Where to start on David Poland's review of Superman Returns? Well, let's see...it's not "terribly cast". Brandon Routh does the sad-and- lonely thing fine by me. Kate Bosworth...okay, her Lois Lane feels a tad insubstantial, but she's far from "terrible". Kevin Spacey doesn't ace out Gene Hackman, but he's moderately amusing as Luthor. Parker Posey isn't given enough to say or do, but she brings a bit more feeling and gravitas to her girlfriend-of-Lex part than Valerine Perrine did to hers. Frank Langella shows more wit and finesse than Jackie Cooper did as Perry White...casting is not a problem, trust me. And it's not poorly conceived -- it has a theme, a heart and a soul. You can't say these elements aren't there, and I don't know how anyone can say tjhe emotional import of the story is poorly conceived. Superman Returns is not one action beat after another, okay, but I wouldn't call it extremely light on the stuff. The romance between Clark and Lois is all about "we want to go there but we can't" -- to me and a lot of others who know that relationships that can't work are more dramatically touching than those that do, this makes it romantic as hell. The film definitely features a memorable 'gosh, that was great' repeat-to-your-friends action moment (and you can double or triple that if you catch it in 3D). SR may be hurt big-time by Pirates of The Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest , but like I said in my original review I can't imagine that the Pirate pic will have anything like the emotional resonance that Superman Returns has. Okay, it may be completely played out by August 1st...that's possible.

<< previous | next >>

Posted by Jeffrey Wells on June 15, 2006 at 5:11 PM

comment #1

sandekat says ...

David's review seems a bit extreme, but then so does yours.

Why do I get the idea frorm both of you that the unsaid subtext is: You: 'its not great, but its got a heart and a head and Pirates doesn't'.
Dave, "its hollow and poorly concieved and Pirates isn't'.

I think the bickering and jostling about the two movies is ridiculous. If they are both good/great and stay true to their basic 'rules' their box office will build off of each other. They are so different that they will not deny; each other audience.

The only key concept here is that they must be good: not industry critic good......film audience good.

.....and as a hopeful audience member, I shall 'bon chance' to each of them.

Posted by sandekat at June 15, 2006 5:44 PM

comment #2

Daniel says ...

This is gonna be fun, Jeff... Are you gonna go point-by-point on why *every* review with a different POV on Superman is wrong (not just divergent from your opinion, apparently, but *wrong*)... You may have a long day of posting on June 28, then...

I find Poland a little ballsy on posting his review given that I know first-hand how tight a muzzle Warner Bros. is keeping on people who felt anything other than rapturous about this movie...

Posted by Daniel at June 15, 2006 6:01 PM

comment #3

Rich says ...

I think Jeff's review was from the heart. He's admitted he doesn't really like big tentpole films, so if one does give him something legitimate to hang his hat on, attention must be paid.

That said, Jeff is generally in the minority with his approach to this type of film. With respect to the people who will be counted on to make this movie a big hit, Poland's review sounds a lot more like the "honest" buzz that's been coming out of Hollywood for the past month or so (AICN suckups aside). All in all, it's beginning to look like Revenge of the Sith all over again. A not-very-good movie that initially will be given a free pass by people who really, really want to like it. But the proof will ultimately be in the pudding. And when guys like Moriarty honestly don't like what they see, look out.

Posted by Rich at June 15, 2006 6:20 PM

comment #4

delbomber says ...

This is simply a square-off between two top film blogging rivals...Poland and Wells are always going at it...I doubt Jeff is passionate enough about Supe to take on the world.

I tried reading Poland once...not sure of his credentials, but his blog reads like that of a professional blogger, while this site reads like the blog of a professional journalist (most of the time, anyway).

Posted by delbomber at June 15, 2006 6:55 PM

comment #5

Zach says ...

Jeff,

I appreciate your comments and enjoy what you have to say on your site. It certainly seems like Dave Poland had an agenda when he wrote his review of Superman Returns. Considering that all of the other early reviews have been positive, his seems overly harsh and as if he went into the film determined not to like it.

It came across as unprofessional to me (especially the way he discussed POTC "CRUSHING" it at the boxoffice), and his points about the actors ages are pretty silly. Actors often play characters older or younger than they actually are! Do we really want to see a 40 year old superman and lois lane? Suspension of disbelief!! That's what makes movies like this enjoyable. Plus, why is he so overly concerned about whether teenage boys are going to do repeat viewings, rather than the actual quality of the film itself? I really don't think thats something that is gauged by whether teenage boys go for repeat viewings.

How in the world can someone be "offended" by a movie like Superman Returns?? He doesn't sound like he'd be much fun to be around. There's nothing wrong with disliking a movie, or writing a negative review...but Mr. Poland really comes across as bitter, miserable and unprofessional in the way he talked about this film.

Posted by Zach at June 15, 2006 7:06 PM

comment #6

Dave Poland's Vagina says ...

Poland is just trashing the film to promote himself. That's why his review is early and overly harsh - it catches people's eyes right now.

He's a douche, and we all know it.

Posted by Dave Poland's Vagina at June 15, 2006 8:15 PM

comment #7

oddDuck says ...

Poland's a HUGE douchebag. He writes like a crotchety old man with a stick up his ass. As far as their differing takes on the movie, Wells's just seems more compelling and convincing, especially considering that he is not one to normally go for big budget trash.

Posted by oddDuck at June 15, 2006 8:28 PM

comment #8

Dixon Steele says ...

David Poland is the Ann Coulter of the movie business.

Posted by Dixon Steele at June 15, 2006 8:33 PM

comment #9

LORI says ...

Wells' review was more convincing in my opinion because he had substantive insights. Nothing against negative reviews, certainly different people like different things, but David Poland's seemed so over the top negative in a way that made it seem like he was opposed to the very concept of the movie from the start and was determined to not enjoy watching it.

I too think his complaints about the actors ages are a bit ridiculous. And the way he was pimping Pirates of the Carribean in the middle of his review was suspect to say the least!

Posted by LORI at June 15, 2006 8:45 PM

comment #10

who? says ...

Who are you people? Really, let it go NRG. We know you're out there planting.

Posted by who? at June 15, 2006 9:06 PM

comment #11

Daniel says ...

Zach... *All* of the other early reviews of the film have been positive because the studio has -- very politely I must say -- asked people who didn't love the movie not to write their reviews until the day-of-release. At the same time, people who told studio publicists that they LOVED the movie have been encouraged to write about it. It's not like it's some weird coincidence that almost all of the reviews out there are positive. And it's also NOT an indication that when all is said and done, the reviews for the movie are going to all be raves. There are going to be a ton of mixed reviews for this one, some mixed-to-positive (as mine will be) and some mixed-to-negative.

Poland has broken the embargo either because he feels big enough to or because he was assured nobody cared. Regardless, once the movie is released, the reviews won't all be positive.

Dan

Posted by Daniel at June 15, 2006 9:14 PM

comment #12

supermansucks says ...

Thank you Daniel for giving some truthfullness!!! Everyone knows that the only reason this is getting good reviews now is because Warner Brothers will sue people that didnt like it.

Once the real reviews are released watch out. This movie is gonna tank! Singer claerly had no idea what he was doing. Everyne knows that the first too XMen movies were terible. This looks like it has two much romance and "caracter development" and blah blah blah...give us action please! I'm glad Dave Poland calls it like it really is.

Posted by supermansucks at June 15, 2006 9:54 PM

comment #13

pharmer says ...

DP is a feeya.

Posted by pharmer at June 15, 2006 9:58 PM

comment #14

RMB says ...

Hey, you know what?

Dave Poland can write what he wants. More power to him.

Jeff Wells travels the WORLD, yo!

Anyone who gets out of LA occasionally...and has children to be proud of...gets my vote. I mean...if SUPERMAN RETURNS can win over the dude who HATED the LOTR films...well then...get up, stand up...you know the rest.

Take a date to SUPERMAN RETURNS...and see where it get you.

'Nuff said.

Posted by RMB at June 16, 2006 12:32 AM

comment #15

Martin Benitez says ...

"The romance between Clark and Lois is all about "we want to go there but we can't""

Nooo! It`s Smallville all over again!

Posted by Martin Benitez at June 16, 2006 2:06 AM

comment #16

Daniel says ...

supermansucks,

My sense of things is that reviews are going to mostly fall in the positive direction, at least to some degree. They just won't be anywhere near as unanimously positive as one might think from scanning the Internet today.

Oh and I totally wasn't threatened with a lawsuit is I posted a review. Just wanna make that clear...

Dan

Posted by Daniel at June 16, 2006 6:58 AM

comment #17

Mike says ...

Poland also thought "Win a Date With Tad Hamilton" was a classic.

Seriously.

Posted by Mike at June 16, 2006 7:11 AM

comment #18

Felix says ...

Isn't this Poland the same guy who loved The Rundown, hyped Munich til the cows came home and thought Phantom of the Opera was going to win the Oscar?

I think I'll pass on what he thinks about a big summer movie.

Posted by Felix at June 16, 2006 7:21 AM

comment #19

Mike says ...

Exactly, Felix. I like reading Poland's stuff, but he has pretty much the worst taste around -- well, around people I respect at least.

Posted by Mike at June 16, 2006 7:33 AM

comment #20

Jeremy Fassler says ...

Don't even listen to David Poland! He doesn't know what he's talking about anymore. The only time when he even remotely wrote well was when he went all out for Adaptation, a film which I loved as much as he, but what is the deal with him? The Phantom of the Opera winning best picture?
I don't even want to read his reviews anymore.

Posted by Jeremy Fassler at June 16, 2006 10:03 AM

comment #21

robert says ...

david poland is a moron. he craves attention. but gets none. he's angry and dumb. a deadly combo.

Posted by robert at June 16, 2006 2:36 PM

comment #22

zoey says ...

Just checked out Poland's site and the whole Superman review controversey seems to have struck a nerve.

Anyway... this back and forth between Wells and Poland is getting a little too personal. It always seems a bit bizarre to me to read film comments and be blindsided by comments that review other reviews and reviewers and not the actual film. (It's OK if in the name of good film journalism, commentary is needed to point out flaws or bias in another reviewer's comments, but NOT OK if it's just to point out honest differences of opinion.)

Posted by zoey at June 16, 2006 5:21 PM

comment #23