The Gospel According to Superman
Jul. 25th, 2006 06:52 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
khaosworksChristopher Priest (no, not that Christopher Priest, the one formerly known as Jim Owsley) tears Superman Returns a new asshole.
The Gospel According to Superman
Go read it. I'll be right here.
Back? Okay — I agree with much of what Priest says here, although of course I didn't notice the lack of black people or minorities all that much. I don't think it's unconscious racism on my part; it's simply that we've been conditioned from years of cinema and television not to expect minorities on screen. It's only when they do appear that we notice them.
But it's this passage that got me saying an amen:
And like I said in my earlier assessment, it's ordinary, and a Superman movie should not be ordinary.
The Gospel According to Superman
Go read it. I'll be right here.
Back? Okay — I agree with much of what Priest says here, although of course I didn't notice the lack of black people or minorities all that much. I don't think it's unconscious racism on my part; it's simply that we've been conditioned from years of cinema and television not to expect minorities on screen. It's only when they do appear that we notice them.
But it's this passage that got me saying an amen:
As nate451 posted on the Internet Movie Database:Priest also goes on at some length about how he's offended by the trivialisation of Jesus with Singer's heavy-handed use of the Messiah motif. While I think Singer was a bit anvil-licious with those ideas, I didn't think it was all that offensive: after all, Superman-as-Messiah has been there since the beginning, and it's an obvious direction to take. For my part, the movie's greatest sin is what Roger Ebert also points out: it's glum, it's lacklustre.[Singer] seems entirely unaware that he has crafted an entire movie without a laugh, without a tear, without a moment of tension or suspense or compassion or fear. Such a complete failure makes all other complaints about the film no less true, but ultimately academic.
In the absence of any kind of actual content to push the movie along, Singer instead relies on an endless string of movie clichés. Lex Luthor quotes Greek myths, has a collection of ancient statues, and listens to classical music. A little boy gasps as he sees what all the adults have failed to see—that Superman is Clark Kent. Lois Lane leans over a comatose Superman and says, "I don't know if you can hear me, but…" One would be hard-pressed, in fact, to find a single cinematic moment in Superman Returns that has not been done before.
And like I said in my earlier assessment, it's ordinary, and a Superman movie should not be ordinary.
no subject
Date: 2006-07-26 04:12 am (UTC)as for the lack of black people (or minorities), COME ON! why don't we have a campaign to add some black people to the original ACTION COMICS? 'cuz that was obviously what singer used as his template, along with the Donner movie. i think it's really sad to go and watch a summer action movie, and come out wondering where are the black people.
but i guess that's why the reviewer found the film to be without laughs or tears, 'cuz he was too busy socially critiquing it to actually relax and enjoy it. sheesh.
btw i did find the messianic imagery annoying - not for religious reasons, but simply because it was too hamfisted (stabbed in the side, empty tomb, etc). but the biggest irritation for me was the introduction of the kid (SPOILERS!), 'cuz i was watching it as a comics reader first, and the kid basically creates a huge problem for any potential sequels.
(shakes head)
yellowhandman
http://yellowhandman.blogspot.com/