We Need Some Movie News

Apologist Puncher wrote:Superman punched Zod, flew around him and then PUNCHED HIM AGAIN.

YES!!! No sissy-mary kicking or throwing people around here. This is all about the ass-kickings!

Apologist Puncher wrote:This trailer ALONE was more action-packed than all of Singerman Peeps put together.

It was more action-packed than all of Singerman times whatever number you care to throw out there. It also had real humor in it (the S/symbol of hope thing), real heart (anything with Jor-El or Jonathan), etc. There's no comparison between Singerman and this trailer, much less the whole movie. Guilty until proven innocent, as always, but fuck's sake that's only because I swore from the outset that's how it would be. Already I'm tempted to retire that policy. I won't though.

thecolorsblend wrote:

Apologist Puncher wrote:Superman punched Zod, flew around him and then PUNCHED HIM AGAIN.

YES!!! No sissy-mary kicking or throwing people around here. This is all about the ass-kickings!

Apologist Puncher wrote:This trailer ALONE was more action-packed than all of Singerman Peeps put together.

It was more action-packed than all of Singerman times whatever number you care to throw out there. It also had real humor in it (the S/symbol of hope thing), real heart (anything with Jor-El or Jonathan), etc. There's no comparison between Singerman and this trailer, much less the whole movie. Guilty until proven innocent, as always, but fuck's sake that's only because I swore from the outset that's how it would be. Already I'm tempted to retire that policy. I won't though.

SMALLVILLE itself was more action-packed than all of Singerman! I recall it was about Season 6 of SV & it was probably the Spring of 2008 I believe. Anywho, we had an hour long episode of SV that's really what, 42 minutes without commercials? Clark punches Bizarro through the air into a humongous tree near the end. I know we even discussed this before but even that was more action-packed than all of Singerman!

I get Facebook updates & early buzz mostly all seems to be favorable from fans. I read one negative statement about Hans Zimmer's score like 'I don't know' & I know it doesn't sound like John Williams but I dare say that we probably haven't heard the entire thing either. I also think a difference here from Singerman is that this seems to be getting almost 100% approval beforehand. The same couldn't be said for BJ.

non_amos wrote:I get Facebook updates & early buzz mostly all seems to be favorable from fans. I read one negative statement about Hans Zimmer's score like 'I don't know' & I know it doesn't sound like John Williams but I dare say that we probably haven't heard the entire thing either. I also think a difference here from Singerman is that this seems to be getting almost 100% approval beforehand. The same couldn't be said for BJ.

I haven't gone through every single comment over on the Eunuch page but the single reference I could find to Routh was along the lines of Cavill being everything Routh should've been but clearly wasn't.

I found that very telling.

thecolorsblend wrote:

non_amos wrote:I get Facebook updates & early buzz mostly all seems to be favorable from fans. I read one negative statement about Hans Zimmer's score like 'I don't know' & I know it doesn't sound like John Williams but I dare say that we probably haven't heard the entire thing either. I also think a difference here from Singerman is that this seems to be getting almost 100% approval beforehand. The same couldn't be said for BJ.

I haven't gone through every single comment over on the Eunuch page but the single reference I could find to Routh was along the lines of Cavill being everything Routh should've been but clearly wasn't.

I found that very telling.

I've meant to check out duh Homopage to see what's going on but just haven't taken the time. From what you're saying though, man how times change! I though only Singer himself was at fault in this debacle? At least that's the vibe you got from duh apologists previously: "Blandon was awesome as Clark & Superman & should be given another chance but Singer screwed it up!" Quote, unquote. Now it seems duh apologists are a fickle bunch indeed. They'll jump into bed with anyone won't they?

I think it's just as likely that the Eunuch dumped the Apologist hardliners or else they just flocked to whatever havens they have left where they can cry and have their little circle jerks to deleted scenes and fan fiction without being intruded upon by "haters", MOS fans or, indeed, reality. I find it hard to believe that so many Routh fans could so quickly abandon the guy.

There is SV bashing though. At least they're consistent about that.

Apologist asshole wrote:#183 | NeoRanger on April 17, 2013 11:06am EST
Oh, right. I didn't comment in depth because it was about what I expected, but two things that stuck out for me; on the negative side, while it doesn't seem like a dark and gritty film, this tint and desaturation of the colors is something that bugs me-- but only slightly.

On the positive side, the one thing I was fairly worried about was Zimmer. I don't think the guy's as good a musician as most, but he does seem capable of scoring movies right, finding what makes the story tick and do scores that fit. The piece in the trailer is great, especially when it wells up.

Very few things left that I'm concerned about and chances are they will never bother me. Kudos.

EDIT:
and was the exact approach taken by Smallville when it debut over a decade ago!

That's debatable. Smallville, in all its magnificent wisdom of aping Buffy The Vampire Slayer, kind of tied Clark into a destiny he really didn't want, but had to accept anyway. Clark spent a lot of time in that show not trying to fit in, but trying to be "normal", preferably without powers.

If MoS is based off of Birthright (as it seems to be, largely), the opposite is true. Clark is free to make his choices and live the way he wants. He struggles with fitting into the world, but without denying who he really is. This resonates with an audience much better.

What I'm getting at is that Smallville's approach was the high school type of "fitting in", complete with all the teenage angst and passive aggression. From what I can personally tell about MoS, from what little we know, it's less about angst and loneliness and more about actually finding a place in the world and what you want to do with your life.

URL- http://www.supermanhomepage.com/news.php?readmore=12899&c_start=99

Eat shit, Apologist. Smallville lasted ten seasons and continues as an insanely successful comic book; Singerman was done after opening weekend.

Count me as a hater of the desaturated look. A SUPERMAN film with that color grading doesn't sit well with me. Even SR had more color, and yet I thought years ago that it was desaturated and murky as fuck.

But besides that, I'm liking pretty much everything about that trailer. I actually dig the Zimmer music. It's not Williams, but I'm expecting the music will actually fit like a glove for this particular movie. I found it very rousing and I look forward to how it plays out in the film. It'll definitely play during the ending credits, I can guarantee that. As others have pointed out, it basically looks like Snyder and Nolan are complimenting each other on this project. There's obvious Nolan touches with the filmmaking style and it seems more grounded in reality, about as close as a Superman film can be I guess. But then there's Snyder's dramatic presentation as this great big story about a man who does the right thing BECAUSE IT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO. No buts, ifs, ect. That for me screams Superman and puts it over SR a hundred times, and I haven't even gotten to the punching. I couldn't care less for the action, what matters to me is that they keep the integrity of the character intact and present him as the kind of good humanity should strive for. That's what SR failed at.

But I still liked Routh. Sue me.

James Stocks wrote:Count me as a hater of the desaturated look. A SUPERMAN film with that color grading doesn't sit well with me. Even SR had more color, and yet I thought years ago that it was desaturated and murky as fuck.

Bullshit.

But I still liked Routh. Sue me.

Ohhh, if only I COULD....

This does explain a lot of your posts, and replies to others here. A whole lot, actually. But I'd like you to explain what exactly it is you "liked" about ol' BJ Routh as Singerman. Don't rest on just stating this and not expanding on it. You felt the need to throw that unnecessary caveat onto the end of your post, now follow-up on it.

If you can.

I wouldn't call it unnecessary, since it was brought up earlier in this thread about some Singerman fans suddenly denouncing Routh, and I just thought I'd throw in my two cents short and sweet. But if you insist on me expanding it...

I say to the examples you posted: Not enough saturation. I just feel a SUPERMAN film should have bright bold colors. Maybe this is WB imposing its "we want it to be like TDK" nonsense, wouldn't be surprising. As it is, it won't ruin the movie for me as a whole but it will likely be one of my few gripes. I will say, at least it looks brighter than SR. That film looked like somebody cranked down the contrast a bit too much.

As for Routh, for what he was given to do I thought he did pretty good. A lot of my problems are how his character comes off, script-wise. For one, Superman is too marginalized in the story and he doesn't really have much to say thus doesn't really leave much of a lasting impression. Routh does make that up to some extent with a lot of emphasis on body language to show instead of tell, but it's still not enough as the film gets too sidetracked with supporting characters. The film doesn't really give audiences enough to see things from his point of view, so there's too much of a distance to really empathize with him, especially when he does questionable stuff like leaving for five years and then spying on Lois' home. This might have worked if it had been a follow up to a very recent Superman film, but inappropriate as the film that reintroduces the character in cinema. I don't care if it tries to be a follow-up to a film that came out 26 years earlier, it just doesn't work that way.

For a movie that was about Superman's return to cinema, it really should have had the title character front and center. MAN OF STEEL is thankfully looking to go that route. And to settle my stance on SR once and for all, I'll throw in a ranking:

SUPERMAN
*chasm*
SUPERMAN II
SUPERMAN III
SUPERMAN IV: THE QUEST FOR PEACE
*chasm*
SUPERMAN RETURNS

Yes, at least QUEST FOR PEACE can be entertaining in a so-good-its-bad kind of deal. A great drinking game to have with your friends everytime Nuclear Man roars. RETURNS, however, doesn't have much entertainment value. There are a few things I like: Routh, some of the cinematography (not including the desaturation, I'm strictly speaking in terms of composition/framing), and..... I think that's about it. There's some good ideas in it but a lot of them depend too much on knowing events of the first two Reeve films and ultimately it's undermined by how boring the film can get. The pacing goes down the toilet after the first act, the dialogue doesn't have any spark, a lot of the characters are one note and some detestable (Lois being an irritable bitch to everyone), there's not enough action for the spectacle a Superman film should be and most of all Superman would never leave his home (yes Singer, EARTH is his home).

To me that 'desaturation' seems to be more prevalent on KRYPTON than on Earth. When I first saw this new trailer the Krypton scenes struck me sorta like 300 did. Which incidentally Zack Snyder also directed. So a possible explanation? Perhaps to make Krypton have that 'alien' look in comparison to good ol' Smallville USA? To contrast the difference in other words. But I really don't know, that's just conjecture.

As for Brandon 'BJ' Routhman, what more can be said? A 2X4 board couldn't be more bored. Early on I wanted to support this film when it first came out but the more I read online about it after the fact & then think for myself, then it's like, hey, they've got a point! It just drove home the sinking feeling I left the theater with that night. And I've even tried repeat viewings of the DVD. It's like the more you watch it, the more you find wrong with it. Repeat viewings not recommended.

James Stocks wrote:I wouldn't call it unnecessary, since it was brought up earlier in this thread about some Singerman fans suddenly denouncing Routh, and I just thought I'd throw in my two cents short and sweet. But if you insist on me expanding it...

How that fits into a post about the 'MOS' trailer, I'll never know....

As for Routh, for what he was given to do I thought he did pretty good. A lot of my problems are how his character comes off, script-wise. For one, Superman is too marginalized in the story and he doesn't really have much to say thus doesn't really leave much of a lasting impression. Routh does make that up to some extent with a lot of emphasis on body language to show instead of tell, but it's still not enough as the film gets too sidetracked with supporting characters. The film doesn't really give audiences enough to see things from his point of view, so there's too much of a distance to really empathize with him, especially when he does questionable stuff like leaving for five years and then spying on Lois' home. This might have worked if it had been a follow up to a very recent Superman film, but inappropriate as the film that reintroduces the character in cinema. I don't care if it tries to be a follow-up to a film that came out 26 years earlier, it just doesn't work that way.

For a movie that was about Superman's return to cinema, it really should have had the title character front and center. MAN OF STEEL is thankfully looking to go that route. And to settle my stance on SR once and for all, I'll throw in a ranking:

SUPERMAN
*chasm*
SUPERMAN II
SUPERMAN III
SUPERMAN IV: THE QUEST FOR PEACE
*chasm*
SUPERMAN RETURNS

Yes, at least QUEST FOR PEACE can be entertaining in a so-good-its-bad kind of deal. A great drinking game to have with your friends everytime Nuclear Man roars. RETURNS, however, doesn't have much entertainment value. There are a few things I like: Routh, some of the cinematography (not including the desaturation, I'm strictly speaking in terms of composition/framing), and..... I think that's about it. There's some good ideas in it but a lot of them depend too much on knowing events of the first two Reeve films and ultimately it's undermined by how boring the film can get. The pacing goes down the toilet after the first act, the dialogue doesn't have any spark, a lot of the characters are one note and some detestable (Lois being an irritable bitch to everyone), there's not enough action for the spectacle a Superman film should be and most of all Superman would never leave his home (yes Singer, EARTH is his home).

I read a lot of criticism of Singerman, and BS' choices. What I didn't read is, what exactly there was to "like" about BJ Routh. Because his post-Singerman career has shown the guy just can't act. He can't. And the general audience has shown that they don't care much for him in ANYTHING.

So, was it his non-existent chemistry with "Sixhead" Bosworth you liked? His heavily nasal line delivery? The way he can play the part of a peeing tom/stalker with ease? The creepy look he gave during his "speech" to his bastard son? His confused "Clark Kent", who didn't know if he wanted to be George Reeves OR Chris Reeve? Ah, no. I got it! It's the way he screamed like a little bitch for almost the entirety of the films climax! First when the goons are kicking his ass, then when Lex Spacey is "giving it to him" from behind. Culminating in his squeals when "Sixhead" is pulling out SOME of the kraptonite from his side.

Seriously, the guy stunk and I just don't understand the attitude of "Well, it wasn't BJ's FAULT!!".

I disagree with your opinion. I didn't find him "creepy" when he gave his son that speech (I'd say that was the only good time they reused a line from SM:TM and he delivered that just fine I thought). I didn't see any confusion on his Clark Kent persona. There was definitely the clumsy Reeve in there but he toned it down so it wasn't over the top (Reeve toned it down too in III and IV, which I'd say he was better at). As for the lack of chemistry with Sixhead, I didn't like her in the role and I especially dislike how Lois was written, so I couldn't imagine any good chemistry working even if Cavill got the role instead of Routh. Outside of SR, I've only seen him in Zack & Miri, and Scott Pilgrim, and I thought he was funny in the latter and that it's the best role he has had in whatever I've seen him in. But as I said, I think he would come off better if the film had a lighter tone and had more of a role to play front and center. I always got the feeling that he was cast for something along the lines of SM:TP, not SR. That's likely how Singer approached casting the role, but at the same time wanted to throw that into a very morose and more serious entry. It's like how I view George Lazenby, he could have come off as a better Bond if his debut was more action oriented instead of dramatic, even though he does alright that's not where his strengths lie.

I do agree that Routh is a limited actor, so he can only take on certain roles otherwise you get disappointment (DYLAN DOG sounds very much like one). The recent THE GREEN HORNET for example is just bad casting, even if it was trying to be a comedy I thought it still didn't quite work. I like Seth Rogan, but he should have been in a different role to compliment his sensibilities. You know who would be funny in that role? Paul Walker. A limited actor? Very much, but if used right you can get something funny out of him. I could imagine him in the Green Hornet role being funny just by playing it straight, while having Kato be the wisecrack that goes against his stoicism. That way it's still playing for laughs while keeping in character to an extent.

Back to my main point, I thought Routh was fine. Not great in the role, but neither bad. In a lighter and more action oriented film I think he would have come off better. That's my opinion, and I'm sticking with that with no apologies.

Here's a thought. Cast ol' BJ as BIZARRO in the sequel.

Uhhh........or maybe not.

non_amos wrote:Here's a thought. Cast ol' BJ as BIZARRO in the sequel.

Uhhh........or maybe not.

I joked about that very thing for Smallville (before he actually showed up in season 7). I suggested giving him a powder blue shirt and a maroon pleather jacket... but then I realized even that bit of satire does too much to enfranchise Routh's "legacy" with the character. Best he forever be remembered as Superman's George Lazenby... if he must be remembered at all.

thecolorsblend wrote:

non_amos wrote:Here's a thought. Cast ol' BJ as BIZARRO in the sequel.

Uhhh........or maybe not.

I joked about that very thing for Smallville (before he actually showed up in season 7). I suggested giving him a powder blue shirt and a maroon pleather jacket... but then I realized even that bit of satire does too much to enfranchise Routh's "legacy" with the character. Best he forever be remembered as Superman's George Lazenby... if he must be remembered at all.

Coincidentally BJ is getting Bizarro references over at SHH in the comments section of one of those MOS articles. And amazingly there's still people trying to place the blame elsewhere like it wasn't his fault. After all, all Singer gave him to do was a Chris Reeve impersonation. Certainly he'd be better doing his own interpretation?

Yeah, right. A board is still a board no matter how you slice it.

non_amos wrote:

thecolorsblend wrote:

non_amos wrote:Here's a thought. Cast ol' BJ as BIZARRO in the sequel.

Uhhh........or maybe not.

I joked about that very thing for Smallville (before he actually showed up in season 7). I suggested giving him a powder blue shirt and a maroon pleather jacket... but then I realized even that bit of satire does too much to enfranchise Routh's "legacy" with the character. Best he forever be remembered as Superman's George Lazenby... if he must be remembered at all.

Coincidentally BJ is getting Bizarro references over at SHH in the comments section of one of those MOS articles. And amazingly there's still people trying to place the blame elsewhere like it wasn't his fault. After all, all Singer gave him to do was a Chris Reeve impersonation. Certainly he'd be better doing his own interpretation?

Yeah, right. A board is still a board no matter how you slice it.

The next time I see that argument, I'm going to ask a few questions.

01- What in Routh's repertoire makes you believe he can play the role?
02- How does Routh's performance in Singerman differ from any other role he's ever played?
03- What specifically smacks of Reeve in Routh's performance in Singerman? After all, if it's as pervasive as the Apologists would have us believe, surely it extends far beyond "still the safest way to travel", right?
04- Putting all of the above aside, shouldn't Routh have been able to believably mimic Reeve? Why should this have been a limiting factor for him? Actors are often called upon to ape other actor's style (see any version of Some Like It Hot). Even if you believe Routh was supposed to copy Reeve, why was Singer's (alleged) mandate so unreasonable?

Any Realist could probably knock all of those out in just a few words per question but I'd be interested to see an Apologist take them on. They could probably teach politicians a thing or three about evasive answers to simple questions.

Just a quick reminder the score use in the trailer is available to listen to on Youtube!



Even though the soundtrack is confirm to be from the film somehow I have my doubts it's the main score since I don't think they would just actually slap the main theme on a trailer and not wait until the film gets release in order for anyone to listen for it. So until we won't actually hear the main score upon the big day hits I personally hope it'll actually be as good as the John William's score, not necessarily better but just as good. If someone like Shirley Walker can compose a Superman theme that even rivals John William's take then I don't see someone like Hans Zimmer having any complications taking a crack at it. Just sayin!!!

James Stocks wrote:I disagree with your opinion.

I didn't find him "creepy" when he gave his son that speech (I'd say that was the only good time they reused a line from SM:TM and he delivered that just fine I thought).

Except, ya know, that he WAS....

I didn't see any confusion on his Clark Kent persona. There was definitely the clumsy Reeve in there but he toned it down so it wasn't over the top (Reeve toned it down too in III and IV, which I'd say he was better at). As for the lack of chemistry with Sixhead, I didn't like her in the role and I especially dislike how Lois was written, so I couldn't imagine any good chemistry working even if Cavill got the role instead of Routh.

A decent actor overcomes shitty casting with their charisma. Take ANY Bruce Lee movie for example. Do you honestly remember much of ANYTHING his female co-stars did, or do you remember Bruce Lee galvanizing the screen every second he's up there? Why? Because he OOZED charisma.

Now, can you say the same for BJ?

Spoiler:

Outside of SR, I've only seen him in Zack & Miri, and Scott Pilgrim, and I thought he was funny in the latter and that it's the best role he has had in whatever I've seen him in.

Never saw it. I avoid shit movies as it is. I avoid shit movies starring BJ Routh even more so.

Back to my main point, I thought Routh was fine. Not great in the role, but neither bad. In a lighter and more action oriented film I think he would have come off better. That's my opinion, and I'm sticking with that with no apologies.

Except Routh WASN'T fine. I asked for examples from Singerman where he was, you gave half of one. I gave at least FOUR where he wasn't. So if that's the best you can do, re-think your "no apology" declaration and get back to me.

Apologist Puncher wrote:

I didn't find him "creepy" when he gave his son that speech (I'd say that was the only good time they reused a line from SM:TM and he delivered that just fine I thought).

Except, ya know, that he WAS....

That's not the vibe I got. I thought for that scene Routh was able to express a good measure of joy and relief that his legacy would continue through his son, even if the boy wasn't totally aware of his heritage. The "I'm always around" being his way of promising to watch over Lois' family in particular as a way to make up for his absence is in a way optimistic and bittersweet. It's one of the few things that I found to be effective. Guess I just have a certain fondness for characters that try to own up to their mistakes, even if those mistakes (knocking up Lois, leaving Earth, deadbeat dad) were a betrayal of what the characters should be about.

I didn't see any confusion on his Clark Kent persona. There was definitely the clumsy Reeve in there but he toned it down so it wasn't over the top (Reeve toned it down too in III and IV, which I'd say he was better at). As for the lack of chemistry with Sixhead, I didn't like her in the role and I especially dislike how Lois was written, so I couldn't imagine any good chemistry working even if Cavill got the role instead of Routh.

A decent actor overcomes shitty casting with their charisma. Take ANY Bruce Lee movie for example. Do you honestly remember much of ANYTHING his female co-stars did, or do you remember Bruce Lee galvanizing the screen every second he's up there? Why? Because he OOZED charisma.

Now, can you say the same for BJ?

I thought you were talking about sharing chemistry with an actor, rather than one having charisma. I'll clarify. Routh is no Bruce Lee. As an actor, I thought Routh came off fine, however, I'll concede that of all the actors that played Superman he is the least charismatic. With the role being limited in SR, there definitely could have been an actor who would overcome those limitations with a strong charisma, making audiences forget that he isn't in it too much because his presence is that apparent. Routh didn't have that factor going for him, couple that with Superman being marginalized and it's no surprise audiences were quick to forget about Routh.

Outside of SR, I've only seen him in Zack & Miri, and Scott Pilgrim, and I thought he was funny in the latter and that it's the best role he has had in whatever I've seen him in.

Never saw it. I avoid shit movies as it is. I avoid shit movies starring BJ Routh even more so.

Your loss. I find that flick to be a hoot, and Routh is only a microcosm in the grand scheme of things anyway. The appearances by Chris Evans and Thomas Jane are my favorites.

Back to my main point, I thought Routh was fine. Not great in the role, but neither bad. In a lighter and more action oriented film I think he would have come off better. That's my opinion, and I'm sticking with that with no apologies.

Except Routh WASN'T fine. I asked for examples from Singerman where he was, you gave half of one. I gave at least FOUR where he wasn't. So if that's the best you can do, re-think your "no apology" declaration and get back to me.

Then I'll give you four.

1.) What I said above with Superman giving the speech to his son. But I'll add an extra one.
2.) His reunion with his mother where he comes off right as being uneasy over seeing his homeworld a graveyard and being alone.
3.) Him intentionally amping up his dorkiness when he overhears Lois and Richard starting to suspect he might be Superman.
4.) Being rescued by Richard and Lois re-energizes his spirit and determination as much as the yellow sun re-energizes him physically, his saying goodbye to Lois when he believes he's going to die before lifting that island.
5.) His pained expression over realizing that Lois had moved on with a family.

Those are some examples from memory that I genuinely found Routh to be good in.

James Stocks wrote:That's not the vibe I got. I thought for that scene Routh was able to express a good measure of joy and relief that his legacy would continue through his son, even if the boy wasn't totally aware of his heritage. The "I'm always around" being his way of promising to watch over Lois' family in particular as a way to make up for his absence is in a way optimistic and bittersweet. It's one of the few things that I found to be effective. Guess I just have a certain fondness for characters that try to own up to their mistakes, even if those mistakes (knocking up Lois, leaving Earth, deadbeat dad) were a betrayal of what the characters should be about.

It's funny, you use the SAME self-made "conclusions" as the Apologists of old. It's really something.

Anyway, so him saying he's "always around" makes up for being a deadbeat dad, right? That's all it took in your mind to make what he did ok? That says a lot about you as a person.....

But watch it again, if you can, and look at his face. His eyes. The way the shot is framed. If you can't, or WON'T, find anything creepy about it, then there's really nothing more to say here.

I thought you were talking about sharing chemistry with an actor, rather than one having charisma. I'll clarify. Routh is no Bruce Lee. As an actor, I thought Routh came off fine, however, I'll concede that of all the actors that played Superman he is the least charismatic. With the role being limited in SR, there definitely could have been an actor who would overcome those limitations with a strong charisma, making audiences forget that he isn't in it too much because his presence is that apparent. Routh didn't have that factor going for him, couple that with Superman being marginalized and it's no surprise audiences were quick to forget about Routh.

You ask a question, feigning ignorance, then respond to my original post anyway, proving you did indeed get my point. All in the same paragraph.

Your loss.

I find that flick to be a hoot, and Routh is only a microcosm in the grand scheme of things anyway. The appearances by Chris Evans and Thomas Jane are my favorites.

Some people find getting pissed on a "hoot" too.

Then I'll give you four.

Hope you didn't hurt yourself....

1.) What I said above with Superman giving the speech to his son. But I'll add an extra one.
2.) His reunion with his mother where he comes off right as being uneasy over seeing his homeworld a graveyard and being alone.

AH yes, where he sounds like he's talking to his next door neighbor, not the adopted mother he abandoned on a shitheaded whim....

3.) Him intentionally amping up his dorkiness when he overhears Lois and Richard starting to suspect he might be Superman.

"tripping" over a trash can and a retarded wave is fine acting to YOU?

Wow.

4.) Being rescued by Richard and Lois re-energizes his spirit and determination as much as the yellow sun re-energizes him physically, his saying goodbye to Lois when he believes he's going to die before lifting that island.

All things you made up in your head,and that didn't demonstrate ANY form of acting prowess by BJ Routh.

5.) His pained expression over realizing that Lois had moved on with a family.

Another tried-and-true Apologist response. His "facial expressions". Yep, who needs to do any speaking, creating chemistry with your co-stars, or making a role your own?? You can just have "facial expressions", and a pitiful few will believe you were "acting"!!

Those are some examples from memory that I genuinely found Routh to be good in.

Remind me to never trust a thing you say as being "good" then.

Apologist Puncher wrote:

James Stocks wrote:That's not the vibe I got. I thought for that scene Routh was able to express a good measure of joy and relief that his legacy would continue through his son, even if the boy wasn't totally aware of his heritage. The "I'm always around" being his way of promising to watch over Lois' family in particular as a way to make up for his absence is in a way optimistic and bittersweet. It's one of the few things that I found to be effective. Guess I just have a certain fondness for characters that try to own up to their mistakes, even if those mistakes (knocking up Lois, leaving Earth, deadbeat dad) were a betrayal of what the characters should be about.

It's funny, you use the SAME self-made "conclusions" as the Apologists of old. It's really something.

That's how the scene came off to me. I don't care what the apologists have to say, even if you do.

Anyway, so him saying he's "always around" makes up for being a deadbeat dad, right? That's all it took in your mind to make what he did ok? That says a lot about you as a person.....

"Always around" is just putting it mildly (well, I hope that's just it for their sake). I give credit for trying to make up for a mistake, but that doesn't mean what he did was okay. Not one bit. He owes a lot to the three, but since there's no sequel we'll never know how he tried. Heck, would it be a shock if he skipped off again?

But watch it again, if you can, and look at his face. His eyes. The way the shot is framed. If you can't, or WON'T, find anything creepy about it, then there's really nothing more to say here.

How it came off to me wasn't creepy the last time I saw it. That's all there is to it. Nothing more to say.

I find that flick to be a hoot, and Routh is only a microcosm in the grand scheme of things anyway. The appearances by Chris Evans and Thomas Jane are my favorites.

Some people find getting pissed on a "hoot" too.

Well, that's their problem.

1.) What I said above with Superman giving the speech to his son. But I'll add an extra one.
2.) His reunion with his mother where he comes off right as being uneasy over seeing his homeworld a graveyard and being alone.

AH yes, where he sounds like he's talking to his next door neighbor, not the adopted mother he abandoned on a shitheaded whim....

3.) Him intentionally amping up his dorkiness when he overhears Lois and Richard starting to suspect he might be Superman.

"tripping" over a trash can and a retarded wave is fine acting to YOU?

Wow.

4.) Being rescued by Richard and Lois re-energizes his spirit and determination as much as the yellow sun re-energizes him physically, his saying goodbye to Lois when he believes he's going to die before lifting that island.

All things you made up in your head,and that didn't demonstrate ANY form of acting prowess by BJ Routh.

5.) His pained expression over realizing that Lois had moved on with a family.

Another tried-and-true Apologist response. His "facial expressions". Yep, who needs to do any speaking, creating chemistry with your co-stars, or making a role your own?? You can just have "facial expressions", and a pitiful few will believe you were "acting"!!

Those are some examples from memory that I genuinely found Routh to be good in.

Remind me to never trust a thing you say as being "good" then.

Sorry, but if you want me to remind you, it'll cost money, like Routh's weight training: Cheap.

*ba-dum-ch*

James Stocks wrote:I don't care what the apologists have to say, even if you do.

Who said anything about "caring"? I said you sound just like them.

And you do.

How it came off to me wasn't creepy the last time I saw it. That's all there is to it. Nothing more to say.

Except that you're wrong.

Well, that's their problem.

Which was my point from the beginning.

Sorry, but if you want me to remind you, it'll cost money, like Routh's weight training: Cheap.

*ba-dum-ch*

Ho-kay....

thecolorsblend wrote:

You have to admit, I've gone VERY light on the guy.

I must be getting soft in my old age....

Maybe but he seems like a good guy. His views aren't completely orthodox around here but, hey, variety, spice, something or other. I say let it ride. Diversity of opinion is only a threat to Apologists.