I saw the movie Superman Returns once, and it was one time too many. Though I'm usually really into DC superhero movies, I hated this one. For those of you who haven't seen it, Superman returns to Earth after a five-year absence to find out that Lois Lane has a child, and Lex Luthor is trying to take over the world again. At the end of the movie, he figures out that the child is his son. The audience figured this out about midway through when the kid throws a piano at a bad guy, but none of the characters question this.
I didn't like it because of the concept. They turned Superman, America's most noble, upstanding hero, into a deadbeat dad. He knocked up Lois and then went to space. Just try collecting child support from that guy. Just try.
Recently, though, I've been re-watching the old Christopher Reeve movies, and I think I've figured out who to blame for Superman Returns.
I blame Richard Pryor. In spite of the fact that he was dead at the time.
In Superman III, Superman is almost destroyed by Richard Pryor, an Atari game in a cave, a rich man, and a blonde. If you're young, you'll have to take my word for it that it was 1983, and this all seemed to make some sense at the time.
About halfway through the movie, Richard Pryor interrupts Superman trying to score with Lana Lang. He gives Superman a piece of artificial Kryptonite that contains tar, in a godawful attempt at product placement. The Kryptonite doesn't kill Superman, but it changes his attitude. He spends the next few hours straightening the Leaning Tower of Pisa, blowing out the Olympic torch, and developing an alcohol problem. He doesn't turn evil, precisely, he just sort of turns into an asshole for a while.
At the end, Clark Kent defeats Asshole Superman, and then goes to conquer the videogame in the cave. He stops the bad guys, makes friends with Richard Pryor, and prevents doomsday by pouring acid on the floor of a room full of wires.
Again. 1983.
Much later, we get the movie with Deadbeat Dad Superman, which I've always hated. But I like it a little better now that I've figured out who to blame for it.
Here's my fan theory. When Superman was affected by the artificial Kryptonite, it turned him into a jerk for a while, and then he became a noble good guy again. But I suspect that the Kryptonite had long-term effects that nobody ever predicted.
When they cast Brandon Routh and Kevin Spacey, they weren't really casting Superman and Lex. They were casting Christopher Reeve and Gene Hackman. Pretty clearly, they wanted actors who could imitate the originals. They were picking up where the old movies left off, and I have to admit, they did a pretty good job at that. (Aside from Lois Lane. Margot Kidder's hair was so 1970s, there was no point in even trying.)
So they were definitely paying homage to the older Superman movies when they made the new one. I think they did a better job than they realized.
Look at the costumes. In Superman III, as Superman gets to be more of an asshole, his costume turns a darker shade. The blue stays about the same, but the red parts turn a deep burgundy.
Now look at the costume in Superman Returns. Do you see red anyplace? Nope. Dark burgundy.
The costume from Superman Returns almost exactly matches the shade from the bad-ass Superman in Superman III. I've double-checked; I have the action figure.
My theory is that Superman only shook off the short-term effects of the Kryptonite. He went back to being a good guy temporarily, but over a period of a couple years, the asshole-Superman took over again. This explains why he abandoned Lois, who was carrying his child, and flew out of the galaxy for a while.
It actually makes me like the movie a bit better. I can get behind the idea that Superman's behavior was caused by Kryptonite. I like that better than the idea that he was just being a jerk. It makes the whole thing a better movie for me.
I suppose they really did do a nice job of following up the old movies. Because, just like in Superman III, it seems that Richard Pryor did save Superman, after all.
Again....1983. You had to be there.
No comments:
Post a Comment