Return of the King
It’s fairly rare that I find a movie that exceeds or maybe even meets my expectations. They always fall short on some point or another, particularly those movies that represent something from my childhood or past. The Lord of the Rings of recent years presents an effeminate and whiny Frodo Baggins amongst many other shortcomings. Lucas loses sight of the authenticity of painstakingly crafted sets, costumes and makeup and utterly fails to cast likable or believable actors for the most important roles in his trilogy of prequels for the beloved Star Wars series. At least a couple of the directors for the Harry Potter films give the impression that they have never read the books and therefore know little about how the characters would behave or respond in situations that are not already scripted into the story. I could go on to outline the shortcomings of several others of the most important films or series of films of the last decade (The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, I’m looking in your direction), but I’d rather be the next in a long line of fanboys to sing the praises of Superman Returns. The only problem being, I’m not sure I could say enough good things about it.
To begin with, Brandon Routh is great. I think back to the first time I saw a preview with him in it and how I thought, “What underwear catalogue featuring failed actors did this guy crawl out from under?” Words (or thoughts) I’ll have to eat. Routh is the perfect successor to the late Christopher Reeve, personifying both “mild mannered” and “man of steel” in his performance. It is evident, most particularly as Clark Kent, that Routh studied long and hard the previous Superman films and matches, almost exactly, the mannerisms and vocal qualities of Reeve. Every push of his glasses onto the bridge of his nose, every “uhhmm” and “Lois?” (like when she’s walking away from Clark and he’s tripping over people, objects and his own tongue to try and get to her and ask if they can get lunch), every ounce of Superman’s gentle and humble confidence is present in Routh. The other actors lend excellent support and the entire ensemble works well together. Kevin Spacey does an excellent job as Lex Luthor, and though one review noted that Kate Bosworth seemed a little stunted and had little of the magic of Margot Kidder’s Lois Lane, I felt she brought a new dimension to the character, such as attractiveness.
All of the other elements of the film are top notch. The film has excellent cinematography, the special effects are spectacular without overshadowing the story, and the music, Marlon Brando cameo and even opening credits make the movie a sort of homage to the Richard Donner films of the seventies and eighties. However, the thing that most deserves mention is the director. So much so that at the end of the movie, as I turned to my brother, all I could say was, “Brian Singer is Superman.” Singer has proved himself as an excellent director many times, as much by his absence as his presence (note the difference in quality between the latest installment of X-Men and the previous two). Superman Returns, however, is sure to become one of his most important works.
If there’s one thing I’m still a little unsure about, it’s all the Messianic imagery of the film. It’s always interesting to see how film makers insert these ideas into their movies. WARNING: SPOILERS!!! Beginning with Superman’s conversation with Lois about the world’s need for a savior, the movie begins to draw comparisons between the “Man of Steel” and the Son of Man. Note how during the confrontation between Superman and Lex Luthor, after Superman suffers under a brutal barrage from has been beaten senseless by Luthor’s henchmen, Luthor uses the shard of Kryptonite he’s kept for this moment to pierce Superman in the side. Then, as Superman struggles to maintain balance at the edge of the cliff, Luthor holds his hands out at his sides to complete the image of the crucifixion. From there, Superman falls from the cliff into the ocean and slowly begins to sink, thereby signifying his descent into the grave. The symbolism continues in his escape or ”rising” from the watery grave (assisted by his son, Lois Lane and Richard White) and the picture of his “ascension” when he flies above the clouds to heal the wounds inflicted by the Kryptonite and henchmen. Even Superman’s words at the end of the film to his newly discovered son, “The son becomes the father, and the father becomes the son,” though not an exact equivalent, are clearly a reference to John 10:30, “ I and the Father are one." Now I have to confess, it’s kind of fun to pick these things out. I get some measure of enjoyment from observing and noticing the less overt statements in a story. However, like I said, I feel somewhat ambivalent about the comparison between Superman and the Lord Jesus Christ. The ideals at the foundation of the Superman mythology are very humanistic, implicit in Jor-El’s commentary on the innate goodness of man and their simple need for an example. Now, when this view is applied to Christ’s role in history, His place as the atonement lamb is compromised. Many have held up Christ as an example of ideals they approve but rejected Him as the person He has claimed to be, the Son of the Most High God and the only means by which sinners are saved from the penalty for their sin. Furthermore, Superman, while heroic, does not display all of the character of Christ. It’s why I always had a hard time swallowing the allegorical elements of Matrix. Neo is a sucky representation of Jesus. Superman, though closer than Neo, does not have all the characteristic wisdom of the Lord Jesus either. Kal-El displays this in the irrationality of some of his decisions and his unpreparedness in facing his enemies. Bearing all this in mind, I wonder what the writers intended by this imagery.
In the end, it is a spectacular movie. The movie is the ultimate expression of our society’s love for heroes and I’m sure it will be an enduring favorite in years to come.
To begin with, Brandon Routh is great. I think back to the first time I saw a preview with him in it and how I thought, “What underwear catalogue featuring failed actors did this guy crawl out from under?” Words (or thoughts) I’ll have to eat. Routh is the perfect successor to the late Christopher Reeve, personifying both “mild mannered” and “man of steel” in his performance. It is evident, most particularly as Clark Kent, that Routh studied long and hard the previous Superman films and matches, almost exactly, the mannerisms and vocal qualities of Reeve. Every push of his glasses onto the bridge of his nose, every “uhhmm” and “Lois?” (like when she’s walking away from Clark and he’s tripping over people, objects and his own tongue to try and get to her and ask if they can get lunch), every ounce of Superman’s gentle and humble confidence is present in Routh. The other actors lend excellent support and the entire ensemble works well together. Kevin Spacey does an excellent job as Lex Luthor, and though one review noted that Kate Bosworth seemed a little stunted and had little of the magic of Margot Kidder’s Lois Lane, I felt she brought a new dimension to the character, such as attractiveness.
All of the other elements of the film are top notch. The film has excellent cinematography, the special effects are spectacular without overshadowing the story, and the music, Marlon Brando cameo and even opening credits make the movie a sort of homage to the Richard Donner films of the seventies and eighties. However, the thing that most deserves mention is the director. So much so that at the end of the movie, as I turned to my brother, all I could say was, “Brian Singer is Superman.” Singer has proved himself as an excellent director many times, as much by his absence as his presence (note the difference in quality between the latest installment of X-Men and the previous two). Superman Returns, however, is sure to become one of his most important works.
If there’s one thing I’m still a little unsure about, it’s all the Messianic imagery of the film. It’s always interesting to see how film makers insert these ideas into their movies. WARNING: SPOILERS!!! Beginning with Superman’s conversation with Lois about the world’s need for a savior, the movie begins to draw comparisons between the “Man of Steel” and the Son of Man. Note how during the confrontation between Superman and Lex Luthor, after Superman suffers under a brutal barrage from has been beaten senseless by Luthor’s henchmen, Luthor uses the shard of Kryptonite he’s kept for this moment to pierce Superman in the side. Then, as Superman struggles to maintain balance at the edge of the cliff, Luthor holds his hands out at his sides to complete the image of the crucifixion. From there, Superman falls from the cliff into the ocean and slowly begins to sink, thereby signifying his descent into the grave. The symbolism continues in his escape or ”rising” from the watery grave (assisted by his son, Lois Lane and Richard White) and the picture of his “ascension” when he flies above the clouds to heal the wounds inflicted by the Kryptonite and henchmen. Even Superman’s words at the end of the film to his newly discovered son, “The son becomes the father, and the father becomes the son,” though not an exact equivalent, are clearly a reference to John 10:30, “ I and the Father are one." Now I have to confess, it’s kind of fun to pick these things out. I get some measure of enjoyment from observing and noticing the less overt statements in a story. However, like I said, I feel somewhat ambivalent about the comparison between Superman and the Lord Jesus Christ. The ideals at the foundation of the Superman mythology are very humanistic, implicit in Jor-El’s commentary on the innate goodness of man and their simple need for an example. Now, when this view is applied to Christ’s role in history, His place as the atonement lamb is compromised. Many have held up Christ as an example of ideals they approve but rejected Him as the person He has claimed to be, the Son of the Most High God and the only means by which sinners are saved from the penalty for their sin. Furthermore, Superman, while heroic, does not display all of the character of Christ. It’s why I always had a hard time swallowing the allegorical elements of Matrix. Neo is a sucky representation of Jesus. Superman, though closer than Neo, does not have all the characteristic wisdom of the Lord Jesus either. Kal-El displays this in the irrationality of some of his decisions and his unpreparedness in facing his enemies. Bearing all this in mind, I wonder what the writers intended by this imagery.
In the end, it is a spectacular movie. The movie is the ultimate expression of our society’s love for heroes and I’m sure it will be an enduring favorite in years to come.