• MailChimp Widget

    GORDON AND THE WHALE NEWSLETTER



  • Tarantino reviews SUPERMAN RETURNS

    by:
    May 5th, 2009


    Apparently auteur and all around movie nerd Quentin Tarantino is writing a 20 plus page review on Bryan Singer's SUPERMAN RETURNS (2006). While he may be almost three years late, he is not letting time stand in the way of over-expressing his love for the film that explored the more sensitive side of the Man of Steel. Tarantino claims to be a "big fan" of RETURNS, even going so far as to say he is not yet done with the review despite the existing 20 pages.

    So if INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS turns out to not be as fantastic as we all think and hope it is, we will know why. Tarantino spent too much time writing about how SUPERMAN RETURNS is an allegory for generational wounds and fatherly angst and too little time writing clever dialogue and gore-filled Nazi death scenes.

    For the record, I agree with Quentin. SUPERMAN RETURNS was a great film. Comment back with your own thoughts. Did you like SUPERMAN RETURNS? If so/not, will you read Tarantino's dissertation on the film?

    Source NY Times

    Other articles that you might like:

    Commenting Rules: Comments are intended to open up the discussion to our readers about the topics at hand, and as such should be offered with a positive and constructive attitude. If your comment is not relative to the above post or is disrespectful to the authors and readers, we reserve the right to delete it. Continued abuse of our good nature will result in banishment of the offender. Additionally, if you have any burning issues to point out to the GATW crew - typos, corrections, suggestions, or straight-up criticism - please email us instead of commenting here.

    • http://myspace.com/iamchaaaaase Chase Whale

      This is awesome! I defended SUPERMAN RETURNS on many occasions. The ending was a little long, yes, but the movie filled my expectations in every fanboy way.

    • name5

      Superman Returns was incredible, the best superhero movie of all time. Very much underrated! I just watched it 3 times in a row it's so good. I don't think Singer has to go “wrath of khan” on the sequel because if he does another one just like 'Returns' it will be fine with me. Returns was a masterpiece.

      The idea that there is going to be a reboot, is terrible.

    • name5

      Superman Returns was incredible, the best superhero movie of all time. Very much underrated! I just watched it 3 times in a row it's so good. I don't think Singer has to go “wrath of khan” on the sequel because if he does another one just like 'Returns' it will be fine with me. Returns was a masterpiece.

      The idea that there is going to be a reboot, is terrible.

    • Bheki Latha

      I can't wait to read this – cos I agree! And I was really disappointed to hear the plans by the producers to reboot the franchise because I thought, though it's not particularly flashy and action-packed for a blockbuster, RETURNS was great, and it worked as a movie that re-introduced Superman back to the world (real and movie), and afterwards, left lots of room for growth story-wise, action-wise etc. Hopefully QT's review will generate enough public interest for the @$$hole producers to not follow through on the reboot plans and wind up making something akin to The Incredible Hulk or any of the other crapfest comic book movies that they keep churning out. (There are exceptions of course – but y'all should know what those are).

    • http://www.gordonandthewhale.com JamesWallace

      I'm with you Bheki. I would love to see Singer continue with SUPERMAN but it looks like he is returning to X-MEN (which is exciting in itself) I guess it is always possible that he could return to it in the future, but based on how the film did financially, I'd say we're more likely to see a reboot. My one wish is they get someone good to direct that will put the emotional weight of the story first over just making an over-the-top action film AKA crapfest ;-)

      And hopefully we will get to see Tarantino's dissertation even sooner than this. As all things are with him, I imagine that it is just brilliant.

    • Bheki Latha

      I can't wait to read this – cos I agree! And I was really disappointed to hear the plans by the producers to reboot the franchise because I thought, though it's not particularly flashy and action-packed for a blockbuster, RETURNS was great, and it worked as a movie that re-introduced Superman back to the world (real and movie), and afterwards, left lots of room for growth story-wise, action-wise etc. Hopefully QT's review will generate enough public interest for the @$$hole producers to not follow through on the reboot plans and wind up making something akin to The Incredible Hulk or any of the other crapfest comic book movies that they keep churning out. (There are exceptions of course – but y'all should know what those are).

    • http://www.gordonandthewhale.com JamesWallace

      I'm with you Bheki. I would love to see Singer continue with SUPERMAN but it looks like he is returning to X-MEN (which is exciting in itself) I guess it is always possible that he could return to it in the future, but based on how the film did financially, I'd say we're more likely to see a reboot. My one wish is they get someone good to direct that will put the emotional weight of the story first over just making an over-the-top action film AKA crapfest ;-)

      And hopefully we will get to see Tarantino's dissertation even sooner than this. As all things are with him, I imagine that it is just brilliant.

    • Rob Falcone

      Any word on whether or not Tarantino has finished his review? Where can we read it?

      I also thought SR was great; very underrated. Since Singer has chosen not to publicly explain/defend his choices, I'd like to get a real professional's take on what the film was really all about.

      Not sure I'd like to see a Singer sequel though. SR is a wonderful “stand alone” effort. It's Donner's 1978 film; seen through a prism. This Superman is not merely a celebration of “Americana” but a natural outgrowth of human culture.

    • Rob Falcone

      Any word on whether or not Tarantino has finished his review? Where can we read it?

      I also thought SR was great; very underrated. Since Singer has chosen not to publicly explain/defend his choices, I'd like to get a real professional's take on what the film was really all about.

      Not sure I'd like to see a Singer sequel though. SR is a wonderful “stand alone” effort. It's Donner's 1978 film; seen through a prism. This Superman is not merely a celebration of “Americana” but a natural outgrowth of human culture.

    • justsomeguy4

      Superman Returns was the second worst superhero movie ever made, second only to Daredevil, which had so much potential which, of course, Hollywood completely fucked up. I think that Hollywood needs to stop potentially ruining every superhero movie in the near future by ceasing to make any superhero movies for at least ten to 20 years.

    • Majin72

      Superman Returns was “alright” at best. The plot had serious issues and logic fallacies left, right and center. If you’re familiar with the terms fridge logic and fridge horror, here are some lessons and questions I came away with that might strike you as horrifying or just odd.

      -At the end of Superman II, Superman gives Lois an amnesia inducing kiss that makes her forget the tryst she had with him. Why isn’t she freaked out about possibly being raped by Superman without her knowledge when she finds out her sick kid is really his and not her fiance’s?

      -Superman is the creepiest and scariest stalker ever. Also, he’s a deadbeat dad.

      -Lois Lane is a whore. If she had only a couple weeks before finding out she was “late”, then that means she hooked up with her fiance immediately after Superman left for Krypton.

      -Other than being a little jealous of Superman, James Marsden’s character is more morally sound and just a better all around person than the hero and really makes you feel sorry for him by the time the credits roll because you know he’s getting royally screwed.

      -Superman lands on the kryptonite continent and immediately becomes weak enough to be stabbed, but is somehow able to lift the same continent shortly thereafter and toss it into space… How exactly does that make sense?

      I remember there being other things, but I haven’t watched it since I saw it in theatres back when it came out in 2006, so I just went with the really huge glaring ones.

      • Bheki Latha

        Interesting. Clearly you’re the type who pays attention to things. And that’s a good thing. I’m gonna waste a bit of time here (I’ll tell you why later) and give possible explanations for some of the things you’ve queried. I myself have never thought the movie to be flawless, but I believe in it enough, and hate that everything these days is about… oops, almost let the streaky super-cat out of the bag there!

        They’ve said that the movie ‘vaguely’ follows the events of the Richard Donner movies, so things like the Amnesia Kiss (Superkiss? – This is a real thing, believe it or not) they might’ve ditched because it’s too outlandish, much like turning back time. And I just remembered something, in Richard Donner’s movie (which Bryan Singer relied on – not Richard Lester’s), the film is resolved by way of the time reversal technique, so I’ve just bollocksed everything I just said (but I haven’t watched any of the movies in a minute, though I own them all), and thinking about it, a kiss from Superman could be cover for some high-vibration, low-frequency memory-loss inducing whatchamacallit. I mean, Superman once unsuspectingly performed a heat vision lobotomy on a guy without permission in the comics, so anything is possible with powers like that. I think it’s best to just ignore all I’ve just said, and focus on the fact that they played ‘fast and loose’ with the continuity established in the Donner films.

        The only other thing I can comment on is that the kryptonite continent, due to it’s semi-synthetic nature, didn’t affect Superman as badly, so perhaps it drained his powers at a slower rate – because his powers usually return immediately if kryptonite exposure is eliminated. I’m really scraping the barrel here. For nothing. Why? Because of this (not so) secret revelation I’ve been keeping: Anyone who supported a sequel to Superman Returns, whether they’re named Quentin Tarantino or not, is screwed, because these days everything is about… reboots! So, with that in mind, what we should be talking about is how in hell can Zack Snyder possibly not f*ck up the new movie he’s making, when he totally f*cked up Watchmen. And as far as I know, with the exception of 300, which in my opinion looked good but wasn’t all that intellectually(even Alan Moore had issues with it), and some zombie movie remake, he doesn’t have anything much on his resumé worth speaking positively about. I expect to be disappointed.

    • Hypoxic

      Tarantino doesn’t know jack about Superman, and Kill Bill 2 proved it.

  • Recent Post