are inevitably a bit ropey by modern standards. There's actually a lot of plot packed into two hours. Considering how many slightly-off performances Brando gave in his career, he got it spot on in this.

I wonder how Jeff East's false nose looks on on blu-ray

there's a great moment after Lois/Superman have done their nightflight. In one shot, Superman says goodnight, flies off and the camera then follows Lois to her front door where Clark Kent is standing. very cleverly done, though i expect most people don't notice it.

Superman Returns didn't seem right at the time and hasn't improved any, so if Man of Steel is a success next year I expect it will basically be forgotten. A $200 million exercise in fanboy worship.

That's my favourite FX shot ever and until yesterday, although I knew how it was done, I'd never seen the join.
I don't know why they bothered with Jeff East at all: false nose, different voice, there's not that much of him actually left in the movie at all.
I agree that Brando definitely earned his money in this movie, along with just about everyone else.
Ned Beatty grates a bit but Gene Hackman, for once not turning down a decent part in a blockbuster, is as magnetic as ever.
If Kevin Spacey had been given more to work with instead of being swamped by the production design and as crappy love story, he might also have come up with something memorable but sadly, it wasn't to be.

[not_the_doctor]

Originally Posted by ironjade

... Can't see "Superman Returns" lasting so well.

Superman Return's best legacy shot was to be the weak first movie of an overall great trilogy. Kind of like how Batman Begin's street cred improved after Dark Knight. Since they're rebooting the Superman series now, that's not going to happen.

As for Superman The Movie's effect, they're obviously going to show their age in HD, but I still maintain there are a few flying shots that look better and are more exciting than anything in SR, not to mention that it's just a vastly superior movie. I doubt Reeve's Superman performance will ever be matched.

[mialicious]

Originally Posted by not_the_doctor

Superman Return's best legacy shot was to be the weak first movie of an overall great trilogy. Kind of like how Batman Begin's street cred improved after Dark Knight. Since they're rebooting the Superman series now, that's not going to happen.

As for Superman The Movie's effect, they're obviously going to show their age in HD, but I still maintain there are a few flying shots that look better and are more exciting than anything in SR, not to mention that it's just a vastly superior movie. I doubt Reeve's Superman performance will ever be matched.

Have you forgotten Superman 4..that was worse than superman returns

[ironjade]

Originally Posted by not_the_doctor

Superman Return's best legacy shot was to be the weak first movie of an overall great trilogy. Kind of like how Batman Begin's street cred improved after Dark Knight. Since they're rebooting the Superman series now, that's not going to happen.

As for Superman The Movie's effect, they're obviously going to show their age in HD, but I still maintain there are a few flying shots that look better and are more exciting than anything in SR, not to mention that it's just a vastly superior movie. I doubt Reeve's Superman performance will ever be matched.

The live action, on set flying sequences are excellent but the miniature flying bits, even for the time, weren't too good.
What does hold up are the performances. Playing it totally straight is always the best plan with comic book stories; if the cast don't respect their movie, it's a fairly safe bet the audience won't either, e.g. any Batman movie without Michael Keaton or Christian Bale.

[ironjade]

Originally Posted by mialicious

Have you forgotten Superman 4..that was worse than superman returns

I had . . . until now.
Milton Keynes doubling for Metropolis? Really?
I can't believe I actually paid money to see it.

[not_the_doctor]

Originally Posted by mialicious

Have you forgotten Superman 4..that was worse than superman returns

Sure, but it wasn't part of the same series. And to be honest, I felt better immediately after watching Superman 4 than I did after watching Superman Returns.

Originally Posted by ironjade

The live action, on set flying sequences are excellent but the miniature flying bits, even for the time, weren't too good.

Agree, but the scene where he takes off from Luthor's lair and crashes through the ceiling still gives me a thrill that's completely unmatched by anything in SR. I try to forget the following shot of him over Metropolis, though. I also love the silent take-off from the Daily Planet roof top, which was ruined with a silly swoooosh sound in the remastered version.

[rybev]

What do you mean Superman IV isn't part of the same series?

Parts I - IV are THE series.

[not_the_doctor]

Originally Posted by rybev

What do you mean Superman IV isn't part of the same series?

Parts I - IV are THE series.

I thought you were suggesting that SR wasn't the worst movie in the series, since many people think of it as Superman V. So if that's not the case, I'm not sure what your point about SIV was?

[rybev]

I haven't made any comment about S-IV or SR being the worst, I'm asking why you say that S-IV isn't part of the same series.

[not_the_doctor]

Originally Posted by rybev

I'm asking why you say that S-IV isn't part of the same series.

I'm saying SIV isn't part of the same series as SR.

[rybev]

That's clearer now, it didn't read like that initially.

[-GONZO-]

Originally Posted by ironjade

Although I've seen this movie countless times I thought I'd watch Sky's HD version. Big mistake. It shows up the difference in the elements used to make the fx sequences really clearly so that back/front projection becomes even more obvious, graininess is even more noticeable throughout and the models look even ropier than they did on the cinema screen.

I've just started watching my Blu Ray boxset and noticed something I don't recall seeing on the DVD when Krypton is destroyed.
Just as the bright light of the explosion happens you can clearly see the room the scene was shot in as you see the floor and creases in the bottom left of the curtain/screen they used.
http://i193.photobucket.com/albums/z...3668DCB20B.jpg

[logansdad]

Sorry but i have to do this...

MISTAAAH LOOOTHHHOOOR.

[Fizzbin]

Originally Posted by logansdad

Sorry but i have to do this...

MISTAAAH LOOOTHHHOOOR.

And I have to do this...


Miss TESCHMACHERRRRRRRRRR!!!

[logansdad]

Originally Posted by Fizzbin

And I have to do this...


Miss TESCHMACHERRRRRRRRRR!!!

HAHAHA!!