ROTTEN TOMATOES: Brandon Routh Talks Superman's Future Comments

Brandon Routh Talks Superman's Future

by | July 03, 2009

Summary

Whatever happens next for the "Superman" franchise, it appears that Brandon Routh won't be wearing that big "S" and cape -- in a new interview, he says his contract with Warner Bros. has expired. Back to Article

(61-80 of 98 posts) | Reply

Bigbrother writes:
on Jul 04 2009 03:17 PM

In reply to this comment (#2521169)
I think DC Comics figured out that very same thing in the 80's and addressed it by putting more emphasis on villains who could go toe to toe with Supe's. Now there are probably a dozen villains capable of doing it which is fun too because then you get to see how other hero's i.e. Batman, Green Arrow, and Nightwing deal with these galactic type threats too. Examples of this movement include: Darkseid, Mongol, Cyborg Superman, Metallo, Doomsday, Zod, Superboy Prime and Black Adam just to name a few along with your more wily intellectual villains like Luthor. So with these guys the way you beat Superman is just by kicking the crap out of him like you would anyone else.

(Reply to this)

Matanuki writes:
on Jul 04 2009 04:05 PM

In reply to this comment (#2521132)
Hey, I'm no esquire. And look, Zig offers the story of Lex to rebut so clearly neither of us are top dog on Superman knowledge. But then, your words, you "yield to my superior knowledge" so it stands to reason that I have to finally go ahead and use the line I've been saving. Imagine a sinister voice, "I did this to you." lol ;-)

Oh and by the way, ahh "Magic", thrilled you've made an appearance, but try to keep up. Me saying that the story for Superman Returns was far superior to that of Transformers 2 and then going on to nitpick the flaws of said superior story is, in a way, a further diss on the stinker.

I understand that we're moving too fast for you, but please, exercise some tact and play it cool in the corner.

(Reply to this)

Magic is Might writes:
on Jul 04 2009 05:24 PM

Lets see if i can say this slowly enough for you to understand Matanuki. In your OPINION Transformers 2 was a stinker, it is not a fact. Everything you said that was wrong about T2 can be said about Superman Returns but because you are fanboy you are too slow to understand that. Name one plot hole in Transformers 2 that is as BIG as the kryptonite island plot hole? So i will once again reuse your statement, "Only a 12 year old like Matanuki would like Superman Returns."

P.S. The world is laughing at you Matanuki, Transformers continues to bring in the money and please audiences all over the world. You are in the very small minority, live with it.

(Reply to this)

Boxman writes:
on Jul 04 2009 10:05 PM

The Dark Knight was definitly better than Batman Begins but, i still thought batman begins was good. Superman i always thought was boring because he had fewer weaknesses than batman so i think batman is better cause he struggles more. I also think Batman Begins is even better than Superman returns. I seen parts of superman returns and i just couldn't watch all of it cause it so boring but that's because the character Superman to me is just boring because he has super strengh.

(Reply to this)

Dark Knight jr. writes:
on Jul 05 2009 12:48 AM

Dammit! That sucks.

(Reply to this)

Matanuki writes:
on Jul 05 2009 04:08 AM

In reply to this comment (#2521227)
You know what you just did, right? You realize of course, Cap, that you just stepped in a trap that just further proves your identity. I wasn't really one of the dudes ragging on you about that, was more or less content to give you a fresh start. But here you pissing on the one of the only people still willing to give you the benefit of the doubt. (sigh) Whatever.

Anyway, I'm not sure what your stake in Transformers in. You seem to get pretty upset that some people didn't like it. I'll tell you what I told you before under your other name, try the valerian root, my friend. It'll help.

But you're curious and you asked (in a very b1tchy way, but you asked nonetheless). So let me offer this. First, I'm not a Superman "fanboy". If anything, fool, I'm a Transformers fanboy. So the bias you imagine is nothing more than a mental projection from your own mind. Superman Returns, while woefully flawed, still represents to this day a labor of love on the mythology. A lot of us here have a great deal of negative sh.it to say about Superman Returns -and it gets worse when the whole Batman/Superman debate sparks up- but very few, if any, have argued that there was anything in the film that evidenced Singer's contempt for the mythology. Everyone can comfortably agree that, in this case, the director loved his subject and took the material seriously. Michael Bay? What's the first thing he said about Transformers before he took the job, "I'm not doing that stupid toy movie." And still, two movies in, that contemptuous attitude has infultrated the subtext of the telling. That, I submit, is the difference.

Sidebar: Look, before you even bother. Let's consider what we've learned. You should know by now if you didn't learn it a long time ago, Matanuki IS NOT impressed by your attempts to insult him. Sometimes what you say, I admit, is cute. But never quite compelling. Your portrayal of self is much better when you stay on topic and resist the urge to act like a clown.

(Reply to this)

stupydcow writes:
on Jul 05 2009 08:13 AM

Superman Returns was a horrible movie. All it had was the look, it looked great...but everything else was terrible. First off, it wasn't a sequel...it was a horrible remake of the original. Same ideas all around just with a twist but horribly put together.

You had Superman save Lois again from a flying vehicle. Then they fly together and realize how much they love each other. Then Lex wants to create new land for realestate. In the process destroying everything and Superman has to fly like crazy to stop the catastrophes from happening just like the original. Christ he even flew underground to lift the ground in both movies. It was much more poorly put together, the actors where all wooden and boring.

Here is my problem with the plot. Why does Lex want to create a wasteland that will destroy the rest of the world and kills billions of people? Who is going to buy his land and with what currency when currency is destroyed by his new continent? Then the kid...did anyone watch the original sequel, Superman was human when he slept with Lois. That stupid kid couldn't have powers. It just seems to me they tried way to hard on this movie to make it bigger, better than the original without really being smart and original.

At least in the original, Lex had an idea that would work with the loss of just a few million people.

This movie was horrible and Bryan Singer should be beaten for ripping off the original and butchering it in the process.

Re launch, no sequel to this movie...and BB was a whole lot better than SR.

(Reply to this)

ShoemakerFromHell writes:
on Jul 05 2009 09:56 AM

I agree with you stupydcow. I was disappointed that Superman just let that one dude think Superman's kid was his. I also kind of had a problem with the idea that Superman had a bastard child. I don't know if that is in the comics but nevertheless, I found it disappointing for a messianic character like Superman.

(Reply to this)

cuni34 writes:
on Jul 05 2009 10:01 AM

In my opinion the problem with Superman Returns was when B. Singer trying too much to make his film like the first (Donner)Superman.

Dont get me wrong the first Superman was a good movie but it was 30 years ago... Smallville has 9 seasons playing successfully with the superman mythology so I consider maybe the studio executives are not checking enough the public interest in offering a new approach Superman in the big screen

When they have a fresh and new Superman franchise
I am going to be at the theather.

(Reply to this)

cuni34 writes:
on Jul 05 2009 10:04 AM

In my opinion the problem with Superman Returns was when B. Singer was trying too much to make his film like the first (Donner)Superman.

Dont get me wrong the first Superman was a good movie but it was 30 years ago... Smallville has 9 seasons playing successfully with the superman mythology so I consider maybe the studio executives are not checking enough the public interest in offering a new approach to Superman in the big screen

When they have a fresh and new Superman franchise
I am going to be at the theather.

(Reply to this)

matt d. writes:
on Jul 05 2009 10:14 AM

i really liked superman returns got the same kind of good reviews batman begins did if you go by this site, but general audiences thought it was boring... go figure... the movie was beautiful if you ask me.. supes flying up to sun with brandos voiceover; powerful stuff... my only complaint was introducing his son into the story....

WB shoudl bring both of them back... singer is one of the most talented filmmakers out there... remember what he did with xmen 2? get a villian supes can fight and have singer bring the same kind of artistry to the picture and everyone will love it...

(Reply to this)

Bigbrother writes:
on Jul 05 2009 11:23 AM

In reply to this comment (#2521345)
OK, you have a right to not like the movie, but at least don't like it for legitimate reasons. So much of what you said is just wrong...

Yes, it had a lot of the same beats as the original because it's meant as a tribute to the original. Not liking that it's a tribute is fine, but the way you said it made it seem like Singer didn't know what he was doing in replicating the other movie. That was his intention and to be fair the originality came in because it wasn't exactly the same. The airplane in space was much more spectacular a save and he saved a ton more people instead of just Lois. Lex didn't want to create new land in the original he wanted to knock part of California into the ocean to make the land he already owned more valuable and most glaringly I don't think Superman flew underground in the original and lifted anything up. He knocked the missiles out of the air then he flew around the Earth at high speed to turn back time and save Lois.

As for your issues with the plot, he doesn't want to sell the land which is not a wasteland by the way. If you paid attention as Lex explains Kryptonian technology is crystal based like the fortress of solitude though so it just looks like a bunch of crystals they're actually more useful than that though they don't go into detail on how. Lex was planning on being ruler of the world, not making money on a real estate scam. After society collapsed people were going to have to come to him as the only guy with land and superior crystal based tech. to rebuild the world.

Lastly, yes Superman was depowered when he slept with Lois, but since Kryptonians are fictional we don't know exactly how that works so it's possible the kid could still be super-powered IF in fact he is super powered. It never conclusively reveals that it only implies it with the piano flying in from off screen. You should probably watch it again because for a movie you claimed isn't smart you sure didn't understand a lot of it.

(Reply to this)

Bigbrother writes:
on Jul 05 2009 11:30 AM

In reply to this comment (#2521356)
I don't think Marsden's character thought the kid was his. I think he was just taking care of the kid because he was seeing Lois. Unless Lois was a big ol' ho and started shacking up with the guy right after Superman left it'd be pretty obvious the kid wasn't his. Though these people are fooled by a pair of glasses, so anythings possible. The Bastard Child didn't bother me so much. People are always whining about Superman being too God-like. That move humanized him for me and was like saying even a person with all that power can make mistakes and is basically human at heart.

(Reply to this)

Matanuki writes:
on Jul 05 2009 12:44 PM

In reply to this comment (#2521371)
We're definitely in agreement on the humanization part. We were allowed to see Superman as a flawed individual, not merely some inaccessable godhead. I especially like how, in one of the more awkward scenes, they showed him listening in on that conversation where Lois says she doesn't love him. It was as far as they've come in pushing the envelope, and look how people reacted. Suddenly he's a stalker, a deadbeat father, an all around a$$hole.

This is where Singer should take his cues, if he is allowed to do a sequel. He should explore how inflammatory and tenuous the relationship between Superman and his accolites are. Everyone expects him to save the day, but when he shows signs of life he's magically transformed into a renegade pariah.

A character like Brainiac would definitely exploit that. And if written well, it would serve as an allegory for how so many limitations have been imposed on the franchise for people projecting their religious assumptions on the mythology.

(Reply to this)

JRW1980 writes:
on Jul 05 2009 01:05 PM

I've said this before in a way older post about Superman.......I think a great sequel would be to make it that Superman Returns never really happened. He never ended up returning from space but was instead captured by Brainiac at some point. The whole Superman Returns movie has all been an illusion created in Superman's head by Brainiac as a way to hold him prisoner. He's been held captive by Brainiac for years or something. They could set up any number of things that happened in his time.

(Reply to this)

Bigbrother writes:
on Jul 05 2009 01:19 PM

In reply to this comment (#2521382)
But then you alienate the fans of Superman Returns and I've never been a fan of the "Bobby in the shower" trick. Maybe it's a can't win situation and Singer and Routh are lucky to be getting out.

(Reply to this)

jacog writes:
on Jul 05 2009 01:51 PM

Yeah, SR was not the best of movies. It served mainly as a nostalgia piece, and as that it worked well. I guess it was aimed at those of us that saw the original Superman (and perhaps II) in the theaters.

Even with flaws, I vote for sequel over remake. Look at how well Singer did between X1 and X2. X1 was ok, X2 was great. In this case, SR was ok, but not great.

As for the kid. I say work him into the plot, make him become a villain or perhaps kill him off as a plot device.

(Reply to this)

stupydcow writes:
on Jul 05 2009 03:48 PM

In reply to this comment (#2521370)
The movie was still terrible, and yes it was still a rip off of the original. Same formula, same idea, lame lame lame. You say the airplane was spectacular...more like overdone. I felt the helicopter scene had much more impact than the airplane scene. As I watched this movie, through the whole thing I felt these are places I've been before...except this time around it was cold, boring, and dark.

Don't give me the whole fictional character BS...it was stupid, plain and simple. Superman became a stalker in this movie also...stupid. His son was a sick little boy that ends up throwing a piano...stupid. Regardless if it was for real estate or ruler of a wasteland, it would still kill everything....stupid. Superman in a Hospital...STUPID!

Why did Superman go to find Krypton, we all know it blew up and in the original they found Kryptonite...pieces of his home world. Remember this is "SUPPOSE" to be a direct sequel of the Richard Donner movies. Everything about this movie was pointless and STUPID! I love movies and am a huge Superman fan but I guess this was just extremely disappointing to me.

Now don't get me wrong, it had it's moments of "Hey this sorta works..." then it doesn't and it looked great. Good special effects, good sets but in the end Bad movie.

(Reply to this)

stupydcow writes:
on Jul 05 2009 03:49 PM

In reply to this comment (#2521370)
The movie was still terrible, and yes it was still a rip off of the original. Same formula, same idea, lame lame lame. You say the airplane was spectacular...more like overdone. I felt the helicopter scene had much more impact than the airplane scene. As I watched this movie, through the whole thing I felt these are places I've been before...except this time around it was cold, boring, and dark.

Don't give me the whole fictional character BS...it was stupid, plain and simple. Superman became a stalker in this movie also...stupid. His son was a sick little boy that ends up throwing a piano...stupid. Regardless if it was for real estate or ruler of a wasteland, it would still kill everything....stupid. Superman in a Hospital...STUPID!

Why did Superman go to find Krypton, we all know it blew up and in the original they found Kryptonite...pieces of his home world. Remember this is "SUPPOSE" to be a direct sequel of the Richard Donner movies. Everything about this movie was pointless and STUPID! I love movies and am a huge Superman fan but I guess this was just extremely disappointing to me.

Now don't get me wrong, it had it's moments of "Hey this sorta works..." then it doesn't and it looked great. Good special effects, good sets but in the end Bad movie.

(Reply to this)

Bigbrother writes:
on Jul 05 2009 04:17 PM

When you're doing an homage can you really be accused of ripping off the original? Well, obviously you can since you just did, but isn't that part and parcel to doing an homage? Fair enough on the plane sequence for me that, the spaceborne eavesdropping looking for crime and the Daily Planet globe catch were the most memorable moments.

How is being a fictional character a BS argument? I could see it if the issue of pregnancy had ever been addressed before in Superman, but to the best of my knowledge it hasn't. That fact made that awesome diatribe in Mallrats possible..."If Lois gets a suntan the baby could kick right thru her stomach". Superman is a stalker, now that's a BS argument. Are you actually telling me if you had the ability to hear thru walls, and fly you wouldn't be tempted to listen in on an ex or two? The unbelievable part is that he doesn't do it more often or spend all his time sitting outside of Megan Fox's house praying that she never starts to wear lead lined undies. The kryptonite island wouldn't actually kill everything since in his diagram there were' clearly large portions of the earth still above water and I've already addressed the wasteland bit. Lex actually explains that to Posey after they find the fortress. As for Superman in a hospital, where else were they going to take him?

You're right, we all knew Krypton was destroyed, but let me ask you this. If a thousand people told you your house got wiped out by a tornado, even brought you the nameplate off the side of the house, wouldn't you still go to see for yourself? or want to see if anyone besides you survived?. I get the extemely disappointed part. I've had a lot of movies I looked forward to ruined by my high expectations. So I get it, but I think those high expectations may be leading you to judge the movie too harshly. I was just glad to get a character driven movie that could do live action justice to who Superman is as a character better than Donner movies that were limited by the special effects of the time.

(Reply to this)

Related Links

Superman Returns

Related Articles

Most Discussed

Latest News

Latest Interviews

Latest Features

Sponsored Links